18th August 2010
“Charles Darwin didn't do for God. German biblical criticism did; the scholarship on lost texts, discoveries of added-to texts and edited texts. All pointed away from the initial starting-block of faith; that the texts transmitted immutable truths. Realising that 'holy' texts are, like most other things in life, the result of an accretion of human effort and human error is one of the most troubling discoveries any believer can make.”
Douglas Murray
August 18th, 2010 at 1:18
There are two types of people. People that are impressed by Mr. Murray’s point and people that aren’t. Those whose relationship to their holy book is unchanged by an understanding of the human provenance of the text puzzle me greatly. This oughtn’t necessarily shake belief in god but it unquestionably ought to shake belief that the bible is Her words. There is excellent advice on how to live a moral life in the bible. But there is also a great deal more primitive savagery. The people that insist that all of it is somehow divine have had pieces of their evolved morality disabled by a mind virus.
August 18th, 2010 at 1:58
A must-read (IMHO) book on this topic is Bart Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus: Who Changed the Bible and Why”. He is currently Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the U. of N.C. His assessment is that the Bible has as many errors as it has words.
August 18th, 2010 at 2:48
I second Duino’s recommendation. Funny thing is I ran across that book in a Salvation Army library.
August 18th, 2010 at 2:53
Now I see why the creation theory makes so much since to some of these fools! Man created religion to fit man. No wonder why sollie and tech are such idiots; they’ve been created by years of indoctrination of that s/he/it!
August 18th, 2010 at 6:24
Murray is clearly talking about the run-of-the-mill popular criticism of theism. Epicurus and his students were teaching how the idea of a single almighty benevolent god was a logical contradiction almost 2000 years earlier. I think Jennifer Michael Hecht’s Doubt: A History explains quite nicely how and why the German critics were latecomers to the scene. Highly recommended.
August 18th, 2010 at 13:37
John who are you calling an idiot? If you really would care to see the real IDIOT….. Look in a mirror.I very rarely make statements like you have done John.But today, for I make an exception.
August 18th, 2010 at 13:38
That should have read” for you”
August 18th, 2010 at 14:23
why cant you religion freaks get in thru your heads???????????
EVERYTHING connected to organized religion is MAN-MADE.
you might as well put your “faith” in witch doctors. get out and LIVE a little, and get over your morbid conviction that at your DEATH (!) all will be revealed…………………..oh, please.
if you clowns REALLY BELIEVE that your
life is a gift…………then get busy and live it……….. stop sitting around waiting to die…………death will get around to you soon enough.
August 18th, 2010 at 20:19
sol………………
i just read your insane post from yesterday (aug 17) .
you cant seriously believe that building a “ground zero mosque” is obama’s
idea………….and further, how can you rationally believe putting up such a structure ( a BAD idea to begin with ) would have ANY effect on terror
activity against the U.S.
get REAL , you simpleton. there are Millions of people on this earth who
HATE, FEAR, and ENVY the United States………..and would love to see this country destroyed……..and are HAPPY to support terrorist attacks against
the U.S.
your foolish “ground zero mosque” will have NO effect on reality other
than to expand the ranks of pissed off americans……….and you better start shakin , sol : cause when enough of us get pissed off enough….we
might just reject your mosque in favor of a missle launcher.
have a crap day……you brain-dead dork
August 18th, 2010 at 20:42
What I find so amusing is that these so called holy texts that are “the inspired word of God to believers & perfect” is that we have no original copy, no idea when they were written, who wrote them, who did the translation from language to language & all we have left are copies of copies of copies, etc, & each Gospel contradicts itself + what we find is that the stories in them have changed over time. Christians have told me that not only were the original writers of the gospels “inspired by God” but apparently so was each & every scribe that mistranslated and/or added or left out verses. Logic is not something believers have when examining there own religion yet seem very capable of pointing out all the absurdities of other religions. The irony of these same believers who are so enhanced by their God’s merciful ways can manifest such murderous fury towards those who have different beliefs.
August 18th, 2010 at 20:52
Contributors are reminded to please refrain from personal insults.
Thank you.
Admin
August 18th, 2010 at 21:59
to admin………..
my apologies
robb
August 18th, 2010 at 22:18
I played a game of telephone once – you know, where you whisper something in someone’s ear, and they do the same to someone else, etc, etc until the final person reveals what the first person supposedly whispered. Usually quite funny. Well, in our case the initial word was Engelbert Humperdink, and after only 10 hops the result was…..Angel Humper!
I thought that was priceless, personally, but the point is that a lot can be lost in translation. I firmly believe this is what happened with the original stories that now comprise the various holy books, much to our collective misfortune these many years….
August 18th, 2010 at 22:36
Braathwaat,
I agree with you the christian books have gone thru lots of amendments over time but not with Qoran, every word, every punctuations are still as per original as dictated by Mohammad. Now does that probably seem to be the true book?
August 18th, 2010 at 23:31
Greg,
Presumably the intermediaries made inadvertant changes in the original version as they passed the message on. The situation with religion and religious text is even worse when one considers that the messengers typically gain a lot personally by the message that they pass on.
YSG
ps: re – personal attacks – given that religious beliefs are so personally held, is it really ultimately possible to criticize religion without it being a form of personal attack? I suspect so — I appreciate the Admin attempting to maintain a consistent standard for contributors and presumably the anti-contributor(s) …