Thanks for making this thread. I was about to, but I think you introduced the subject in a more tactful way than I would've, so it's probably better that you did.I’m not questioning about the existence of god. I can’t prove that god doesn’t exists, so I must account for a possibility of his existence, even if I think the probability is extremely small. Nor do I want to insult anyone. If I did, or will, I’m sorry, it isn’t my objective. I have never read the bible neither.
Aside from people often being sheeple anyways, the Bible encourages this. People place so much emphasis on faith because the Bible does, and they're afraid their beliefs will be shaken. They're basically taught to see said shaken beliefs as attacks from an enemy force, threats to their safety--a safety that's eternal and irreversible. Salvation hinges upon faith.What I am wondering is about the bible itself. Why do people usually follow it blindly? I’ve seen its danger with many more scientific topics like vaccines, 5G and so on. Why do you believe and trust a book that as been written around two thousands years ago? I know it teaches you about love, respect and kindness. But why is it necessary god’s word? I've read that the old testament is more brutal. If the popes have been the cause for numerous hateful crimes throughout history, why do you still trust the Vatican?
I can't say that I 100% agree with this. I think there are pros and cons. I personally believe that the Bible (and its churches) breed deception. I think the good that does come out of it is really more about the fact that something is motivating people to do things that are helpful to the locals, including things like food banks and charity. It sort of proves what people are capable of when they're sufficiently motivated, if you ask me. Sadly though, this is often (not always) just greed being weaponized against itself, which is actually kind of clever, but at the end of the day it's just greed disguised as generosity, which is also rather toxic because it's damaging to trust. The incentive is pretty much gaining heavenly things rather than earthly ones though. The idea is that giving on earth = gaining in heaven, and since heaven is eternal...well...yeah.I’m not questioning small churches neither, I believe they are helpful for locals.
I think the Bible is a human construct, but I also think we can't say for certain what the intentions behind conceptualizing it were. I think the most we can do is speculate, theorize, generate possibilities.As I see it, the bible has been written by smart people trying to improve the world they are living in. They made barbaric men stay civilized by making them fear hell. They kept them loyal by telling them about the evil that will destroy the world and how only the faithful will be saved.
So, what is your opinion about the bible? Do you think it is god’s word, or at least god’s opinion? Or are you on the other extreme, believing that it is not different from Mein Kampf or the little red book? What do you think?
Faith is not subject to proof. In fact, almost by definition, faith it acceptance of something in the absence of proof. When people speak of disproving something in the Bible, they are generally attacking it on a historical or scientific basis. Neither is necessary for faith. We don't ask, for instance, whether Aesop's Fables are true. Most people understand that the truth conveyed by the story of the tortoise and the hare requires neither that their famous footrace actually took place, nor that such animals had the ability to organize and converse about it.People are always looking for confirmation of their faith. The Bible basically implies there's not evidence by saying that people have to have faith to believe though. If there was evidence out there, that would no longer be true...so funny enough, to find solid evidence is to prove the Bible wrong at least in one area, which would make it more questionable.
That was sort of my point, it's acceptance in the absence of proof...so if there was proof, how would they be believing out of faith?Faith is not subject to proof. In fact, almost by definition, faith is acceptance of something in the absence of proof. When people speak of disproving something in the Bible, they are generally attacking it on a historical or scientific basis. Neither is necessary for faith. We don't ask, for instance, whether Aesop's Fables are true. Most people understand that the truth conveyed by the story of the tortoise and the hare requires neither that their famous footrace actually took place, nor that such animals had the ability to organize and converse about it.
Any book gets its authority from the author. And the author of the Bible is ultimately the Author of the Universe. Unfortunately the book is dead, and it's author is dead.
The death of the book has given rise to the net.
The Bible was once the infallible word of God, but today is merely a status symbol, waved by the President in front of the White House.
I suppose if you feel that way, but Christians still do exist, and we still think it means a lot more than that jackass using it as a prop.