When it comes to views of the Bible, why do some Atheists argue that it doesn't have meaning?

Question

just because it isn't scientifically true? Isn't it faulty to hold a faith book to the modern standards of science? They are two completely different endeavors, with different purposes. Poetry has meaning, songs have meaning, metaphors, fables, parables etc. have meaning and are True, right?

I think I should add that in response to a question I asked a couple days ago, someone said of the Bible, "it is either all true or none of it's true." Another comment was since Christians claim the Bible is "the Word of God," and some of it isn't literally true, then it proves there is no God.

Here's a link to the previous question.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ak5xakHoPLc5y6qcnSm2.hbty6IX?qid=20070620131649AAjRzmA

Answer 1

{{hugs}} I've just been reading some of your old blogs. Diggity, I like you! I know, you're married to a duck now. Unlike SOME people, I don't try to ruin happy marriages :)

I think that Atheists argue those bits of the bible to fundies, who say that it holds literal truth. Or that it contains a perfect model of morality. To someone who isn't a literalist, as yourself, it would be an unfair assumption and a pretty silly argument.

Yes, there are many truths in the bible. My personal favorite: By their fruits ye shall know them.

Answer 2

Tough one.

Any theologian will be able to accurately tell you that there are many versions of the Bible. They'll even tell you that the Old Testament, the Koran and the Talmud are essentially alike at the start.

Where they diverge is testament to politics, language interpretation record keeping and more politics. King James, Charlamagne, the list goes on and on.


We don't hold poetry, metaphors, fables or parables to be anything more than stories or messages with meaning. I'm sure you don't want the Bible to be classified with those. Those aren't sacred. To masses, the Bible is.

For athiests, the Bible is a historical volume. Testament to the fact that a man named Jesus Christ lived. That's true enough. He was put to death by the Romans. Also true. The rest? The rest is as true as much as the person who originally wrote it got right. And as much as the translators got right. And as much as the politicians didn't mess with.

The real and honest answer comes right down to faith. You either choose to have the faith to believe the chasms in some of the truths or you choose not to take that leap.

If you're an athiest? Easy choice.

Answer 3

I always like your questions...

Ah, but how do modern progressive people decide that which is beautiful, poetry, or timeless in the Bible?

I'm not a scholar in the history of Christianity, but it seems that which is privileged from the bible changes from epoch to epoch and from denomination to denomination. The puritans didn't celebrate holidays (you went to jail for celebrating Christmas), Ralph Waldo Emerson denied the divinity of Christ and was an early leader in Unitarianism, the Bible was used for and against slavery in the US, the bible has been used in the temperance movement (often by Protestants persecuting Irish Catholics), the Bible was used on both sides of the civil rights issue. Today, the Bible is being used by some to persecute homosexuals. Etc, etc..

It is my opinion that the Bible doesn't really guide Christians how to live, it's more that Christians often fit the bible into their moral structure and then hide behind scripture as a justification. Early Americans wanted to convert slaves and Native Americans to Christianity and they found Bible passages to justify their actions. Today, that would be seen as reprehensible. What changed? The Bible didn't change. The Bible was used to justify slavery. Now slavery is repulsive to all decent Christians. What changed? The bible didn't change. Did American Protestants have Christmas Eve services 250 years ago? No. What changed? It wasn't the Bible.

As an atheist, I would take your question one step further. Where, at all, is there a place for a 2000 year old faith book in modern society? Why should anyone take a book of fables, allegory, and metaphor so seriously in 2007? There is beautiful wisdom in the bible, but it is only through human social thought that we have filtered out the good parts of the bible from the ridiculous parts of the Bible.

I mean, Plato, Confucius, Epicurus and the classic philosophers have contributed much to modern thought as well. What is so special about the Bible? And which translation should America use as reference. How can us non-Christians take the Bible seriously when Christians not only argue which parts still apply today, which parts are literal, but they argue over which version transmits God's message the clearest?

One thing that aggravates atheists, and I know you're not a literalist, is people appeal to scripture in an argument. It's a immediate conversation ender. "I don't appose gay people, but I'm against gay marriage because scripture told me so". How irritating is that? First, it's debatable how strongly the NT opposes homosexuality. Second, the principle of freedom of religion says that you can't make laws based on your scripture. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But it's silly to prevent others from doing something just because a 2000 year old book, which everyone interprets slightly differently, supposedly says it's bad.

My question to you is, if we don't scrutinize the Bible by modern standards, by what standards should the Bible be measured. How does one decide that "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God" is to be taken literally but "If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out" is metaphor? Maybe Jesus does want you to cut your hand off if you sin?

Also, look at it from an atheist's perspective. No God means that the Bible is not God's word or even inspired by God. From my perspective, the bible is not that special when contextualized with the mountains of other ancient works available to study.

Answer 4

Yes, it is faulty to hold a book to standards of science. I doubt that is usually the issue in the situations you describe. The problem is when the Bible is promoted as being "The Truth". How can it possibly be a matter of faith, and yet absolutely true at the same time? One may have faith that there is a god, and that the bible is inspired by that god... but that is faith, *not* truth. That is what I take issue with.

Run James Run said it perfectly.

Answer 5

As an atheist I have never argued that the bible doesn't have meaning, I have just questioned its use as the book of truth. Any body that does not open their assertions to the rigors of scientific or logical examination runs the risk of having their beliefs categorized as superstition. There may be much that is true in the bible, but what is untested makes a poor foundation for assertions. I think many people have difficulty expressing their views accurately in words, when atheists say they think think the bible is without meaning they may be trying to say that it has no meaning as a rule book or guide book in these enlightened times. I don't believe that the bible is valueless, even today.

Answer 6

all the different religions and atheists stay in peace and are in elementary words attacked through undesirable christians which motives all good christians to melancholy on the wear and tear they do! Up till about 40 years again Christianity became thriving and there became no conflict with others yet in only those few short years the well-known christians have become illiberal, hate filled, bigoted and persecuting ensuing in a turning out to be backlash hostile to christianity and inflicting christianity to loose over ten p.c. in decrease than a decade with the loss accelerating! The self destruction of Christianity is underway and the in elementary words element that would give up it is to desert the undesirable human thoughts, search for to rediscover the idea of a loving god and act like it!

Answer 7

What is modern science? "Experts say 'Jesus tomb' is a fantasy" is a headline I just found by searching for "experts say." Philippians 2:14-16 says: "Do everything without grumbling or arguing, so that you may become blameless and pure, 'children of God without fault in a warped and crooked generation.' Then you will shine among them like stars in the sky as you hold firmly to the word of life." These sorts of controversies just give people an easy bait, if you ask me.

Science as we know it and the media are so intertwined. Democracy is based on the myth of the social contract, which means that you give up some of your personal freedoms in exchange for protection of your rights. 2 Timothy 4:3-5 says that people "gather around" or "heap up" (episōreuō - a word derived from one that means "burial urn" - "soros") many teachers for themselves. Karen Armstrong says, in "A Short History of Myth" that mythology began when homo sapiens became homo necans, man the killer. What I'm getting from 2 Timothy 4 and secular reading and my own experience is that the sole purpose of society as we know it is to justify murder as being "just" or "necessary." It's the life we live from birth to death, unless we are active evangelists as to God's salvation through Jesus. This is a comment from Plauche: "Traditional social contract theory holds that the origin and purpose of government is to escape the state of nature and its perceived deficiencies. ... this attempt at justifying the State with social contract theory ultimately fails. We can never really get out of anarchy. The formation of states does not eliminate anarchy but rather transforms natural anarchy into other types, the most well-known and widely recognized of which is international anarchy (i.e., the anarchic relationship that exists between states in the international system)."

The Bible differs from popular science of all ages. "Laughter is the best medicine" is not something the Bible agrees with. Ecclesiastes 7:3 says: "Frustration is better than laughter, because a sad face is good for the heart." Proverbs 9:12 says: "If you are wise, your wisdom will reward you; if you are a mocker [luwts - to scorn, make mouths at, talk arrogantly, to boast, to scorn, to mock, deride, to interpret (language), interpreter (participle), ambassador (fig.), to be inflated, scoff, act as a scorner, show oneself a mocker], you alone will suffer." In this terrible world, there are false prophets who falsely claim "peace." (Ezekiel 13:10; Jeremiah 14) The ethic of Christianity is scientifically sound in the sense that peace-makers are doing a good thing for their own life and health. How do people think that they're going to find a way to stop getting angry, when the very ethic of the business world is family-denying? Have you not noticed that the words "wage" and "wager" are very similar?

Answer 8

I'm not sure why an Athiest would say the Bible has no meaning. That's kind of an odd statement that wouldn't hold up to a logical debate. The burden of proof would rest on the maker of the statement, and that's a rather tall order.

However, I don't believe that the Bible and Science are mutually exclusive. In fact, I believe the more we discover in the area of science, the more it shows that the Bible was waaaay ahead of its time....we're just catching up.

Here's an interesting link:

http://pachome1.pacific.net.sg/~jesuslovesme/verse.htm

Answer 9

The Bible is scientifically true and has more meaning than any other book. That is because it is truth. Science has never disproved any thing in the Bible. Science only claims to have disproved things in the Bible. The quest to prove the Bible wrong is nothing more than men trying to justify their sin by denying that God exists. They can try for the rest of time, but they will fail. And when they stand at the great white throne they will have to account for it. If every skeptic, scientist, and luke warm believer would truly investigate the multitude of evidence out there they would be astounded at what they find. One extremely atheistic and commited skeptic named Lee Strobel investigated Jesus and God and then he too believed. His hard ball questions and extensive investigations are written down to make your investigation easy. A large part of his investigation centers around the validity of the Bible scriptures. Can we trust the gospel accounts? and etc. Read the Case for Christ and the Case for Faith . Both are available at any bookstore. You can usally find a copy at the thrift store as well. I buy then every chance I get and give them away. In fact I will send you both free of charge if you commit to read it. Leave a contact message in the comments and I will get them to you . Cap'n Arlo

Answer 10

I don't argue that the bible doesn't have meaning. Of course it does. I may argue about the bible being the word of god and no mistakes as such. I have always believed that the bible was like an Aesop's fables. Stories of morals from long ago.