An Atheist Reads the Bible - 1 - Lot's Daughters

Flamed Diving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00B3IqCvZdE

Very simple, yet effective. An audiobook of the Bible, with animation overlayed.

http://www.youtube.com/user/43alley

Galvasean

Who needs Last House On The Left when we have the Bible?

Flamed Diving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REJ0Qc10iV0

I like this, cause it slightly defecates the notion of the NT being a step-away from the OT.

Flamed Diving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj7VSGmKRPw

Most important of all.

Very funny:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNz-FeWoVc8

CDfm

So God has a bit of a temper and there is collateral damage.

By the same token when the Allies bombed Germany in WWII there was collateral damage too.

We read the bible allegorically and the message to lot was to get out of the city and that it had affected his values in that he had offered the mob his daughters.The angels told him not to. Lots wife looked back which is a metaphor for not wanting to let go of the old way of life.

The daughters after the incest events gave birth to Moab and Ammon who founded the tribes that were the Israelites bitter enemies. So in that way you might say that they had free choice to leave the old ways behind them and didnt.

So I would say there is a lesson in there that is more realistic and contemporary on morals,mores and values if you want to see it.

One might almost say its an early theory of memetics.

Flamed Diving

CDfm wrote: »

So God has a bit of a temper and there is collateral damage.

By the same token when the Allies bombed Germany in WWII there was collateral damage too.

We read the bible allegorically and the message to lot was to get out of the city and that it had affected his values in that he had offered the mob his daughters.The angels told him not to. Lots wife looked back which is a metaphor for not wanting to let go of the old way of life.

The daughters after the incest events gave birth to Moab and Ammon who founded the tribes that were the Israelites bitter enemies. So in that way you might say that they had free choice to leave the old ways behind them and didnt.

So I would say there is a lesson in there that is more realistic and contemporary on morals,mores and values if you want to see it.

One might almost say its an early theory of memetics.

Who is 'we'?

In either case, the message remains that God is a child killer.

Overblood

CDfm wrote: »

Lots wife looked back which is a metaphor for not wanting to let go of the old way of life.

Says who? Maybe she just looked back because she wanted to look back? People look back at things all the time. I looked back at a nice girls arse in town the other day. Is that a metaphor?

The Mad Hatter

CDfm wrote: »

So God has a bit of a temper and there is collateral damage.

By the same token when the Allies bombed Germany in WWII there was collateral damage too.

Yes, but God is - well, he's a god. He can do anything, apparently. He's not using bombs, he's using magic powers, so why not just magic it so that only the men die?

You also seem to be missing several of the other aspects of the despicable morality in these stories.

Flamed Diving

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

You also seem to be missing several of the other aspects of the despicable morality in these stories.

Years of conditioning, Hatty.

CDfm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Who is 'we'?

In either case, the message remains that God is a child killer.

You are free to read it however you wish.

Its the same as saying Churchill was a child killer.

Even if you dont believe in God it has a philosophical message that has relevence today and has influenced thought and cultural beliefs.

Zombrex

Overblood wrote: »

Says who? Maybe she just looked back because she wanted to look back? People look back at things all the time. I looked back at a nice girls arse in town the other day. Is that a metaphor?

No, but it is probably sin :P

Zombrex

CDfm wrote: »

Even if you dont believe in God it has a philosophical message that has relevence today and has influenced thought and cultural beliefs.

Do as you are told or you will be executed? Obey without question? God loves you?

CDfm

Wicknight wrote: »

Do as you are told or you will be executed? Obey without question? God loves you?

Biblical Fundamentalism is alive and well in A+A:rolleyes:

Zillah

CDfm wrote: »

So God has a bit of a temper and there is collateral damage.

By the same token when the Allies bombed Germany in WWII there was collateral damage too.

Really? That's the best you've got? An omnipotent being couldn't avoid collateral damage? You're terrible. Just awful. We need a much more crazy Christian to defend this shit because this isn't even fun anymore, it's just sad.

CDfm

Zillah wrote: »

Really? That's the best you've got? An omnipotent being couldn't avoid collateral damage? You're terrible. Just awful. We need a much more crazy Christian to defend this shit because this isn't even fun anymore, it's just sad.

Well Zillah - you dont believe it either literally or metaphorically.

I even open the door for you to discuss memetic evolution and explain it for us all.

Zillah

I believe in it as a story.
I believe people read and believe these stories.
I believe that people adore and worship the God presented in these stories.

It scares the crap out of me.

I believe that people will use arguments like "Collateral damage is to be expected when you divinely annihilate a city", and believe it somehow justifies or excuses the event.

Those people scare the crap out of me.

Zombrex

CDfm wrote: »

Biblical Fundamentalism is alive and well in A+A:rolleyes:

I'm sorry, what do you think the message was?

Zombrex

CDfm wrote: »

Well Zillah - you dont believe it either literally or metaphorically.

I even open the door for you to discuss memetic evolution and explain it for us all.

The explanation is that it is a story that comes from a time when people were used and expected cruel and brutal rulers, and thus expected a cruel and brutal God.

The issue for modern Christians who have grown up in post-Enlightenment is that they don't do cruel and brutal, and thus they have to square the round hole of the Old Testament with modern standards of morality and ethics.

Which is where rather nonsensical explanations like "collateral damage" come from.

CDfm

Wicknight wrote: »

The explanation is that it is a story that comes from a time when people were used and expected cruel and brutal rulers, and thus expected a cruel and brutal God.

The issue for modern Christians who have grown up in post-Enlightenment is that they don't do cruel and brutal, and thus they have to square the round hole of the Old Testament with modern standards of morality and ethics.

Which is where rather nonsensical explanations like "collateral damage" come from.

Or you could read it as a corrupt society/ideology allegory like the destruction of nazi Germany. If you took Hegels Triad Thesis,Antithesis and Synthesis and applied it.

I just took one element being the destruction of a city and applied it to say behaviour during wartime and the bombing of cities during WWII. I am not saying such things are desireable but in certain circumstances ethically they are inescapeable.

In this context you could have , Nazi Germany , its destruction and the growth of Neo Nazi right in Europe.In the same way you had Sodom, its destruction and the growth of the Moabites.

You could say that the daughters had the opportunity to leave their old ideologies behing them and didnt in the same way thne Neo Nazis in Germany dont and they are a problem that has to be dealt with/tolerated.

Thats a simple interpretation but Im sure you get the concept and you come accross Hegels Triad being applied in the writtings of Marx and Engels and it has many applications.

I read somewhere (probably on boards) that there is a book due out on memetic readings of the bible.

Flamed Diving

CDfm wrote: »

Or you could read it as a corrupt society/ideology allegory like the destruction of nazi Germany. If you took Hegels Triad Thesis,Antithesis and Synthesis and applied it.

I just took one element being the destruction of a city and applied it to say behaviour during wartime and the bombing of cities during WWII. I am not saying such things are desireable but in certain circumstances ethically they are inescapeable.

In this context you could have , Nazi Germany , its destruction and the growth of Neo Nazi right in Europe.In the same way you had Sodom, its destruction and the growth of the Moabites.

You could say that the daughters had the opportunity to leave their old ideologies behing them and didnt in the same way thne Neo Nazis in Germany dont and they are a problem that has to be dealt with/tolerated.

Thats a simple interpretation but Im sure you get the concept and you come accross Hegels Triad being applied in the writtings of Marx and Engels and it has many applications.

I read somewhere (probably on boards) that there is a book due out on memetic readings of the bible.

So God is a child killer, then.

Ergo, he isn't perfect.

Ergo, he isn't God.

Welcome.

CDfm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

So God is a child killer, then.

Ergo, he isn't perfect.

Ergo, he isn't God.

Welcome.

Lots of Ergos -but he does Vengence and retribution.

Flamed Diving

CDfm wrote: »

Lots of Ergos -but he does Vengence and retribution.

Yup, making him a petty child killer.

That isn't perfect.

So, he cannot be God.

CDfm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Yup, making him a petty child killer.

That isn't perfect.

So, he cannot be God.

Typical Flamed Logic and I expect no less

Flamed Diving

CDfm wrote: »

Typical Flamed Logic and I expect no less

A child killer is not perfect. God is, by your definition, perfect.

God is not perfect. It is really that simple. It is the logic of bronze-age desert tribes which falls flat on its face.

Blackhorse Slim

I think I understand. Some parts of the Bible are metaphor, or allegory, and are not meant to be taken literally. Other parts of the Bible are literally true, and actually happened exactly as described. And all of this is the Word of God. And most importantly - exactly which parts are true and which parts are metaphor change over time.

What about this Jesus lad? Was he real at all, or just an allegory? And Hell, is it a real physical place? How do we know which bits are meant to be real, and which aren't?


The story of Genesis was literally true, and still is for some people, but for others is it a metaphor for God's Creation, rather than a historical description. Likewise, all that evil stuff God did was expected of him when rulers were expected to be cruel and harsh, but now that we are more enlightened it never really happened. Is that it? Can I be christian now?

Flamed Diving

Blackhorse Slim wrote: »

I think I understand. Some parts of the Bible are metaphor, or allegory, and are not meant to be taken literally. Other parts of the Bible are literally true, and actually happened exactly as described. And all of this is the Word of God. And most importantly - exactly which parts are true and which parts are metaphor change over time.

What about this Jesus lad? Was he real at all, or just an allegory? And Hell, is it a real physical place? How do we know which bits are meant to be real, and which aren't?


The story of Genesis was literally true, and still is for some people, but for others is it a metaphor for God's Creation, rather than a historical description. Likewise, all that evil stuff God did was expected of him when rulers were expected to be cruel and harsh, but now that we are more enlightened it never really happened. Is that it? Can I be christian now?

It makes 'perfect' sense to me, Blacky.

Zombrex

CDfm wrote: »

Or you could read it as a corrupt society/ideology allegory like the destruction of nazi Germany.

But no one would think the genocide of Nazi Germany would be a good thing CDfm, that is the point. Or that a leader who carried out such a brutal response would be worthy of follwoing. They might have 4,000 years ago.

CDfm wrote: »

I just took one element being the destruction of a city and applied it to say behaviour during wartime and the bombing of cities during WWII. I am not saying such things are desireable but in certain circumstances ethically they are inescapeable.

Not for an omnipotent deity :rolleyes:

We don't have collateral damage in war time on the basis that it is a war so heck we have to kill some civilians, it is because man kind is particularly bad a fighting and often, inadvertently , kills civilians.

It is not some requirement.

CDfm wrote: »

You could say that the daughters had the opportunity to leave their old ideologies behing them and didnt in the same way thne Neo Nazis in Germany dont and they are a problem that has to be dealt with/tolerated.

You could say that if you were desperately trying to find some way to excuse this

CDfm wrote: »

I read somewhere (probably on boards) that there is a book due out on memetic readings of the bible.

What are memetic readings of the Bible?

CDfm

Wicknight wrote: »

Not for an omnipotent deity :rolleyes:

It is not some requirement.

If you take a literalist reading of the bible you need to accept a bit of vengence and retribution with that interpretation. Im Catholic and we dont do a literalist reading.

You could say that if you were desperately trying to find some way to excuse this

Maybe - but if I was contemplating bombing a city during wartime Nazi Germany it would be an ethical argument/philosphical argument I could look at even if I was atheist.

What are memetic readings of the Bible?

I think it may have been Dades who posted on this -I cant remember - but its definately quite a cool idea. Its taking the evolution of cultural ideas in context I think.

Other than that I suppose we must wait for the book. Thats what you get with polarised arguments - you get a good idea or tool and the opposite side discount it.

Zillah

CDfm wrote: »

Maybe - but if I was contemplating bombing a city during wartime Nazi Germany it would be an ethical argument/philosphical argument I could look at even if I was atheist.

You keep missing the core reason that this is a pointless and irrelevant metaphor.

Scenario 1: Churchill orders that bombs be dropped on German cities so that their economy and industry be damaged so as to prevent the Nazis from continuing the war effort. (It sucks that innocent people died but the Nazis needed to be stopped.)

Scenario 2: Churchill has a magic bomb that can instantly remove any and all threats to democracy without harming a single innocent person. Instead he orders that Berlin be firebombed again. (Hey, what a child murdering jerk!)

God and Sodom is more like scenario 2. He is omnipotent. There's no such thing as collateral damage when once is omnipotent. Any damage he did was deliberate. So by Darwin's great bushy beard, will you stop with the meaningless Nazi comparison!

Dades

CDfm wrote: »

I think it may have been Dades who posted on this -I cant remember - but its definately quite a cool idea. Its taking the evolution of cultural ideas in context I think.

I doubt it. My knowledge of memetics is only what I get from skimming threads on the subject to make sure nobody's being naughty. Twas Robin I'd say.