A Conversation for The Bible - a Perspective

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 1


OK people. I am the author of this entry. There seems to be a few Xians mad at me for slandering their religion, or some such nonsense.

I have two words for you: lighten up!

The article is pretty clearly a rather lighthearted look at the Bible, intended, in the spirit of H2G2, to be an introduction to, in this case, the Bible, targetted at a theoretical person who had never visited Earth or heard of a bible before. This theoretical (and pretty funny) construct of an audience is pretty clearly not a Xian audience, it not having ever seen a bible before. When I wrote this article, I tried to imagine how the Judeo-Christian tradition would look to an adult who'd never even heard of it. I happen to think it would look pretty silly. At first, at least. Whether or not they later would be converted rests on the strength not of my article, but rather on the power of the Christian religion.

Incidentally, there will probably be a few people who have never read the bible reading this entry. I happen to think that either the entry itself or the references-to-look-up at the end might just entice someone to have a look at this thing, where they might previously not have bothered.

In a nutshell, I doubt my critiques are so unbearably scathing that any current Xians will change their minds about their faith. Moreover, if the Xian faith is really all that hot, maybe some of these new bible-readers might just, as you put it 'accept Jesus as their personal saviour'. Point is, unless you're an over-the-top Politically Correct nut, in the final evaluation, I think this article does more good than harm.

And that's all I have to say on the matter

it's just silly buggers playing tricks with you

Post 2

Prof. Monkel

you know, i'm a christian, or Xian, as you so wittily thought to call us, and i couldn't find too much wrong with your article. it is a bit exaggerated perhaps, but it's crisp and witty. got a good laugh about it. especially the bacon bit. it's true, that part is completely true.

what i'm mad about is the fact that you seemed to label every christian (sorry, xian) the same. heck, i'm a christian and i think the hitchhiker trilogy is some of the greatest literature ever. there are people out there other than Kevin (where Kevin is a xian that takes everything in xianity so seriously that the slightest twinge of the devil in anything at all is, well, the devil, a good example of which would be my mother).

other than that, i'd say good entry.

it's just silly buggers playing tricks with you

Post 3


"if the Xian faith is really all that hot, maybe some of these new bible-readers might just, as you put it 'accept Jesus as their personal saviour'"

Well for starters I too take offence of you omitting Christ from our title.

And more importantly you completly missed the point of the Bible in your article. Sin and the consequences for it.

The whole Bible is about man's sin and what God did to cleanse us of it. Thats the whole point of Christ and his death. A sinless man accepting responsibility for the sins of all those who believe in his sacrifice.

The Bible is not only a historical record it is also the answer to life, the universe and everything in it. And why it is there in fact. Not only that but it also answers what comes after this life and universe.

Perhaps you can put those in your next article.


Post 4

Martin Harper

> "Xian, as you so wittily thought to call us"

It's an abbreviation - just like the term 'xmas', for example. 'Xmas' originated in the sixteenth century, where the X was the greek letter 'chi' and served as an abbreviation for 'christ' and also as a representation of the crucifixion.

So the term has been around for centuries, and was probably originated in the christian faith, so I don't see that there's any need to be offended by it, is there?

-Martin smiley - smiley

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 5


How were you able resist saying that the bible is just a series of folk tales? The bible is a code of conduct that has been rewritten thousands of times by monks who made changes in the hand written material and of course reflected the views of the person,abbot,in chage.

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 6

Researcher 216254

Sir, you are an idiot, and your life is a joke to me.


A Theist.

it's just silly buggers playing tricks with you

Post 7


Of course he took 'Christ' away from the name, he wanted to insult Christians.

It doesn't say a lot for him though does it.


Post 8


On a strange, happy little note, I looked up Xian on Merriam Webster Online, and I got this entry:
One entry found for Xi'an.
Main Entry: Xi'·an
Variant(s): or Si·an /'shE-'än/; or formerly Chang·an /'chä[ng]-'än/
Usage: geographical name
city E central China capital of Shaanxi on the Wei population 1,959,044

I'm not saying that I'm going to get into a huff or puff because you mis-labeled us after a city in China smiley - smiley

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 9

Researcher 218612

"The bible is a code of conduct that has been rewritten thousands of times by monks who made changes in the hand written material and of course reflected the views of the person,abbot,in chage."

Sorry, you are WRONG. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove the accuracy of the KJV.

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 10

Tonsil Revenge (PG)

Actually, the "Dead Sea Scrolls" are only proof that the Masoretic text is fairly reliable. The Septuagint and the Vulgate are at variance in several important areas.
The "Dead Sea Scrolls" are of no help at all with the New Testament portion of the KJV.

Which KJV were you referring to?
It has had at least six revisions.

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 11


If you are looking to be convinced of the truth of Christianity solely on the basis of archaeology - or indeed, if you are looking to prove that its untrue on that bases, you will be terribly disappointed.

As someone who considers themself to be a liberal, modern, cynical, worldly person who does not fall for religion easily, I nevertheless came to the uncomfortable and ego-shattering realisation that Christ existed, Christ claimed to be the Son of God and that the circumstantial evidence (and also the evidence of archaeology, external validation etc.) strongly indicates that He was telling the truth. Once you've got to that stage, the rest falls into place. Of course I struggle with certain parts of the Bible, but ultimately I trust God, "'My thoughts are higher than yours' says the Lord" and "Will not the judge of all things do right?" (I've no Bible to hand so I'll not risk inaccurate references!). I became a Christian reluctantly, perhaps because I knew that I was signing up for a lifetime from the kind of cocky know-it-all cynics who populate this page smiley - winkeye and who remind me of myself a few years back. But if He can hang on a cross for me, receive the punishment that is mine in shame and agony, then I don't think I have much room to complain about having to put up with a bit of sneering opprobrium from you chaps!

Essentially, there is no way I would be a Christian if I felt for one moment that I was committing intellectual suicide. I know that I am not. But once I became a Christian and truly began opening myself up to God, I received -as do all Christians - the power of the Holy Spirit. That in itself is by far the most convincing evidence that Christianity is 100% true. The catch here is that I can argue with you til the cows come home about the reliability of the Bible and the evidence for the resurrection etc. but I can do nothing to make you feel what I feel. You have to make that step of faith and repentance first. The evidence that flows through you after that point makes the whole Christianity issue an open and shut case for people who the Lord.

God bless you and may He open your hearts and minds. I doubt any of you can be as cynical about Christianity as I once was - there is real hope for you all.

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 12

Tonsil Revenge (PG)

Having been raised in a church, my father was a pastor, my skepticism is based on my experiences.
I will never abandon my Bible or my God, but I certainly have had many occasions to shake the dust from my feet upon leaving a 'church'.

I have had many occasions to deal with "christians" who had never actually read their Bibles, only memorized the parts their faith finds useful. They could not stand to have someone open a Bible in their presence and point to a passage and say,"What do you think about this?"

Right now I am having to deal with some people at church who babble endlessly about the "infallibility" of the Bible.
Again, few of them have actually read it.

One, a man who has been a sunday school teacher and a bible drill intructor for decades, was amazed to learn that the book of Esther has no mention of God in it.

I believe that while God knows what he is doing, many "Christians" don't have a clue.

People being silly and taking offense at my article

Post 13



Sorry for the disorganized state of my arguments, but I have to run and I do not have the time to edit...

First, let's get this out of the way: I do not think that I am more intelligent than you because of my atheism... intelligence has nothing to do with it at all. It is completely possible for you to be intelligent yet still hold onto irrational beliefs. I almost certainly have a few irrational beliefs of my own, Christianity just is not one of them. Now, for a few of my own reasons for my atheism...

So, the most convincing evidence (in your post) that Christianity is true is your heartfelt belief that it is true? I believe that I am Emperor of New Jersey. I decree that all superfund sights are to be cleansed within the next five minutes.

I would have to call myself one of those nasty cynics that you complain about... although I like to think of myself as a nice guy deep down inside; I see so much deception and lies in the world. It is impossible for me to blindly trust any one source, the Bible included.

God seems like a tyrant to me. You either join his side, or go to Hell... or you get drowned... are your city gets destroyed... you get the picture.

But God's followers say that God is love. How can this be? The Christians say that God loves us so much that he sacrificied his son (see Parable of the Insane Dog Breeder) to save us, but he still gives us the free will to deny his Love and take up residence in Hell, "...where fiery demons will punch me in the back..." (Simpsons).

And the reply given by an article I read online by another atheist (I forget his name and where the article is)? A mugger could just as easilly hold a knife to my back and say, "Give me your money or die." Sure, I have free will. I can resist the mugger, and then die and have my money taken away anyway... but the mugger is hardly a benevolent figure. The mugger is clearly evil, so how come the same label, "evil," is not attached to God? Better yet, let us call the mugger "good" since he was kind enough to give me the option to live, provided I would kindly part with my wallet.

"But God, unlike the mugger, does not want to take anything away in return for my worship, only give..." you say? Blindly following religion does take something away: your ability to think for yourself. Not only that, the doctrine that God created the earth for Man, so we are fit to do whatever we want with the earth... regardless of the welfare of other species and future generations (not to mention the people who are impoverished and miserable in the PRESENT). We are free to destroy other cultures in order to "save" them by "converting" them to our wonderfully greedy way of life.

With Christianity, the state of the world that you are in does not matter, because you have heaven waiting for you when you die. As an atheisit, the state of the world is EVERYTHING, so I work hard to make the world a better place.

What about people who are born in the third world in nonchristian families... are they destined for hell simply because they had a hard lot in life and never discovered Jesus? What about the many evils performed in the name of Jesus and God throughout history? Or, as Homer Simpson himself said, what if you picked the wrong religion and by going to Church all you are doing is making God madder and madder every day?

Oh, and the Bible is also sexist... so all the female Christians out there have me a bit confused. I think there are a few female leaders in there somewhere, but some of the passages that I read were still extremely sexist. Why would any female in their right mind join a religion when its own holy book tells women not to speak their mind in church, and places the guilt on WOMEN for tempting MAN to commit the original sin?

I think that you follow a metaphorical interpretation, rather than literal, of the bible, correct? That's a step in the right direction, but the problem with interpretation is that you can interpret anything to mean anything.

In closing, here is an unpleasant article from an atheist that I found to be obnoxious, but a bit amusing. Christian Boot Camp:

Key: Complain about this post