What is so good about the 'Good Book'?

Is Origin of Species responsible for atheism? Is Mein Kampf responsible for World War II?
The Bible is only a book. It retains its title because the title fits.Unlike these others the bible IS responsible for much because it is a thing of worship and justification for hundreds of millions for nearly 1700 years. It's a matter of scale.[This message has been edited by nos482, 11-05-2002]

Originally posted by doctrbill:How did people justify aggression before there was a Bible?

​

How do people justify aggression when they have no Bible?They used their religious writings, and/or myths.Is the constitution responsible for America? No. Those who support the constitution are responsible.They don't compare because it is not the same concept.By this reasoning - If atheism is around 1500 years from now, then Origin of Species can be held responsible for atheism?Atheism is not a belief system and the person who wrote it was a Christian.I am all in favor of attacking abusers of the holy script. But the Bible itself doesn't hear a word I say. It just sits there, like it doesn't care. Maybe it's intellectually challenged. Maybe it's mentally incompetent. If that is true, then there is no court in the land which would hold it "responsible" for anything.It is a means of justification.So, how does one get rid of the evil Scripture-thumpers? Jews put rocks in their heads. Christians threw them on the Barbie. Muslims lift up their heads. But they keep on coming. I hear that Hitler had some success with gas. Oops! That's another story. At any rate, I don't need a book to tell me who my enemies are.You may not, but a good many people do.[This message has been edited by nos482, 11-05-2002]

Originally posted by doctrbill:Writing was invented about 5000 years ago. Was there no war before that?Recorded history started around 10,000 years ago And they still used the same excuses.How not? You assert that the Bible is responsible for war. I say people are responsible for war.I didn't say any such thing.Darwinism is a belief system but I don't think one needs Darwin to know that Godidit isn't the answer.Darwinism isn't a belief system either.I don't think authorship is particularly relevent to this issue. The question is whether a book can be held responsible for a person's bad behavior. In this country (U.S.) it cannot. Freedom of Speech you know.That is freedom of political speech.I know what you are saying, but it won't stand up in court. In the real world one doesn't kill people with impunity unless he is ordered to do so by his country. In such case, "The British Are Coming!!" is all the justification one needs.I didn't say that it did either. I had said that it was a means of justifing one's actions.No one needs a book to tell him that Osama bin Laden is our
enemy.It does when it is based on a jihad.In wartime the Bible is used to comfort those who are about to die. But it is one's commander who points him to the enemy. He may quote Sargon, Alexander, Patton, or Joshua, but it is military command which assigns the enemy."For god and country..."I believe we must recognize a difference between the Bible and various organizations which purport to know, "the Will of God as revealed in the Bible." Whether they know it or not, and probably not, the "God" of which they speak is a long dead hanging judge or some ancient war-mongering Emperor. The problem with their ignorance is that they don't know they've got it. "But they're not real Christians..."A more effective tack is to know the Bible better than they do. If that doesn't work, then perhaps a well placed grenade (Oh Please God).

​

dbThere is much in the bible which can be used to justify much evil as well.

Originally posted by John:Ah.... deja vu. I have pointed this out to you before, Nos, in the very first thread in which we butted heads. The earliest example of writing dates nowhere near 10000 years ago.

​

No webpage found at provided URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/334517.stmYou're speaking mainly of Egyptian history. They aren't the oldest civilization. Recorded history also includes certain cave paintings as well. I didn't say written history. There are many ways to record history other than your limited definition of just writing.Well Nos said it, so it must be true. Do you think you might be able to elaborate?It is a theory, a part of the theory of Evolution. Christianity is a belief system with rites, rituals and other such nonsense. Darwinism has none of this. Do you see the difference or do you just want to be contrary?It is painfully obvious that this not the argument doctrbill was making.Mary Mary quite....

I always knew what you meant. I just wanted to make you define your terms. You were very terse with doctrBill and the issue is all semantics. A 'belief system' does not have to have rites and rituals. That is the nosfinition, but not the only possible one. I function within a set of beliefs yet have no rites and rituals (Is coffee a rite or ritual?). That could be considered a belief system.In this context a belief system does include what I had said. Contrary to what you are trying to do.[This message has been edited by nos482, 11-06-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:

quote:

---

Originally posted by nos482:
You enjoying yourself? Trying to get me banned again?

---

​

You don't need my help for that. But no, that is not what I am trying to do.

​

I am trying to get you to fight like an adult and not like a whinnie-baby-name-caller. The ban must have done you some good because you finally seem to making an effort at it.

​

Now can we get back to the thread?

​

---

You prove yourself a liar by somehow bringing this posting back after I had deleted it before anyone could reply to it just to get me into trouble. I'll probably get banned now forever and everyone will take your side in this since I'm such a terrible person and all, as you say. Well, at least I respect women.[This message has been edited by nos482, 11-06-2002]