Tuesday, May 28, 2013

#21: The Bible - Metaphors and Inconsistencies (Oh, Dear. What Am I Getting Myself Into?)

Alright, this ought to get a lot of responses. Let me just give my little disclaimer, as I always feel the need to do. These are just little nuggets of thought. They are not necessarily my beliefs; they are simply ideas that have popped into my head over time...questions that my friends and I have raised in conversation at some point or another. They're just ideas to think about. I don't mean any disrespect, and I don't want to offend anyone. If you get offended easily when discussing or reading about the Christian faith or the Bible, then please, dear God, do not read this. However, if you can think and speak indifferently and add to/discuss this topic with me in a civil manner, then by all means, carry on.

Ok, the Bible. For the record, I'm going to use the New International Version, because that is the one that is the easiest to understand, it's the version I'm familiar with, and because I want to. I'm going to start with Genesis, because that makes sense. Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." The Bible goes on to say, in the next several verses, that God did so in 6 days, making the 7th day a day of rest. As an example of the many verses that explain how God created such things, we'll use Genesis 1:3: "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light." Just like that. This being that neither was created, nor can be destroyed, this being that has always existed with no maker of its own, just poofed light, among other things, into existence. Now, these verses get a lot of criticism from skeptics, because how can someone just "poof" something into existence? Presumably, if God did exist, one should think he would take a lot of time to create a world with an infinite universe, planets, stars, outer space, moons, plant-life, animals, dinosaurs, humans, etc. It's true that this doesn't make much sense. But here's an idea, something a lot of people believe. The Bible is not literal; it's metaphorical. We are supposed to take from it ideas, concepts, and morals. We'll let alone the fact that some views in the Bible are archaic, because we don't lock up women who are on their periods, we don't refrain from eating shellfish and pork, etc. Even though these beliefs may have been acceptable in Bible times, they just aren't in practice today, along with many other things from the Bible that I believe should be deemed "archaic," but we won't go there. Instead, you can read the picture I've included below this note. It has a ton of Bible inconsistencies in it, and it's a hilarious read. The point is, if you believe in the Bible, certainly you can hear the idea that maybe the Bible was meant to show you the way you should live your life, not so that you literally think that God poofed everyone/everything into existence. That's not the point. The point is we have a world with all these amazing things in it. So here's something else: If you believe in the Bible, then did God really create the world in 6 days? Well, couldn't this be a metaphor as well? Can't we presume that maybe God doesn't have a sense of time really, since he has always existed and will never not exist? So maybe the 6 days in which God created the world were actually millions of years per day. Maybe God created the very first spark that led to billions of years of evolution, and every day was just a huge stage of evolution. Maybe God is only putting this into layman's terms, because our tiny little brains are too stupid to understand anything more complex. Well, that's certainly a view that a lot of people stand by.

Moving farther into Genesis, we have, of course, the part of the Bible that talks about how God created Eve from Adam's rib, thus turning many Bible views into a sexist debate. Why should the woman be the one who was created only for the companionship of the male? Why should the woman have been created FROM the male? Why should the man have been created first? Why should God be referred to as a male? Well, these sure do sound like human-like ideas. But, I guess that makes sense, since humans wrote the Bible, NOT God. And maybe what orthodox Christians say is true (if you believe in the Bible.) Maybe humans wrote the Bible THROUGH God, but there are obviously, at the very least, some errors in the Bible that couldn't possibly have been made by a perfect God, so they must have been made by humans.

That brings me to my next point. And this is my favorite point to argue, when it comes to Bible-talk. I'm REALLY interested in an argument that can refute this. Genesis 4:1 says, "Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain." For those of you who don't know, Cain is a MALE. Then Genesis 4:2 says "Later [Eve] gave birth to [Cain's] brother Abel." BROTHER. Ok, so let me just bring this to your attention really quickly. So far, on earth, we have Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel. Ok, we have 3 males and one female. Ok, the next mention of other humans is in Genesis 4:17, where the Bible says "Cain made love to his wife." Ok, I'm going to stop right there, because I am now thoroughly confused. Where did this wifey-poo come from? So now, on earth, we have Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, and Cain's wife? So...where did she come from? I surely hope Cain's wife is not his mother Eve. And I surely hope Cain didn't take a female animal as his wife. Hm. Inconsistency. So here's where I, again, ask you to consider that, if you believe in the Bible, maybe these stories are metaphorical. Maybe Adam stands for man, and Eve stands for woman. Maybe when God created Adam and Eve, what he meant was that he created men and women. Again, this would be a brilliant way to put a bigger concept into layman's terms for our gullible, stupid human brains. If you refuse to believe, at this point, that everything in the Bible is metaphorical, rather than literal, then you might as well throw out the Bible as a credible source altogether, because Genesis 4 makes absolutely no sense otherwise.

Sidenote: Notice that I am not saying anything about the Bible not being credible, or that the Christian faith is wrong. I won't reveal to you my true beliefs on this subject. I'm only giving you common arguments and thoughts/ideas/proof to back them up. It's on you to decide what you believe, after I'm finished with my nuggets of information here.

Ok, back to the meaty part of this note. It has also been suggested, by a friend of mine, that maybe some of the things that people in the Bible saw, which they thought were miracles of God, may actually be something to look into. We'll take Exodus 3, for instance. Now, drug plants have always existed. Is it not possible that, when Moses saw the burning bush, maybe he had eaten some shrooms or some other drug plant that had grown out of the ground? Moses had to eat, you know. And my friend says that, some evidence shows that shrooms were quite possibly able to grow in the desert where Moses was when he saw the burning bush. So this could apply to a lot of the crazy stories we read about in the Bible. These people who claimed to see amazing things, witness miracles, etc. could possibly have just been high on a drug plant that they had eaten from the ground. That doesn't sound impossible, does it? Or we could go with the idea that the miracles people witnessed were nothing but mere tricks. Or, then again, we could always go with the idea that the Bible is metaphorical, not literal, and that there was simply a moral behind Exodus 3 and all the other crazy stories in the Bible. Either way, the drug idea is a pretty interesting one, and not a bad idea, really.

Bare in mind that these are only a few ideas as to how the Bible was meant to be taken and the inconsistencies with the orthodox Christian faith. I could go on and on about inconsistencies in the Bible. Instead of doing that, I, again, refer you to the picture below. But you get the point. Some skeptics can take these inconsistencies and say, well, since there are inconsistencies in the Bible, which is supposed to be the word of an all-powerful, all-knowing, perfect being, then the Bible must be a load of bull, and we can't credit it at all. Well, I'm willing to meet halfway and say that if anyone is going to believe in the Bible, he/she should at least give it a second glance and think that maybe it's not meant to be taken literally, but metaphorically, instead. Again, I'm not going to reveal my true beliefs on the matter. This is just something to think about. And, honestly, why does it matter if the Bible is literal or not? Isn't the moral of the story what matters anyway? Why do we HAVE to believe it verbatim?

And I would like to add in something a very smart man suggested to me once. He said that all religious books were written to keep social order. People wrote the books, claimed they were the writings and teachings of God, and made everyone believe there would be consequences if they didn't do what "God" wanted them to do. Doesn't this sound like a way to keep social order? Doesn't this sound like a possibility? Everyone who practices a religion, Christianity included, could just be studying from books that came from jerks who lied to their townspeople, just to keep them in order. It could all just be a simple hoax that went way too far and lasted a longer time than originally intended. Well, if this is true, then cheers to the guy who started it all, for his bloody brilliance. Sidenote: If you haven't seen the movie "The Invention of Lying," you should. It's hilarious, and it explains my points in this note completely by using an analogy/situational example.

One more thing here. I love the idea of Heaven. I like to think we will all go to Heaven one day. But what about Hell? Now, why would God send his beloved children to Hell? It specifically says in the Bible that people who do not believe in God will be sent to Hell when they die. Now first off, let's say a Christian witnesses to a devout Islamic. These guys are just as devout in their religion as Christians are. They grew up learning their religion from babyhood just like Christians. So if a Christian witnesses to an Islamic person, does that person go to Hell if he doesn't change his beliefs to those of Christianity, since he has now heard about Christianity? The Bible says yes. So look at it from an Islamic person's perspective. If one of them were to come to you and say, "Hey, here's my religion. If you don't believe in it, you will go to Hell," would you completely drop Christianity and become Islamic? No! You would think that person was crazy and pray for his soul. You would tell him that your religion is right, and his is wrong. So how could God expect this person to not react in the same way upon hearing about Christianity for the first time. Also, first-timers of Christianity probably don't accept the religion very well, as the Bible has some pretty crazy, uneblieveable stuff in there. Furthermore, it seems ridiculous that we would be sent to Hell simply for not believing in something there is no hardcore proof of. I mean the Bible says God loves his children more than we love our own. Well, I don't have children, but I can still tell you that, if I did, I certainly wouldn't be able to send them to Hell for all of eternity. That's cruel and psychotic! What kind of monster would do that to their own children? That's quite a sick punishment. One might say they want no part of a religion that has such a god. Think about it. I'd say roughly 80% of the world is not Christian. That means God sends 80% of his children to Hell! If someone were to tell me, "Hey, so check this out: I'm going to give you ten children, but eight of them will go to Hell," I would just not have ANY children, so that none of them would have to go to Hell. I'd rather not have the children than send 80% of them to eternal damnation with fire and sin and an evil dictator with an awful name like Satan. Screw that. So why would God be ok with sending so many of his beloved children to Hell?

I encourage comments and discussion, and please, if you can refute any of this, I encourage you to do so, because I'd be really interested in hearing some other views. If you are going to quote the Bible for help in explaining your side, then please give me the book and the exact verse (along with the version of the Bible you are reading from,) and I will gladly take a look at it and hear your side. But here's the most important thing: Please understand that I am not forcing any views on anyone. This is for discussion purposes only. Please do not leave comments that are inappropriate, rude, or offensive on either end of the spectrum. I welcome discussion, not name-calling. And please remember not to pass any judgements on me or anyone else who comments on this note. "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." (Matthew 7:1.)

This is hilarious. And whoever wrote Leviticus was nuts, just saying. Read this if you want a good laugh and want to read about some other inconsistencies in the Bible. Now, I am well aware that most modern-day Christians believe that the Old Testament was completely nullified when Jesus died and rose again, thus forgiving all of our sins and bringing about the New Testament for the world to live by. However, many Christians still believe in the Old Testament, as do Jews. Also, think about it. If a God EVER made crazy laws like this for people to live by, isn't that fishy? I mean, the Christian God isn't supposed to change his mind on what is right and what is wrong. If he truly knows what is right and what is wrong, then that shouldn't change as if it is an opinion. What God considers to be right and wrong is supposed to be FACT according to him, since he is all-knowing. That means his beliefs on what is right and wrong are unchanging. So why would he give people one group of guidelines to follow and then completely change it up later on? Honestly, any God that, at any point in time, mandates that we kill people is pretty messed up, if you ask me...

No comments:

Post a Comment