Basically read the Bible in the context it was written in to better understand its meaning instead of taking the reactionary approach where you work backwards from what you already believe.

[–] mathemachristian@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Yes that is what I was trying to get at. Thanks for making it precise

[–] balls_expert@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's a book written at a moment in history when people believed thunder was god's anger, and you're trying to pick it apart to find out what is God's message and what is some guy's creative writing

How stupid would modern people look if we died and found out god does indeed want us to stone people for adultery and that "those who are free of sin throw the first stone" part was just a scribe's personal moral belief

There's no way to interpret, discard, or contextualize this book properly. There is no telling that god's ways aren't literally those in the ancient testament where you're supposed to leave your raped daughter to die on your doorstep

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm an atheist, I don't try to divine "god's will" when I read the Bible critically. What I try is to understand the struggles of the people who wrote the passages.

There’s no way to interpret, discard, or contextualize this book properly.

Art is always open to reinterpretation. At this point you're telling people they can't do something and I'm just laughing cuz I already done it. Cope.

[–] balls_expert@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then I'm talking about what the 1st guy was doing