Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-06-2011, 12:33 AM
 
Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
Buddy christ Wrote:An atheist's critique of the Bible

Feel free to throw your own logical dissections at any time.

GENESIS

1:16 "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."

-The moon is not a light, it is a reflection of the sun's light. This is the first of many examples that suggest that God's omnipotence seems to be limited to the knowledge of the demographics and time period of when the Bible was written. Strange.
Thanks Buddy for the invite to dissect your critique. I'm only going to address the first point you presented, because I don't have the time to get to all of them.

The concept that the moon reflects the light of the sun is alluded to throughout scripture. One example being Isaiah 30, "Moreover the light of the moon will be as the light of the sun, And the light of the sun will be sevenfold." The passage clearly demonstrates the fact that the moon reflects the intensity of the sun, but let's get to the passage you presented in Genesis.

The first several chapters of the Gospel of John are a midrash on the creation account, which is a form of biblical interpretation used by the Jews to help expound scripture. A first century Jew reading the gospel of John would have understood it for what it was, a Midrash of the original creation account found in Genesis.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us

Gen 1:3 Then God said,"Let there be light"; and there was light”
John 1:5 “The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it”

One parallel between these two creation accounts is the greater and lesser lights. The Genesis account states that God made two lights, the greater light referring to the sun and the lesser light referring to the moon.

The Gospel of John also refers to there being two lights, the lesser light being John the Baptist, “He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light”, and the greater light being Jesus Christ, “There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.

Interestingly enough we know that the moon has no light of it's own, but only reflects the true source of light being the sun. Just as John the Baptist being the lesser light has no light of his own, but only reflects the true Light that is Jesus Christ.

Gen 1:16-17 “God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”

John 1:6-9 “There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.”

God being the author of all scripture clearly understands the fact that the moon reflects the light of the sun, just as John the Baptist reflects the Light of Christ.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hunted By A Freak's post
23-06-2011, 08:02 AM
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
Thankyou for sharing that insight.

I'm intrigued as to the significance of your forum name. Would you care to enlighten me?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2011, 08:51 AM
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
I would rate that as weak at best. The only way you could possibly gather from those scriptures that the moon reflects the son's light is if you already knew that, which means that you're trying to put knowledge into the scriptures through interpretation.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ashley.hunt60's post
23-06-2011, 10:22 AM
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
Your insights are really interesting HBAF, but then again it all depends on interpretations. Stating that:
Quote:Moreover the light of the moon will be as the light of the sun, And the light of the sun will be sevenfold.
Is about the moon reflecting the sun's light at night only makes sense in retrospect KNOWING that the moon reflects light. I WOULD be impressed by this text if i would really say it as it is. The only thing I read in it is that the sun is seven times more powerful then the moon.

Obs1: 19-22 Wrote:19On the second day he created a rock orbiting the earth 20 reflecting energy particles called light 21 then he said: behold on the 19th day of the fifth month thousandninehundredsixty years after the messiah arrived mankind will walk among that light. 22 and he saw that it was good.

Now such scripture would impress me although the date are incorrect. If Biblical interpretation was mere about synchronization of ancient timetables, I would have no doubt see divine inspiration. Too bad it isn't.

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2011, 11:05 AM
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
First, thanks for making a new thread for arguments against my thread, rather than derail my critique off onto a tangent.

Like observer, I agree that the only reason you see "the moon reflects the sun" is because you want it to. The fact that the moon and the sun's light intensified 7 times says nothing by itself. And for your Genesis/John bit, I see no parallels between the two texts besides the word "light."


For instance,

Gen 1:3 Then God said,"Let there be light"; and there was light”
John 1:5 “The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it”

-One is about the creation of light itself, and the other seems like a analogy for sinners not understanding the ways of the Lord. Connection?


You said you didn't have to time to get to all your objections, but please post a few more. I'm interested to know what a theist thinks of my interpretation.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2011, 11:27 AM
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
Though I don't agree (I also feel that this is an "after-the-fact-interpretation". ie, molding the scripture to fit the facts) I must admit, that was one of the better put together arguments I've read. You seem to know your bible. I'd be very interested in hearing you critique some more of Buddy Christs thread.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2011, 11:57 PM
 
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
(23-06-2011 08:02 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Thankyou for sharing that insight.
Your Welcome!
Quote:I'm intrigued as to the significance of your forum name. Would you care to enlighten me?
Not too much significance in the name, it's a song by Mogwai. Though I think the better question is "who's the Freak?" Shy


(23-06-2011 08:51 AM)ashley.hunt60 Wrote:  I would rate that as weak at best. The only way you could possibly gather from those scriptures that the moon reflects the son's light is if you already knew that, which means that you're trying to put knowledge into the scriptures through interpretation.
Of course that's a possibility, however it seems highly unlikely considering the way it's presented. It's buried in Midrash, that's actually speaking of the new creation. In other words the point of the passage wasn't to validate some scientific claim for skeptics several thousands years later, but to demonstrate how God became a man. I only presented a small portion of what is being presented in the Gospel of John regarding this subject. But compound that with passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel that first speak of the sun not giving it's light, then followed by the moon, never the other way around.

Isaiah 13, "The sun will be dark when it rises And the moon will not shed its light."

Ezekiel 32, "I will cover the sun with a cloud And the moon will not give its light."

And I do still like the passage found in Isaiah 30, "The light of the moon will be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun will be seven times brighter"
Quote this message in a reply
24-06-2011, 12:32 AM (This post was last modified: 24-06-2011 01:05 AM by daemonowner.)
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
The passage from Isaiah 30 doesn't demonstrate the moon reflects the light of the sun, it could easily be interpreted as the light of the moon will be as bright as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun will be even brighter.
The other verses (Isaiah 13, Ezekial 32) are, however, more convincing. Some technical details remain wrong, such as the covering of the sun with a cloud, and possiby the sun being dark, but they would still imply that they knew the moon reflected the suns light.

Also, I think it is important to keep in mind that the books were authored by different people, sometimes multiple people.

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo

"Every man is guilty of all the good he did not do." - Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-06-2011, 12:49 AM
 
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
(23-06-2011 11:27 AM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Though I don't agree (I also feel that this is an "after-the-fact-interpretation". ie, molding the scripture to fit the facts) I must admit, that was one of the better put together arguments I've read. You seem to know your bible. I'd be very interested in hearing you critique some more of Buddy Christs thread.
I'm already stretched pretty thin, but I'll look at the list again and try to post something soon. Don't be surprised if I fade off the scene for awhile, I'm sure I'll eventually turn up again.



(23-06-2011 11:05 AM)Buddy Christ Wrote:  First, thanks for making a new thread for arguments against my thread, rather than derail my critique off onto a tangent.

You said you didn't have to time to get to all your objections, but please post a few more. I'm interested to know what a theist thinks of my interpretation.
Thanks and your welcome. I'll do what I can, but being new here I also want to check out some of the other shreds.
Quote this message in a reply
24-06-2011, 11:01 AM
RE: Reply: An atheist's critique of the Bible
Actually I do not find the scriptures of Isaiah 13 and 32 to be convincing.

"The sun will be dark when it rises And the moon will not shed its light."
-This sounds like the author intended the reader to believe the entire sky will be dark, as in the sun will be black, and the moon will not shine it's light as well. I believe that the "its" is actually a possessive, as in the moon's light.

"I will cover the sun with a cloud And the moon will not give its light."
-Again, same thing, it actually sounds like it should be a possessive, as in the sun will not shine, nor shall the moon give it's light.

From what I read about light in the bible, the authors all seemed pretty convinced that the moon gave it's own light. Like some of the other posters have said, you are trying to make scriptures fit to the modern knowledge that the moon indeed reflects light

[Image: 1471821-futurama_bender_s_big_score_imag...er-1-1.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: