Fact, all religious texts were written, edited, annotated, collated, by men. Plural. The premise is that every word of a religious texts was inspired by a god who compelled, suggested, required, or influenced persons using a undefined modalities to author its inspired narratives.
This is a interesting supposition.
Just ruminate on the concept for a sec.
Get comfy and start imagining how this process might occur.
What exactly does “inspired words” mean. Does it involve having visions, hearing voices, a feeling or possibly dream interpretation. Given the nebulous nature of the claim the possibilities are limited to what gives us the ability to perceive the world we occupy. Consider the game people play called “Telephone”. Now cogitate on how a minimum of forty years of oral history may have changed the details of the first known written bible book was authored. How would anyone know if there were any communication gaps, unintended misquotes or contextual errors. Was there any spiritual supervised editing or rewriting involved. Come to think of it, how’s a person to verify any claim made about the many Bible books provenance’s. Scholarship in this field of study seems a little like studying palm reading or astrology.
Critical thought can be a challenging method of cognition. One question often leads to another and before you know it all your left with are is as many questions as conclusions. When this happens the default answer should be “I don’t know or I’m not sure but I’ll investigate the claim. Reliance on hearsay and interpretation is a poor method for determining the truth of any proposition. Yet uncorroborated evidence, allegory, supernatural intervention, dubious scenarios and unknown provenance constitute all that theistic narratives are based on.
Of all the possible ways to deliver any important messages why use this methodology for communication? A book for truths sake. Ask yourself, why were anonymous individuals chosen, why the decades even centuries long time intervals between inspirations, why the conflicting narratives, why the need for a interpretive cadre and why aren’t these questions obvious to all who care about how you arrive at the truth of a proposition? What’s fascinating to me is the frame of mind required to accept these texts as gospel, pun intended. The Old Testament is the glorification of an inept, psychopathic war god. The New Testament is the glorification of a doomsday cults human blood sacrifice of their savior god. The complete absurdity of the proposition is breathtaking.
Just a thought.
Your assigned brain teasers.
“Why should anyone feel compelled to be subservient to a benevolent benefactor?
Put another way, what kind of mind demands to be worshiped for doing what came naturally?”
Nationofnope.
nationofnope 