That's the problem. I think the first question is interesting (and a fundamental theological question - similar to why does God make people 'harden their hearts' and do evil at times), it's applying the Bible to the outside world.
The second question just seems purely internal - how does that affect our external reality?
It doesn't have to — I can say a plot item in Star Trek makes no sense just as easily.
That said, I guess I am curious what this story might have meant to be, at one time? How could it be reinterpreted in a way that isn't immediately self-defeating?
And I really don't get how people take this literally, given apparent contradictions like this, but biblical literalists are too alien to my world view for any explanation to really help me understand how they perceive things.
> It doesn't have to — I can say a plot item in Star Trek makes no sense just as easily.
We can say anything we like, but my question is really, what does it matter? Internal consistency matters much more to Star Trek, an adventure and grist for geeking-out, than the Bible, which provides material to help us spiritually. The point of the Biblical story is, what can we learn?
> The point of the Biblical story is, what can we learn?
That Christians worship an unreasonable, malicious or mad, god with unreasonable standards. "Even when you were a gullible idiot and faced an influence I'd not accounted for despite being all knowing, I'm still going to punish you and all your offspring forever for what you did wrong, especially the woman and that's why childbirth hurts."
That, even as literature, it shows the human condition is one of the vibes of a story without paying attention to details, one where just-so stories which get written backwards from observables don't need to make logical sense when read forwards in order to convince people.
Like I said, the difference world view is alien. I assume the same is true in reverse, and that True Believers (and perhaps not even casual holiday-only believers) can't understand how I might not see things the way they do.
I'd say you are looking for problems rather than value, a form of critical reading appropriate to contracts, public affairs, etc. The Bible and similar texts are generally not contracts you need to accept or reject as a whole. They are not literal. If you look at them as literal and 'contracts', there are far more flaws than the ones you point out (including the sexist story I posted originally). They take a different form of critical reading:
They are sources of inspiration. Don't look for the flaws, look for the benefits. Imagine you go to an art museum or you play a computer game. Do you look for the worst paintings? Scour the museum for mistakes in the paintings? Do you read the game's code for bugs and poor coding practices? When you go to a bookstore, do you look for the worst book? What a waste of time that would be - you want the best, the most enjoyable and inspiring, not the worst.
> That Christians worship an unreasonable, malicious or mad, god with unreasonable standards. "Even when you were a gullible idiot and faced an influence I'd not accounted for despite being all knowing, I'm still going to punish you and all your offspring forever for what you did wrong, especially the woman and that's why childbirth hurts."
FWIW, that passage is part of all Abrahamic religions.
For most, indeed. And that's good! But I have met people who claim to think they must be absolute truth, then put a huge asterisk around all the bits I point out and say those don't count for whatever reason.
There was a meme back in the UK, that amongst Anglicans, only extremists actually believe in God. No idea how true that is.
Widely regarded as beautiful and romantic. To me, it looks like the guy has a broken neck, and the woman has been decapitated at the base of her neck, her head rotated 90° and re-attached to her torso by the ear.
Likewise, movies. The plot holes in Independence Day annoyed me so much that when the sequel came out, I started (and still have not finished) writing a book that takes the opposite road with all the mistakes the film made.
So, while I've played the Eye Of Argon game, I never even tried to finish reading it once my friends and I stopped playing, and I've never bothered watching whatever the film is that has the line "you're tearing me apart Lisa".
> FWIW, that passage is part of all Abrahamic religions.
>That Christians worship an unreasonable, malicious or mad, god with unreasonable standards.
See now after a few rounds we see your real thoughts come out. I'm old enough to have had this thought and many more about God/Religion and why humans need it in their lives.
I don't have the time to go into it but perhaps as you get older and dig into this more it will start to make sense.
> See now after a few rounds we see your real thoughts come out.
It took you this long? I wasn't hiding anything.
> I'm old enough to have had this thought and many more about God/Religion and why humans need it in their lives.
> I don't have the time to go into it but perhaps as you get older and dig into this more it will start to make sense.
I was born and raised Catholic, then I found Wicca and realised that not all the gods and religions work like Christianity.
Then, sometime around 10-20 years ago but gradually rather than as a single event, I realised I could get stuff out of stories without believing them.
The ancient Greeks got on well with their very flawed pantheon. Those old tales put me very much in mind of the modern comic-book heroes (and anti-heroes), which I suspect is mainly due to where comic books get their inspiration from rather than the other way around. But I can be inspired by Miles Morales' struggles without needing to think he's real.
Why do you think I'm reading it like that? I thought me saying "nah, polytheism" might have been a hint that I don't take it at all literally.
Likewise that I was referring to the internal logic of the story.