this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2025
346 points (93.2% liked)
History Memes
3381 readers
790 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism, atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Lemmy.world rules.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I just did a quick search on answers to this, and the few literalist ones that i saw were bad. The literalist answers all seem to boil down to "some additional thing happened that wasn't written about". If you can add additional situation-altering things to what the bible actually says, then you're saying what's written isn't actually important
there's hundreds of english versions of 'the bible' and the most popular one was written just a few hundred years ago. They have been adding additional situations as needed the whole time, there's nothing else in there if you don't believe in divine inspiration.
No! Clearly it's an unbroken line of a translations from God to now, with zero alterations. It's the only logical option possible. It's not like going from language A to language B could cause translation errors, right?
Growing up in all this (both school and church), I remember a few arguments teachers and church leaders would make:
Also, the same issue and questions arise again in some ways after the Flood and Noah's Ark. The resulting cousins all had kids together?
Mostly I remember these apologetics kind of discussions just got us in trouble for asking obvious questions and questioning logic.
While I massively criticize religion anymore, what I will say is that my belief was these religious scripts are possibly holding some truths, but the oral history, telephone game of it all, AND ancient peoples not knowing how to properly explain things results in what we have here, which, if taken literally, is fucking stupid.
It helps to think of the Bible and most religious texts as fables rather than history.
Yeah I think it is more a lit the metaphor of 'we are all family' and less about 'fuck your siblings'
Yeah, this is the only reasonable way to look at it. Once you consider how little sense it makes, and also that all religions have some sort of origin story with the same level of truthiness, but being mutually exclusive, it makes all of them obviously wrong. I'm sure there's some reason the stories exist. Some event happened in the past, or some people trying to explain things based on their understanding. However, that doesn't make it true. Some of it can still be useful though as fables with moral lessons.
I'd advise against using any religious text for morals though, or you end up stoning people for someone's wife doing something wrong, or something like that. They might have been useful at the time, but I feel we have better ways of teaching morality now. Most people don't need to think there's some guy in the sky watching them to not be evil.
Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
Whenever I picture religious debates and arguments, I think of this scene from Halo 2. Nay, it was heresy!
Sounds like the kind of thing you want to wager your soul on.
I just figured that the people who wrote anything in Genesis couldn't be bothered to mention any unimportant daughters that were born. Eve was only a rib.
I'm fairly sure the Bible actually does allude to Adam and Eve having heaps of other children, they just aren't named.
Does that make things better?
Downgrades the disturbing factor down a touch. No Oedipus complex.
Is it worse to fuck your mom or your sister?
On average you share 50% of your genes with your mother, but only 25% with your sister. I don't know if that removes any ick, tho.
There's no right answer. Just one that's more wrong.
Oh, mum or sister, to me it's all the same.
you're not accounting for "missing" pages of the bible. after thousands of years, shit just gets lost
you can downvote me but you're delusional to think the Bible isn't missing parts like Jesus' whole adolescence. i swear the stupidity from reddit is leaking
Many books are entirely missing, but not because they were ‘lost’; they were removed from canon, primarily by the Vatican, but by other authorities, too. A Protestant set of them is known as the Apocrypha.
Some of these censored books have been included in various editions. Most were removed because they were controversial for some reason or another. Often the removed texts have as much reason to exist as others that were included, but they were politically problematic.
Amongst my favourites includes a nativity story in which baby Jesus fights a dragon. I feel cheated that version was edited out.
Like deuteronomy.
Go on?
Eh, it's one of those 'blink and you'll miss it' moments. I had read the bible front to back a few times as a kid, but it wasn't until a college class that taught the bible as literature, not religious truth, that I remembered where it was pointed out that in the book judges a bunch of people found the book of deuteronomy and brought it to the religious leader of the time to ask if it was real or whatever. I think the whole episode comprised six verses or less.
Thanks, that's very interesting.
Sure, there are parts of the story missing. I don't say there's anything wrong when Dune does a time skip though. It's understandable that the author didn't consider anything important to be happening in that time, so they save time by just skipping it. Just like we don't need to hear about them sleeping or anything. Authors generally don't write about meaningless things.