Navaros #fundie

Navaros #fundie imdb.com

The Bible is for all of human history. Therefore, it is impossible to "read it in historical context" in the way in which you imply it should be. You are implying that the Bible is only applicable to a certain limited time frame in the past, and one which you and the other blasphemers of your ilk have arbitrarily chosen to suit the agenda of the anti-biblical messages that you want to push.

12 comments

old comment by Piling On

If it's for all of human history, why are its concerns so absurdly parochial? Most of it is about:

1. The history of a pair of puny kingdoms in the ancient Near East that ceased to exist about 400 and 500 years after they were founded (respectively). The Bible doesn't even furnish a complete description of these two nations, because it rarely talks about anything other than their religion and their ruling dynasties.

2. Legends about those two nations' stateless ancestors.

3. How the exiled people of Judah reshaped their religion into the defining element of their identity, and how that religion developed in Judea for the next 600 years.

The actions of neighboring nations are only described when they affect Israel and Judah, and even some important topics very close to home, like how the Samaritan community developed, are completely ignored. The only portions of the Bible that can really claim universality are the early parts of Genesis, the passages in Isaiah and subsequent apocalyptic books that assert that all nations will worship Yahweh, the parts of the New Testament that assert that Jesus and Christianity should be preached to everybody, and works of folk wisdom like Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.

Navaros #fundie imdb.com

12 comments

Confused?