Can one read the Bible, objectively?

[Deidre]

Don't let us stop you. How far have you gotten?

Right now, I've been reading about Lucifer and how he came to be called Satan. From my exploration into the LHP, the concept of Satan interests me and while I've read a lot of 'lore about Satan, the Bible's story illustrates that he is a very real entity and that God is Lucifer's father, and considered him a 'favorite,' until Lucifer's pride got in the way, according to the stories. What intrigues me is if this is true, there existed a spiritual world before the human world, which could point to that mankind didn't invent the spiritual realm. But, that's if you believe the stories.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Right now, I've been reading about Lucifer and how he came to be called Satan. From my exploration into the LHP, the concept of Satan interests me and while I've read a lot of 'lore about Satan, the Bible's story illustrates that he is a very real entity and that God is Lucifer's father, and considered him a 'favorite,' until Lucifer's pride got in the way, according to the stories. What intrigues me is if this is true, there existed a spiritual world before the human world, which could point to that mankind didn't invent the spiritual realm. But, that's if you believe the stories.

Well, when I read the bible, honestly I think "do people really believe this is literal" as if looking out my window all of the sudden I'll see Jesus in a chariot, streets of gold, demons fighting, and things like that. If a person is taught that growing up, that's one thing. If one believes it as an adult and finds logic in the literal nature in it, I wonder how.

I mean, I can see some spiritual lessons from it, but if you believed it true, what got you to that belief to fact?

 

[Desert Snake]

Since I find value in a variety of faiths and religions, I've decided to read some ancient texts, one such text being the Bible (again). When I've read it in the past, I was a practicing Christian, so I wonder if it's possible to read the Bible objectively and still be moved to believing that it holds truths for our lives? Thoughts?

Yes, I do.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

If you predetermine that it is false you've closed your mind to it. It's based on the premise that it is God's word, so you can have an open mind to that. If not you would never consider anything beyond humanly possible while reading it, and it wouldn't make sense to you.

So, is it safe to say that to you, anyone who reads the Bible with an open mind, but doesn't immediately conclude that it is definitely the Word of God (that is, either concludes it is not the Word of God, is "just" inspired by God, or reserves judgment on its status for further review and assessment), must not really have had an open mind to begin with?

 

[Kemosloby]

So, is it safe to say that to you, anyone who reads the Bible with an open mind, but doesn't immediately conclude that it is definitely the Word of God (that is, either concludes it is not the Word of God, is "just" inspired by God, or reserves judgment on its status for further review and assessment), must not really have had an open mind to begin with?

Open mind is a figure of speech, it should be taken in the context that it is used. Open mind is not like a physical state, except maybe during brain surgery.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Since I find value in a variety of faiths and religions, I've decided to read some ancient texts, one such text being the Bible (again). When I've read it in the past, I was a practicing Christian, so I wonder if it's possible to read the Bible objectively and still be moved to believing that it holds truths for our lives? Thoughts?

I'd read the Bible like Aesop's Fable's. Many interesting stories that also provide advice for the reader upon it's many conclusions.

 

[Kemosloby]

So, is it safe to say that to you, anyone who reads the Bible with an open mind, but doesn't immediately conclude that it is definitely the Word of God (that is, either concludes it is not the Word of God, is "just" inspired by God, or reserves judgment on its status for further review and assessment), must not really have had an open mind to begin with?

An open mind does not imply drawing any conclusions at all. It means let your ideas go where they will when you read it.

 

[blü 2]

Since I find value in a variety of faiths and religions, I've decided to read some ancient texts, one such text being the Bible (again).

Point one: you're looking for 'value' in 'faiths and religions'.

When I've read it in the past, I was a practicing Christian, so I wonder if it's possible to read the Bible objectively and still be moved to believing that it holds truths for our lives?

Point two: 'moved to believing that it holds truths for our lives'.

A search for 'truths for our lives' is, I'd have thought, a different kind of project to reading the bible objectively.

To read the bible objectively is to find out who wrote what, what they literally said, and why they said it. A lot of the Tanakh is about folk history and folktale, a lot is about the politics of particular times and situations, a fair bit is poetry, and Job is a short story. Then there are books of rules and genealogies and so on. So many authors, eras, angles, stories, purposes.

If you were being objective about the NT, you'd read it in chronological order ─ Paul first (1 Thes, Philippians, Philemon, 1 Cor, Galatians, 2 Cor, Romans), then Mark, then Matthew and Luke, then John. You'd skip 2 Thess, Hebrews, 2 Tim, Colossians, Ephesians, Titus and 1 Tim as forgeries (the polite word is 'pseudepigraphs') or likely so. And Acts is a late weird add-on.

Doing that would give you the history of basic ideas in early Christianity (and bring you to the question, was there in fact an historical Jesus, about whom no one in the NT knows anything, so that his earthly biography has to be told as a concoction of fulfillment of prophecy tales, sayings, and bits?)

But it doesn't sound to me as if that's what you're looking for.

So if you're after 'value' and 'truths for our lives', just read as your instinct takes you and let 'objectivity' look after itself.

 

[Deidre]

I think what's tricky about reading any ancient religious text is that the purpose of the text is to promote a belief/faith/religion, it seems to have an agenda of some type. Whereas reading a book for fun, especially if it

Point one: you're looking for 'value' in 'faiths and religions'.

Point two: 'moved to believing that it holds truths for our lives'.

A search for 'truths for our lives' is, I'd have thought, a different kind of project to reading the bible objectively.

To read the bible objectively is to find out who wrote what, what they literally said, and why they said it. A lot of the Tanakh is about folk history and folktale, a lot is about the politics of particular times and situations, a fair bit is poetry, and Job is a short story. Then there are books of rules and genealogies and so on. So many authors, eras, angles, stories, purposes.

If you were being objective about the NT, you'd read it in chronological order ─ Paul first (1 Thes, Philippians, Philemon, 1 Cor, Galatians, 2 Cor, Romans), then Mark, then Matthew and Luke, then John. You'd skip 2 Thess, Hebrews, 2 Tim, Colossians, Ephesians, Titus and 1 Tim as forgeries (the polite word is 'pseudepigraphs') or likely so. And Acts is a late weird add-on.

Doing that would give you the history of basic ideas in early Christianity (and bring you to the question, was there in fact an historical Jesus, about whom no one in the NT knows anything, so that his earthly biography has to be told as a concoction of fulfillment of prophecy tales, sayings, and bits?)

But it doesn't sound to me as if that's what you're looking for.

So if you're after 'value' and 'truths for our lives', just read as your instinct takes you and let 'objectivity' look after itself.

I agree, and I'll apply this mindset. Or I'll try. lol

Were you always a 'skeptic?' Or did you ever believe in anything beyond the material world?

 

[blü 2]

Were you always a 'skeptic?' Or did you ever believe in anything beyond the material world?

My mother knew that manners compelled Pisco, and my dad went along, and thus the young me did too. When small I was sent to Sunday school but never connected, never quite knew why I was there (and then became adept at ducking it). At 14 I got a rush of curiosity and went to Confirmation classes, waiting and waiting till they explained the afterlife, which was a deep riddle to me; but all I got was a cheery laugh and 'It's all in your catechism!'. Still, I went ahead, thinking that membership of the Club would mean access to the members' bar where all the secrets were; but no, nothing changed. So I wandered off, thought I was agnostic, in time atheist, and now igtheist, not by way of choice but for total lack of choice. (I had one interesting short detour along the way, though. I may start a thread on it one day.)

 

[Kapalika]

May I recommend ...

That actually looks like something i might be interested in *bookmarks*

I randomly picked up the Bible from my grandpa's bookcase when I was six. Knew nothing about Christianity. Read the first three chapters. Thought that this God character was very evil and Eve character was in the right and Adam a wimp for not sticking up for her and punching the God guy in the face. I did not read much more since it looked like a very bad fairytale. The next one in the book case was a ghost story and much better.

I still consider it the most objective assessment of that story.

Ha! I love this. <3

Right now, I've been reading about Lucifer and how he came to be called Satan. From my exploration into the LHP, the concept of Satan interests me and while I've read a lot of 'lore about Satan, the Bible's story illustrates that he is a very real entity and that God is Lucifer's father, and considered him a 'favorite,' until Lucifer's pride got in the way, according to the stories. What intrigues me is if this is true, there existed a spiritual world before the human world, which could point to that mankind didn't invent the spiritual realm. But, that's if you believe the stories.

I would really recommend you read Paradise Lost as that is actually where a lot of that comes from. You might really like the book.

 

[Kenny]

Welllll...lol if you're a follower of Christianity, you might read it with assumptions or bias, I'm pretending like I'm reading it for the first time.

Apparently you can since many who were not Christians became Christians for the first time. One could also ask "Can I objectively dismiss Christianity?"

Incidentally, I had never read the Bible (only heard about it) and became a Christian. I thought the Bible said Adam ate an apple and Job was a place you went to work at.

 

[Deidre]

Apparently you can since many who were not Christians became Christians for the first time. One could also ask "Can I objectively dismiss Christianity?"

Incidentally, I had never read the Bible (only heard about it) and became a Christian. I thought the Bible said Adam ate an apple and Job was a place you went to work at.

How interesting! I've always believed that faith is an experience. Did you have an experience that converted you?

 

[Kenny]

How interesting! I've always believed that faith is an experience. Did you have an experience that converted you?

Not really.

I just asked a lot of questions (one time from 8 in the evening to 1 in the morning) to which they answered by opening the Bible.

The experience happened after placing my trust in Jesus Christ where my marriage was instantly transformed overnight. (My wife and I both accepted Jesus at the same time. My wife was Catholic in name only as her family was involved in witchcraft. I was.... well, I wasn't anything other than I believed there was a God.)

 

[David1967]

It is my honest opinion that if you read the Bible as a work of fiction...that is all it will ever be. If you read it to confirm biases...it will. But if you want to find the truth of it, you have to have the same spirit that inspired it.

The apostle Paul tells us why.....
Hebrews 4:12...."For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart."

very well said Deeje.

 

[metis]

Frankly, I don't have blind faith in anything or anyone, including even myself. As an anthropologist, we are trained so much to rely on objectively-derived evidence that our natural tendency is to question, which at times may even include some scientific axioms as well. Therefore, the issue of faith has always been tough sledding for me-- and I live here in Michigan.

But, as I've mentioned quite a few times before, I do tend to "lean" in directions even though there may not be sufficient evidence to justify even "leaning". Not everything can be derived from objectively-derived evidence, so I do leave myself open to other input.

 

[Mister Silver]

When I was a theist, I read the bible subjectively in accordance with what fellow believers shared in church. When I had doubts, I believed them that it was merely the devil attempting to lead me astray from the faith.

When I finally opened my mind and began to read the bible objectively, it became much clearer that those doubts were born of reason attempting to remove the suffocating, oppressive chains with which religion had imprisoned me.

 

[Kenny]

When I was a theist, I read the bible subjectively in accordance with what fellow believers shared in church. When I had doubts, I believed them that it was merely the devil attempting to lead me astray from the faith.

When I finally opened my mind and began to read the bible objectively, it became much clearer that those doubts were born of reason attempting to remove the suffocating, oppressive chains with which religion had imprisoned me.

Then again, as one usually tends to justify oneself, maybe it wasn't the devil but good questions with bad study habits to get the right answer.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Open mind is a figure of speech, it should be taken in the context that it is used. Open mind is not like a physical state, except maybe during brain surgery.

Doesn't really answer my question. So what you figuratively want is someone to read the Bible with an 'open mind,' that is, without prejudging it.

If they do this, without prejudging it, but after reading it, they DON'T believe it to be the True and Complete Word of God, what is it you say of them?

That they weren't open minded? That they are being deceived by atheists and/or the Devil? That they are too stupid to see what is clearly there?

What advice do you have for a seeker who has read the Bible thoroughly and completely, being open to the possibility of it being the Word of God, but still comes away unconvinced?

 

[Mister Silver]

Then again, as one usually tends to justify oneself, maybe it wasn't the devil but good questions with bad study habits to get the right answer.

Yes, the right answers led me to being an atheist.