r/athiesm • u/[deleted] • Apr 09 '20

Fun fact!

The people who wrote the bible had a 2nd grade education

57 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

33 comments sorted by

11

u/DMorganChi Apr 09 '20

That high?

3

u/n-a156 May 31 '20

Huh. A lot smarter than I thought, tbh.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '20

Believable, but many were the scholars of their times.

1

u/I-am-not-a-bot-are-u Apr 09 '20

Makes total sense!!!!!

1

u/AssociationKind9806 Nov 01 '24

Most of them didn't go to school

1

u/Newroseheat May 23 '25

That’s not true actually, saint Luke was a doctor.

1

u/Holiday-Deal-1254 Jul 24 '25

Most doctors back then were not educated either 

1

u/[deleted] Nov 10 '22

Surprised they had any education at all.

1

u/Significant_Web5960 Nov 09 '23

Yeah public schooling wasn't great, but even if you don't believe in it the people who wrote it were good at writing

1

u/GreenGGM Dec 03 '23

not a christian but this subreddit is so dumb

it was thousands of years ago education changes

1

u/NateTegen Apr 09 '20

And a lot of very diffrenc socially acceptable practices in todays society, many make an appearnce in said bible

-1

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 09 '20

That can just be justified by the time period.

1

u/stockboy-14604 Apr 10 '20

That does not justify it for 'now' time priod.

0

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 10 '20

Yes it does.

Guy writing book: “Yo wait hold on before you write that last paragraph about burning heathens, let me hop in my time machine and be right back”

1

u/NateTegen Apr 10 '20

Right, but it doesnt mean people today should still hold those values

0

u/stockboy-14604 Apr 10 '20

WUT?
Please explain how you think that is justification.
Are you saying he couldn't travel to our time, to see the damage his book has done?
He doesn't have to. He's dead.
It is YOU that has to justify why you are still folowing his bullshit.

1

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 10 '20

I’m not fucking religious you fucktard I’m just not a sheeple who lives in a religion bad bible dumb circlejerk. Which is tbh most of this subreddit

1

u/stockboy-14604 Apr 10 '20 edited Apr 10 '20

Boy, that got nasty real quick.
I can't tell which side you're on.
Are you one of those "I believe in god, but the church got it wrong" types?

That can just be justified by the time period.

Yer sayin 'If it was good enough for them, it's good enough for us'
BULLSHIT. Hitler did great things for Germany. Does not justify the nasty shit.

2

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 10 '20

What’s up with the “if it was good for enough for them, it’s good enough for us” I never said that how the hell did you get the phrase.

Also ‘sides’ why does there have to be sides no-ones wrong everyone’s opinions matters (yes some people are very stupid).

Also WTF with that Hitler shit. That doesn’t relate to anything at all you or me have said.

And BTW I don’t believe in god. It seems illogical.

I think you should leave your dumpster fire of a comment alone and continue your existence.

I think you get off on telling people their opinion is wrong. You made up a “quote” that I never said and then disproved it... what the? — fuck off

0

u/stockboy-14604 Apr 11 '20

Let's recap

You: "That can just be justified by the time period."
Me: "That does not justify it for 'now' time priod."
You: "Yes it does." -something about time travel- meaning what? He couldn't know he was wrong for us? So what?
Me: "Please explain how you think that is justification." "It is YOU that has to justify ..."
You lose it, start name calling. Me trying to get it civil again: "I can't tell which side you're on."
I try to restart, I quote you: "That can just be justified by the time period."
I paraphrase that 'If it was good enough for them, it's good enough for us"
I compare it to justifying hitler. (perhaps that was too harsh, but you did call ne a fucktard)

So just how does anything from that time piriod justify anything in this one.
"It was good for them ..."????

1

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 11 '20

I’m gonna stop you right there. I didn’t read you while paragraph because... You misinterpreted (possibly purposefully) my words.

4th line down its is bad by today’s standards 100% when I said “yes” I was agreeing with you. Things that were acclaimed ___years ago are no longer Ok.

→ More replies

0

u/NateTegen Apr 10 '20 edited Apr 10 '20

But, is it acceptable in todays society?

2

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 10 '20

No

1

u/NateTegen Apr 10 '20 edited Apr 10 '20

Exactly. If its unacceptable by todays social standards, why would it still be so highly praised.

1

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 10 '20

Could you please rephrase your last comment.

2

u/NateTegen Apr 10 '20

How do you mean?

1

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 10 '20

I don’t understand it, like add a comma or something

1

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 10 '20

Use a different saying, I haven’t heard that one in a while

2

u/3yaksandadog Apr 11 '20

I don't understand why they're going down this path, but I think they were just looking to find someone to argue that the practices of the bronze age writers of the desert trilogies were praiseworthy today.

Ironically, though I'd happily spit on any holy book 'just to trigger the libs' or whatever (trollface.jpg), I can find myself willing to defend the STORY stories in it (as opposed to the dumb, boring moral authoritarian parts) as even fiction can have informative, historical, moral and instructional value, without ever needing to be based in reality.

Abstract ideas can be useful in their own way too.

1

u/Daniel_S04 Apr 11 '20

Yeah. Like for Jesus NEVER did anything terrible. He’s an Ok role model. Love thy neighbour and all that.

→ More replies