Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by El Solo Lobo on April 24, 2011 at 9:49pm

My opinion is that the moment anyone anywhere declares anything to be "sacred" it should immediately be shat upon, either literally or metaphorically.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on July 13, 2011 at 2:24pm

Actually, poop is an excellent organic soil conditioner.  You can buy big bags of chicken poop and steer poop at big box stores.  It really makes things grow.  My feelings of reverence for compost make it almost sacred.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by paul babcock on April 25, 2011 at 4:21am

That is quite an odd conundrum. Another perfect example of recent to intermediat vintage is that of John Smith and the Mormons. As I understand it he had just the same reputation as a swindler as did Mr. L. Ron.. How that came to be a going concern is just inexplicitly amazing. Within less than one generation people were willing to kill and die for something that they had just concocted not long ago at all.

Idk that sacred is the absolute best word, but I hold existence to be sacred. I am somewhat moved by Richard Dawkins arguments explaining how unlikely our existence is to each of us.

Besides our existence I hold reason, knowledge, justice, and a few other things like this in similar high regard. Tho, again, Idk that sacred is the absolute best word for this.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Johnsky on July 13, 2011 at 1:39pm

Can I pose a suggested definition?

 

Sacred : An irrationally strong belief in an object or concept that somehow rationalizes an excuse for beheading, blowing up, torturing, burning, drowning, dismembering, or otherwise causing unwanted death and or damage to any person(s) who disagree with said object or concept.

 

In short : It's sacred if they kill people over it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Will Faithless Sophia on July 13, 2011 at 2:35pm

Sacred was originally understood to mean, 'set apart,' so something sacred was of much higher importance when compared to something that was not sacred.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Loren Miller on April 1, 2013 at 3:43pm

"Set apart" is right on the money, as in not subject to scrutiny or critical analysis.  More like "leave your brain at the door," because if you use your brain, you'll see right through the snake oil we're trying to sell you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on July 13, 2011 at 2:37pm

I don't consider the Bible sacred, any more than I consider the legends of Aztecs, Inca, Maya, Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, Scandinavians, India, etc sacred.  It's interesting to read in the same way that sci fi is interesting.  Also, there are historical references that are probably true, just like Gone With The Wind has true references to the Civil War, and many events in the book happened.  Same with the Grapes of Wrath, occurring as part of the mass migration of poor farmers from Oklahoma to California.  Still, probably none of the characters actually existed.

 

The bible has a special place in human legends because so many people think they beleive it, even though they don't read it.  If someone beleives it, they should read cover to cover, and critically ponder the contradictions, lack of historical and archeological support for many sections, and the incredible violence in the book.  It is not sacred, but if people didn't beleive it, some parts would be cool to read.

 

I do develop a sense of awe and reverence in the forests of the US Northwest, and craggy ocean shores, and mountains.  I might consider those places sacred.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on July 13, 2011 at 2:41pm

I don't think non-believers who point out the illogical inconsistencies, not to mention down right fabrications, fairy stories, and acts of vicious cruelty contained in the bible, are in any way "validating" it. The bible is the greatest unread bestseller of all time. A common response to the question, "What made you an atheist?," seems to be, "I actually read the bible." If more people knew what was really in it, rather than taking the word of some greasy, slimy, bouffant haired, slick tongued money grubbing huckster and snake-oil salesman, I think there would be more us than there are now.

As to "sacred," I'm probably giving away my age, but I remember the cover of the old National Lampoon, asking the question, "Is Nothing Sacred?" that showed a pie thrown in the face of the iconic picture of Che Guevara.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sentient Biped on July 13, 2011 at 8:52pm

You are right.  Reading the bible was key to deconverting me.  There were other factors, but bible reading was one of the most important parts.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Russell Christian on September 23, 2011 at 2:11am

I think it's important for Atheists to discuss and debate not only the bible but any of these so called "sacred texts" if for no other reason to keep ourselves sharp and fresh intellectually with regard to what others believe and what we are assailed by on an almost daily basis.  It is easy to fall into the habit of using the same old arguments time after time until they almost become rote. Not that this renders our favorite arguments any less valid but it is easy to stop thinking critically about them when they become habitual.  And that is not so desirable.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Sarbeck on April 1, 2013 at 5:10pm

The New Oxford American Dictionary suggests comparing "sacred" and "secular".

NOAD defines "secular" as having no religious or spiritual basis, so it warrants criticism as "atheist" does (because it implies theism).

I haven't heard any claims that something is sacred. Such a claim serves the same purpose as a political slogan; it means "the thinking has been done, so obey."

Should we continue to debate the bible?

Drop the "should" in the question; when such debate no longer serves a person's purpose, he/she will turn to more important things.

As long as people teach the bible, people will debate it.

• ▶ Reply