>2015
>still believing in a literal interpretation of the judeochristian religions
>not realizing that these are a collection of fables set in historical times meant to guide followers, not a fucking history textbook
>actually having discussions on what Adam and Eve looked like or where they lived
guys come on
If they're not meant to be taken literally, than what's the difference between the Bible and the Illiad?
>>296883
One doesn't make me fall asleep while reading it.
>>296883
>than what's the difference between the Bible and the Illiad?
One is a book involving a dead religion, the other is a book involving a thriving religion.
You don't think people in Ancient Greece thought the oral tradition of the Iliad and all those gods and goddesses were real?
>>296883
The Illiad was a fanfiction written by a bunch of Greek nerds that got bullied out of the gymnasia.
>>296895
The Iliad is way, way, way too long to have simply been an oral tradition. It was composed by one person.
They might not have thought the gods were literally like in the myths, but they believed in them.
>>296903
>Illiad
>One author
There is a lot of consensus that Homerus never existed and that the Illiad was made by a team of writers
>>296875
once you start interpreting hte text how you to want to, you quickly realize there's no reason to believe it at all
welcome to the atheism club
>>296903
>The Iliad is way, way, way too long to have simply been an oral tradition.
Hahahaha.
You're a funny man, anon.
>>298743
>once you start interpreting hte text how you to want to, you quickly realize there's no reason to believe it at all
Yes. That's a very good argument against literalism.
It's a good thing I don't subscribe to that.
>>296948
>There is a lot of consensus that Homerus never existed and that the Illiad was made by a team of writers
No there isn't. You're thinking of the 19th Century.
The style and uniformity of the two works ascribed to Homer is just too much to be a team of writers. The Iliad, for instance, has a specific theme of anger that is set in motion which causes destruction, first directed against Agamemnon, then against Hector; the story starts when it starts, and ends when it ends. If a team of writers did it, then the story's beginning would keep being pushed backward, and the ending would keeping getting pushed forward. The Odyssey also has a very strong uniformity of plot, and it doesn't retreat anything covered by the Iliad, which it would have if it were a separate work by another author that wasn't designed to complement the former work.
>>298757
*retread
The whole point of the bible is to entrench it's morals by linking them with eternal hellfire or heaven.
>>299014
Is that your professional opinion?
