RationalWiki talk:Annotated Bible

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives for this talk page: , (new)


Any comments on this? Peter Monomorium antarcticum 08:03, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Not even to complain about the colour choice? Peter Monomorium antarcticum 21:08, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Hmph. Oh, well, bold revert discuss, and all that... Peter horas non numero nisi serenas 22:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Bible Generator bug[edit]

links on the Bible Generator reloads the page somehow:

Titus 1:1-2
Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;
In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

This one does not go to Titus as intended; it goes to this same talk page. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 16:41, 5 July 2014 (UTC)


Currently most of the pages lack a table of contents, making navigation difficult. I do not have the knowledge to add a ToC, but if a tech could that would be helpful. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 23:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

On the annotations[edit]

It is clear that the people who wrote the annotations were raised to believe that the bible is supposed to be believed literally as it's written, and not that it could be interpreted metaphorically as a bunch of stories. Just wanted to say that. Maybe I'm wrong but it's the feeling I'm getting. --Spafky (talk) 12:55, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that seems to be common around here, especially when you're dealing with stuff like New Atheism. I wonder what cult someone like Christopher Hitchens must have grown up in to have such a negative view of Christianity. (talk) 06:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
From the point of view of someone who is not a Christian, the only way to read the Bible would seem to be from the point of view that it says what it says. It is understood that that different Christian denominations and sects argue about whether it should be read literally, metaphorically, mystically or whatever. This is an internal argument for those Christian groups.
But it is not down to non-Christians to decide which of these many conflicting Christian views are "correct". (The same could be said about non-Muslims and the Quran.)
We just have the words which the various books use. Obviously this will often not mesh with the views of Christians who think that their God has placed some deeper or hidden meaning in the words.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:30, 3 January 2022 (UTC)


I might want to do something similar to the Annotated Qur'an with the number of chapters and split it between Old and New Testaments. Sound good? I'm kinda scared that I'm going to mess up the formatting of this page. Patty Pat 02:58, 20 May 2022 (UTC)