/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20235558]

Is he right? Is the Bible only regarded as great poetry because people are conditioned by religion?

[Anonymous No.20235598]

>>20235558
He isn't and you're a faggot. I'm not even a Christcuck. Kill yourself

[Anonymous No.20235599]

>>20235558
Yudkowsky is a fat balding manlet.

[Anonymous No.20235605]

>>20235558
He's just pissy because it doesn't contain enough hymns to his deranged gangster computer god, or whatever the fuck him and his little cultists worship nowadays

[Anonymous No.20235606]

>>20235558
it's kinda an easy philosophical thought don't you think?
>because people are conditioned by religion?

[Anonymous No.20235610]

It has its high points, but yeah, if you don't drink the kool aid, the bible doesn't seem all that great.

[Anonymous No.20235613]

>Yudkowsky

[Anonymous No.20235620]

>>20235558
Bahktin explains in Mimesis the Bible is using in a sense "constrained writing." They weren't writing to make some purely aesthetic literature but were writing for the truth. Auden explains that in his childhood he wanted a real machine in his fanrasy world that he thought was "aesthetic" but turns out is less efficient than a less aesthetic machine, so he realized that he ought to sacrifice his aesthetic preference in favor of truth.

[Anonymous No.20235627]

>>20235620
>writing for the truth
Is that why a serpent told Eve to eat a forbidden fruit?

[Anonymous No.20235631]

>>20235627
I think you're confused.

[Anonymous No.20235636]

>In the beginning, God created the skies and the land...
LOL why did he attack the literary quality of the Bible and compare it unfavorably with Shakespeare, but chose not to use the KJV. I don't even know what translation he got that from...
>In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

[Anonymous No.20235640]

Jesus died a virgin?

[Anonymous No.20235653]

>Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

>And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

>And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

>Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

>Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

>Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

>Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

>Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

>For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

>But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

>When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

>For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

Seems pretty good to me

[Anonymous No.20235655]

>>20235636
>In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

[Anonymous No.20235664]

>In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.

[Anonymous No.20235673]

>>20235558
Bit of a chicken and egg question. If the bible wasn't written in a compelling manner could Christianity have spread in the same way? Also, he's forgetting that the old testament didn't exactly have Marval movies competing for its attention. The publishing house comparison is blatantly asinine.

[Anonymous No.20235698]

>>20235558
Not sure people are talking about Genesis when they refer to the Bible's literary quality. Check in on Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, and Psalms. The historical books are shit. Anything decent in the Bible involved Big Daddy Solomon in one way or another.

[Anonymous No.20235703]

>>20235698
Don't forget Job

[Anonymous No.20235709]

>>20235558
Bad writing by Yudkowsky
>In the dawn of all things there was terrible fire
Just very bad, the dawn of all things and terrible fire rouse very different passions but there is not so much as a comma to divide them, either he expects us to move swiftly between the two affects or does not recognize their difference
"In the dawn of all things," yet this is expressed with a device referring to an event in the created world; "terrible fire", as if human passions already existed, contrast this with the simple and unsentimental diction of the Bible which is perfect for its subject

[Anonymous No.20235726]

>>20235653
Greek poetics. Very nice.

[Anonymous No.20235755]

>>20235558
I'm a strident atheist but he's being ridiculous. You can't hold ancient literature to modern standards, ie asking why it isn't as appealing to him as shakespeare (which is also written in his native language, which makes a big difference). The best books in the bible in terms of literary quality (genesis, exodus, judges, job) are absolutely among the best ancient literature in the world. Not much from the ancient world is as complex and well-crafted, and most things that are as good, like gilgamesh, are relatively isolated from their context and much harder to interpret/appreciate.

[Anonymous No.20235802]

>>20235620
>Bahktin explains in Mimesis
Auerbach, not Bakhtin.

[Anonymous No.20235814]

>>20235802
That's right. I don't know why I put Bakhtin.

[Anonymous No.20235815]

>>20235558
The "passage" he wrote is total dogshit
Demonstrates his total lack of understanding
>there was terrible fire
Okay
>brighter than all suns that are or were
Why would an ancient book talk about "suns"? There is only one sun in the sky, unless you are using modern day astronomical knowledge and lingo. He couldn't even write two lines without hamfisting his pathetic science worship into it- proving that he doesn't appreciate and understand the history of both religion and of science.
>forging all that came after,
>the creation light, the searing beginning
So this "creation light", this "searing beginning"... is the same as the "fire" which he called "terrible" just moments ago? Why would the thing that created the universe be terrible? That's not consistent with the Bible's teachings, or the teachings of any school of thought aside from suicidal modern day nihilist fauciians

[Anonymous No.20235834]

>>20235815
it's consistent with gnosticism pseud

[Anonymous No.20235839]

>>20235834
I should've prefaced that I was talking about real things that real people believe in, not things that people on 4chan pretend to believe in because its more contrarian

[Anonymous No.20235868]

>>20235839
gnosticism is an incredibly important school of thought, it's even addressed in the Bible. you should've just mentioned you're an idiot

[Anonymous No.20235879]

The Quran is a much better example of this.
Muslims believe it's the literal word of God and therefore the most poetic and perfect writing to possibly exist.
Too bad nearly no refutations of it exist because the grand majority of Arab speakers are muslims.

[Anonymous No.20235909]

>>20235558
>pic
im embarrassed to have read this

[Anonymous No.20235918]

Pretty much. Groupthink is the only thing religion got going for itself. By the way, groupthink is also the reason behind the confirmation of 'miracles'. It's just a bunch of tards peer pressuring into agreeing with demonstrable bullshit, and a good portion of the Bible is just this, tards forcefully agreeing with one another

[Anonymous No.20235920]

>>20235815
terrible shouldnt really mean something so negative as it does. same goes for awful, causing you to be full of awe. both words would be appropriate for God or an angel in earlier eras.
when Russians called Ivan "terrible" they werent saying he was an asshole, but powerful and frightening.

[Anonymous No.20235922]

>>20235558
The Bible is a collection of books, could you create a beautiful psalm or a prophecy in just a few minutes? No. Also his recreation of genesis is gay and nonsensical.

[Anonymous No.20235937]

>>20235815
Its actually hilarious, some atheist homo tries to disprove the literairy merit of genesis, ends up creating gibberish and fails.

[Anonymous No.20235948]

>>20235558
Of course. All taste is conditioned, and religion is no worse or better conditioner than any other
That said, people using it as a manual for anything related to morals or standards are complete retards

[Anonymous No.20235950]

>>20235937
And if you replace 'Genesis' with 'Enuma Elish', you get the origin story of the Bible

[Anonymous No.20235985]

>>20235948

[Anonymous No.20236025]

>>20235950
Lol take a load of thus guy, probaly thinks I am a Christian, because everyone discussing the Bible us either an lefty atheist or a bible thumper