5 ms·

Coming from the Bible Belt, I can assure you that point 2 is absolutely false. That said, even as a non-Christian I was also uncomfortable with that as an intr

Coming from the Bible Belt, I can assure you that point 2 is absolutely false. That said, even as a non-Christian I was also uncomfortable with that as an introduction. I'm sure many Lispers are of the opinion that almost 100% of their peers are atheists or other "nones", but that's (I suspect) more a function of geography than language choice. It's unwise to turn off what could be a significant portion of your readers in the first paragraph!

hga 13y ago
Indeed, you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. This author has told us up front attracting people to LISP/Clojure is not his primary goal. There's also the minor detail that if you're a Christian the really canon stuff is in the New Testament, a lot if not most of the problematic stuff is in the Old Testament and not longer strictly applies (surely most of us remember "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"???), so I suspect the whole premise is false.
- protomyth 13y ago
  Well, certainly the procedure for going to the bathroom is a bit different in modern times[1], and what parts of the Old Testament is a matter of debate between branches of Christians. Heck, the english translation of "thou shalt not (murder|kill)" is a bit of a thing. By the time you get out of bible school and listen to the sermons, you have gone through the whole bible[2]. I just found it very tone deaf to open with that kind of story when it basically has the same effect as what he is complaining about. Its just odd. 1) Although if you happen to hit a disaster, reviewing a bit of the health guidelines in Leviticus couldn't hurt. It will also probably help if you remember a lot of it is basic how-not-to-die health guidelines. 2) I came from the Catholic and 7th Day Adv family (yeah, not exactly the most agreeable to mix), and both seem to have gone through the whole thing. Plus, they have a bit of disagreement as to what constitutes the whole thing. Luther did a bit of pruning.
  - AutoCorrect 13y ago
    the Catholic church did a bit of pruning too, in the 3rd century AD. Council of Nicea
    - protomyth 13y ago
      The Council of Nicea didn't deal with bible canon - that was made up for "The Da Vinci Code". Various religious sites debunked that one during the books and movie introductions.
- fusiongyro 13y ago
  Most of the stuff, period, is in the OT. We Jews have boatloads of commentary addressing the problematic stuff though, so if the problem is reading another possible remedy is more reading.
  - hga 13y ago
    Exactly. If I were a Christian distressed by things in what we call the Old Testament that I didn't find suitably addressed by Christian scholars, I'd certainly review the Jewish commentaries to see how they addressed those things. A heck of a lot of intellectual firepower, Jewish and Christian, has been focused on all these texts over a couple of thousand years (more by the Jews?), it would be foolish to abandon your religion based simply on reading the Ur-texts with finding out at least some of what the world's best minds have had to say about them and what they might mean. Heck, merely reading the wonderful prose of the King James Version requires e.g. recognizing that a lot of its prose was somewhat obsolete when William Tyndale's work from 3/4 of a century earlier was used as the basis of all early printed English bibles. So you need to learn archaic English ... and all of that will do you very well in studying subsequent English prose.
    - pnathan 13y ago
      As someone who works for a scholarly text analysis company focused on in-depth & intricate understanding of what Judao-Christian authors meant, I concur with this. It is really hard to understate the volume of words and man-millenia spent reading and writing about these books. So not only is it possible to read your sacred book and still believe it, it's possible to read your sacred book and remaining fragments from other regional books (sacred and otherwise) - all in "close-to-original" language, and a wealth of other secondary material, and then still believe. You'll just slap your forehead than you might have originally bargained for when you started your quest...
      - cdwhite 13y ago
        Your description of "a scholarly text analysis company focused on in-depth & intricate understanding of what Judao-Christian authors meant" really piques my curiosity---I associate that sort of thing with academia (seminaries and religious studies departments, medieval studies, maybe a few classicists), not a (presumably for-profit) company. If you don't mind my asking, what company do you work for, and what do they do?
protomyth 13y ago
> Coming from the Bible Belt, I can assure you that point 2 is absolutely false. Maybe its a Baptist thing, but Catholics and 7th Day Adv defiantly have gone through the whole thing as part of their studies. Nuns do get a little mad when you giggle about certain sections much like and English teacher with some scenes in Shakespeare.
- learc83 13y ago
  >Maybe its a Baptist thing Depends on how often they go to church. If they attend regularly for a few years, then the preacher will likely have gone over 80% of the Bible in Sunday morning sermons. And most Baptist churches have some kind of weekly Bible study where you go more in depth. Plus, most Baptist churches I've been to will start some kind of "read the Bible in a year" thing in January--complete with handouts for how much you need to read each day.
  - protomyth 13y ago
    never heard of the "read the Bible in a year", good to know
    - baddox 13y ago
      FYI, they are usually arranged fairly cleverly. The ones I remember seeing would run through weekly themes, like "scriptures about love" or "scriptures about finances." They would also often combine relevant Old and New Testament passages together for a day's reading. For example, one day's reading assignment would be one of Jesus' parables that references an Old Testament scripture plus the Old Testament scripture being references. Or, prophetic scriptures would be paired with scriptures detailing the fulfillment of those prophecies.
baddox 13y ago
I also come from the Bible Belt, and point 2 seems reasonable to me, at least if you only consider people of a reasonably modest devotion to their faith (let's say, people with a "home church" where they attend weekly services 30+ weeks a year). Granted, few would have literally read the Bible cover to cover, in order as if it were a large novel.

hga 13y ago

Indeed, you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. This author has told us up front attracting people to LISP/Clojure is not his primary goal. There's also the minor detail that if you're a Christian the really canon stuff is in the New Testament, a lot if not most of the problematic stuff is in the Old Testament and not longer strictly applies (surely most of us remember "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"???), so I suspect the whole premise is false.

protomyth 13y ago
Well, certainly the procedure for going to the bathroom is a bit different in modern times[1], and what parts of the Old Testament is a matter of debate between branches of Christians. Heck, the english translation of "thou shalt not (murder|kill)" is a bit of a thing. By the time you get out of bible school and listen to the sermons, you have gone through the whole bible[2]. I just found it very tone deaf to open with that kind of story when it basically has the same effect as what he is complaining about. Its just odd. 1) Although if you happen to hit a disaster, reviewing a bit of the health guidelines in Leviticus couldn't hurt. It will also probably help if you remember a lot of it is basic how-not-to-die health guidelines. 2) I came from the Catholic and 7th Day Adv family (yeah, not exactly the most agreeable to mix), and both seem to have gone through the whole thing. Plus, they have a bit of disagreement as to what constitutes the whole thing. Luther did a bit of pruning.
- AutoCorrect 13y ago
  the Catholic church did a bit of pruning too, in the 3rd century AD. Council of Nicea
  - protomyth 13y ago
    The Council of Nicea didn't deal with bible canon - that was made up for "The Da Vinci Code". Various religious sites debunked that one during the books and movie introductions.
fusiongyro 13y ago
Most of the stuff, period, is in the OT. We Jews have boatloads of commentary addressing the problematic stuff though, so if the problem is reading another possible remedy is more reading.
- hga 13y ago
  Exactly. If I were a Christian distressed by things in what we call the Old Testament that I didn't find suitably addressed by Christian scholars, I'd certainly review the Jewish commentaries to see how they addressed those things. A heck of a lot of intellectual firepower, Jewish and Christian, has been focused on all these texts over a couple of thousand years (more by the Jews?), it would be foolish to abandon your religion based simply on reading the Ur-texts with finding out at least some of what the world's best minds have had to say about them and what they might mean. Heck, merely reading the wonderful prose of the King James Version requires e.g. recognizing that a lot of its prose was somewhat obsolete when William Tyndale's work from 3/4 of a century earlier was used as the basis of all early printed English bibles. So you need to learn archaic English ... and all of that will do you very well in studying subsequent English prose.
  - pnathan 13y ago
    As someone who works for a scholarly text analysis company focused on in-depth & intricate understanding of what Judao-Christian authors meant, I concur with this. It is really hard to understate the volume of words and man-millenia spent reading and writing about these books. So not only is it possible to read your sacred book and still believe it, it's possible to read your sacred book and remaining fragments from other regional books (sacred and otherwise) - all in "close-to-original" language, and a wealth of other secondary material, and then still believe. You'll just slap your forehead than you might have originally bargained for when you started your quest...
    - cdwhite 13y ago
      Your description of "a scholarly text analysis company focused on in-depth & intricate understanding of what Judao-Christian authors meant" really piques my curiosity---I associate that sort of thing with academia (seminaries and religious studies departments, medieval studies, maybe a few classicists), not a (presumably for-profit) company. If you don't mind my asking, what company do you work for, and what do they do?

protomyth 13y ago

> Coming from the Bible Belt, I can assure you that point 2 is absolutely false. Maybe its a Baptist thing, but Catholics and 7th Day Adv defiantly have gone through the whole thing as part of their studies. Nuns do get a little mad when you giggle about certain sections much like and English teacher with some scenes in Shakespeare.

learc83 13y ago
>Maybe its a Baptist thing Depends on how often they go to church. If they attend regularly for a few years, then the preacher will likely have gone over 80% of the Bible in Sunday morning sermons. And most Baptist churches have some kind of weekly Bible study where you go more in depth. Plus, most Baptist churches I've been to will start some kind of "read the Bible in a year" thing in January--complete with handouts for how much you need to read each day.
- protomyth 13y ago
  never heard of the "read the Bible in a year", good to know
  - baddox 13y ago
    FYI, they are usually arranged fairly cleverly. The ones I remember seeing would run through weekly themes, like "scriptures about love" or "scriptures about finances." They would also often combine relevant Old and New Testament passages together for a day's reading. For example, one day's reading assignment would be one of Jesus' parables that references an Old Testament scripture plus the Old Testament scripture being references. Or, prophetic scriptures would be paired with scriptures detailing the fulfillment of those prophecies.

baddox 13y ago

I also come from the Bible Belt, and point 2 seems reasonable to me, at least if you only consider people of a reasonably modest devotion to their faith (let's say, people with a "home church" where they attend weekly services 30+ weeks a year). Granted, few would have literally read the Bible cover to cover, in order as if it were a large novel.