The bible is already a work of hallucination. I’d like a little of whatever whoever came up with that pile of nonsense was on. I’m not sure what AI can add to it.
The OT for sure. The NT is different, there’s decent evidence the NT was substantially completed in the first century with minor edits in the second. (Wholesale rewrites in the first century totally on the table, though unlikely)
As a secular scholar I’d point to the lack of substantive differences between the versions used by the widely dispersed church fathers in the early second century, their preoccupation with pointing out error, and their lack of having to tackle massive differences in the text when they tackled lots of other problems and heresies
Many parts of the Old Testament are based on stories created thousands of years before. Those stories were possibly using imageries and plot lines that symbolized something real at the time… known as ‘teaching stories’.
Of course many of the B jockies did not go to good (or any) schools, did not understand the languages spoken by the original authors, and didn’t let that stop them. (At least not in Monte Python’s stories.)
I was taught that God dictated the Bible to scribes. Whether the scribes were high on local smokes and/or brews … how the hell can we know? Small wonder we can make sense of any of it at all … let alone the authors’ original intentions.
So, like those guys, try to get the AI to hire you to help people understand its stories. Meh, it’s a lliving - and it worked before.
The bible is already a work of hallucination. I’d like a little of whatever whoever came up with that pile of nonsense was on. I’m not sure what AI can add to it.
Most of the work on the Bible was done in a committee hundreds of years after the alleged events. So most probably just plain old fashioned alcohol.
The OT for sure. The NT is different, there’s decent evidence the NT was substantially completed in the first century with minor edits in the second. (Wholesale rewrites in the first century totally on the table, though unlikely)
As a secular scholar I’d point to the lack of substantive differences between the versions used by the widely dispersed church fathers in the early second century, their preoccupation with pointing out error, and their lack of having to tackle massive differences in the text when they tackled lots of other problems and heresies
Many parts of the Old Testament are based on stories created thousands of years before. Those stories were possibly using imageries and plot lines that symbolized something real at the time… known as ‘teaching stories’.
Of course many of the B jockies did not go to good (or any) schools, did not understand the languages spoken by the original authors, and didn’t let that stop them. (At least not in Monte Python’s stories.)
I was taught that God dictated the Bible to scribes. Whether the scribes were high on local smokes and/or brews … how the hell can we know? Small wonder we can make sense of any of it at all … let alone the authors’ original intentions.
So, like those guys, try to get the AI to hire you to help people understand its stories. Meh, it’s a lliving - and it worked before.