In the future, Word, don't forget that many of us old geezers around here are much better-read than you, and always will be, so you have to quit acting like we're speaking from positions of ignorance.
Not what I'm thinking, and I don't underestimate that it's difficult, or pretend to have read more than any of you. I'm just stating that even if you had read 100 translations of the bible, one still has to interprete it carefully, because these translations still don't tell you the whole story. As you correctly said:
having a cultural context certainly helps bring out the subtleties that are embedded within the works
I've read those tragedies but I don't know as much about them as about comedies, so I'll use Aristophanes and Plautus as another example...
The humour of Aristophanes' works derives from many things, and sometimes he's predictable, or just crude and sexist (even if Lysistrata is popular among feminists), or parodies certain politicians. There is lots of dialogue where you can tell that this is supposed to be funny, but you don't get the joke because you have no clue what its theme is, or what kind of politician is referenced. For a long time, Plautus had a reputation of being an author for common people, because his plays seemed to be about Greek everyday life (he was Roman, but he copied a lot from the Greeks), the typical, patriarchic family etc. - but this is changing now because there's lots of evidence for many references to the Roman law system in his works. The bottom line is that such rather obscure connections and details do matter and it's difficult to accuse someone of apophenia when we want to apply the same criteria to the bible.
That's why they're considered timeless works: because you don't have to have a cultural context that is contemporary with the author's culture in order to get the main points and feel the tragedies presented
I agree that these works are timeless. Still, one can't deny that some elements in them hint at the time and place where they were written, and things like the understanding of law that this culture had. I'm saying we should treat works of the past more carefully because we tend to think that we, in our time, are the only ones who truly understand them, and I would treat the Old Testament accordingly, because the story was at least 200 years old before Sophokles was born.
Titanoboa wrote:Lucifer wrote:Nobody willingly walks into the kind of discrimination atheists face here... [...] It takes strength of conviction and the kind of understanding that only comes with knowledge and experience to walk away from the church in the US.
That's very interesting, it's pretty much the other way around where I live. Sure Sweden is a christian country on paper (iirc 65% are members of the Swedish Church) and we've got a cross in our flag and everything, but in reality it's one of the most secular places on earth. Question: have you been persecuted by christians for being atheist?
Over the past decades, more and more people left the church and nobody here really cares anymore if it happens again;local priests regularly criticize the Pope, and so do religion teachers. The last generation who visits the church every sunday is getting old and we're just waiting for them to finally close down the whole thing. I apologize if some of my remarks sound insensitive, but it isn't that easy either when you have the feeling that you're losing an important part of your identity. Still, I'm not hysterical or think my belief is "under attack".
(edited the typo)