An Atheist's defense of the Bible
To clear the table of bullshit religious vs. atheist debate, I will first credit us, the atheists, with the creation of the Bible, as well as all the other holy and unholy books, religions, doctrines and ideologies (delusions for short from now on). If you're an atheist, you surely agree with this, unless you're the exceptional atheist that thinks God(s) did it. There is no such thing as a religious person; they are simply atheists sporting different delusions than ourselves. You may think they are qualitatively different delusions, but that is just because you are delusional. Wait for the argument.
If my argument is to make any sense at all, I must define what I mean by our own (atheistic) delusions. There are many. The biggest, most important and most damaging one in my opinion is that we ourselves think we are not delusional; it simply blinds us to our interests, positions, allies and the whole political scene becomes extremely blurred.
Finally, here's the meat of my argument: Some of our (atheistic) delusions today are worse and more damaging to society than those of most religious people. This may have been different in the middle ages, but today in the western world it is the "free market" and "competition" ideology of individual (divided-and-conquered) actors that blinds us to our own interests and enslaves us under the destructive will of the only socially cohesive group in the society: the socially cohesive super-rich. In our drunken stupor we think that none of the religious communities are our allies. This is extremely dangerous divided-and-conquered mentality that will bring us nothing but pain. I think we can learn a lot from a group of people who meet every Sunday for whatever reason and we should embrace with open arms the ones that have the same interests as we do. We should emulate their sense of community and "togetherness", because that is the second most important strength known to man. Faith gives the group strength through personal integrity, just as the personal integrity of a man makes him the strongest pillar of the group.
So how is this a defense of the Bible? Well, would the faithful be gathering around a book, if it made perfect sense in every detail? If it was a math text book with no need for interpretation and if it said 2+2=4, would they hover over it and discuss it and find meaning in the impossible situations in their lives from it? No, they wouldn't. It just makes sense and they can go back to their everyday life the next minute, reassured that 2+2=4. Disintegrating communities under extreme pressure cannot use math to achieve unity and fight for a better tomorrow. To avoid total destruction, they throw the ball of faith further down the road, because it is too long a road to walk with discipline and without faith for an entire community. The Bible must not under any circumstance make sense in the detail and that is the only way it makes perfect sense in the big picture. The Bible is our atheistic tool to tackle the impossible as a community. It does not just "console the weak"; that is simply your delusion of individualism whispering to you. If you are alone in your mind, I don't care who you are: alone you are weaker. The Bible is this "magical" non-sensical thing they gather around and re-weave the torn fabric of a community according to already established pattern.
At the end I have a few disclaimers and implications belonging to separate threads:
1) this NOT a utilitarian perspective. I am not letting anyone off the hook, instead I ask you to point the guns in the right direction. If you have been wronged by a religious community, I understand you and I would probably be just as angry as you are at the non-sensical justification of their abuse. But remember: these people are atheists with interests and excuses (delusions) just like us. I don't give a shit what their excuses are and neither should you. Go find atheists with your interests and don't mind the excuses. I am only glad for Dr. Martin Luther King's religious excuses; they had a consolidating and cohesive effect on the entire nation and I as an atheist can say that I have no qualms in following the man.
2) I have not described the depth of our atheistic delusions adequately, but to do so would add confusion to the already too long post, so I will save those for an individual thread. I will however say that our real adversaries profit from the divide they cause in the population, no matter what lines are drawn at the table. Minority vs minority vs majority, color vs color, religion vs religion vs atheism, women vs men, young vs elderly, public vs private, even rich vs poor in some cases, although they try to avoid this one if at all possible, due to their own by-default adherence to this group. The closest we can get to the real frontline in my opinion is powerful vs powerless and this divide the powerful want to obscure as vehemently as they can. They know the strength of the group because they use it themselves and they fear it.
3) Am I implying that we atheists lack "group integrity" (disregarding here the atheists with faith-based excuses/delusions)? Not at all. Listening to some scientists and artists speak about, well almost everything, surpasses the imagination and wild expectations of the faithful and in the future we will be the driving force that will bring a society, for which access to healthcare is no different than access to tap water, beyond our solar system. But for the moment being we are more fragmented and vulnerable and therefore rely more on own personal integrity to get us through. I think that is costing all of us, faith or no faith, a great deal. We are the pillars divorced from the dynamic community we should be supporting by divide-and-conquer tactics of people who's only business in life is staying in power. We have to change that.
Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.