a tale of past and present....

[Peter Kropotkin]

I am reading an interesting book called ''Dominion''
written by Tom Holland..... it is the history of the Christian revolution
that still impacts us today.......

but in thinking about the past, the Roman era in which Christianity
was founded, is giving me pause......about then, about today
and about where we are and where we might be going....

First the past..... the Romans had a fairly strict list of virtures
that they considered to be the heart of the Roman state/society.....
they were called Pietas, Clementia, Dignitas, and Gravitas, Salubritas,
and veritas, to name a few of the so-called Roman virtures...

Pietas: Duty, or religious behavior....
Clementia: the personification of mercy and clemency....
Dignitas: dignity
Gravitas: which in Roman times meant a self-control and an ability to
maintain composure in situations....
Salubritas: Truthfulness...
Veritas: Sternness, self-control, honesty in dealing with others....

All of these and some more was considered to be the heart of what it meant
to be ''Roman''... including values which were the heart of Roman society/state.....

and in a very real sense, they were the guiding light/principles of Roman society
for several hundred years.... but can we trace where these values were no longer
part of the Roman tradition? Yes, I believe so....

In reading Roman history, one can see as the years passed by, that those values,
while publicly were proclaimed, were increasingly shown to be lacking in the
leaders of Rome....the history of Rome was increasingly full of strife and conflict,
as the years after 150 AD.... with the conflict between the conservatives and
the reformist politicians of the ''Social Wars''... which increased the idea of civil
violence.... and then in response to this civil violence, came the civil wars
and the rise of the dictatorships... or as one has said, ''The civil wars caused
the fall of the Republic, not visa versa" and in part, the cause of the ''civil wars''
came about from income inequality, from the vast differences between the wealthy
and the poor... and even in the vast differences between the old nobles, who
were poor and the new wealthy.... but not nobles... and one of the conclusion
of the early civil conflicts of 90 BC, was the establishment of the first
dictator, Sulla.... in 83 BC... and as the years passed, the idea of the
Roman virtues became less and less important.... what matter wasn't
virtues but power.... and the various civil wars from 100 BC to roughly 30 BC,
was about gaining power, not about Roman virtues...... and this makes all the
difference in the world.... as the ''leaders'' were about seeking power,
the values/virtues of being Roman, changed.... how does the average Roman
hold on to the traditional values of being Roman if the leaders have no interest
in holding such values? The loss of values comes from a top-down failure
not a bottom-up failure... and this makes all the difference in the world...

the question becomes, for the average Roman, how do hold on to traditional
values if their leaders don't hold onto those values?

what are the things that can unite a people into being a nation?
the holding onto values such as Roman values, it is not just about
being born Roman or being a Roman citizen.... the unity of a people
need something more than just a birthright... it needs values that
a people can hang onto... and with the loss of Roman values that have
been undermined by the leaders of Rome, what other aspects
can be used to unite the people into being one people?

and it is here that we see, the rise of the Christian religion.....
at this point of the dissolution of Roman values....
brought on by the failure of leadership from the leaders, the Caeser's
of Rome.... who failed to follow traditional Roman values and created
a ''winner take all'' value system....

and what does the Christian Religion brings about? values that are moral
values... something the Roman republic has lost.... a sense of what is morally
right and what is morally wrong...... the Roman republic has lost it,
and the Christian religion makes that one of its essential points....
that of, what is moral? right or wrong, it is an answer that helps the
Christian religion grows and thrive over the next 400 years....

The Roman Republic has lost any sense of morality and values...
and that was given by the Catholic Church....
and this is an idea of the power of morals and values in a people....
as a group, people instinctively seek out values and morals.... this
has been a tried-and-true method of people since the beginning of time....
the leaders of the state/society have been the ones who traditionally
give out the morals and virtues of a state/society...... but once
a state/society has its leaders forsake morals and values for power,
as it did in Rome, the people themselves seek out values and virtues
that make sense of their lives....

the victory of Catholicism is a victory of people establishing
values and morals which give them value and purpose....

In large part, Rome fell because there were not enough Romans who
actual held onto Roman values and beliefs.... the fall of Rome comes
when more people have faith in the Church than they do in the Roman
state/society.... what unites people is the church, not the Roman
Republic.... right or wrong, that is history....

and now let us take, as comparison, our modern world....

Next post...

Kropotkin

[Peter Kropotkin]

I will take as my comparison America and its values....

the question of Americ is understanding its past...
America was born as an enlightenment project....
both its declaration of Independence and the Constitution
are born of the Enlightenment.... and if you don't realize this,
then the history of America will not make sense to you.....

the values of America:

Individual freedom
self-reliance
equality of opportunity
competition
the ''American dream''
hard work.....

and these values are born of the Enlightenment.....

and today, do we today value these ''values'' as Americans once did?
No, and why not? Basically, for the exact same reasons Roman lost
their values....the leadership of America has stop pursuing these
values and are pursuing power and money over values....

we can see the beginning of the loss of values during the Vietnam War....
and what was the difference between World War two and the Vietnam war?
its purpose, its reasons.... no one could reasonably tell us why
we were in Vietnam.... but the reasons for World War two was crystal
clear.....and Vietnam wasn't.....

the lines started to blur in the Vietnam war....and then we got Nixon,
who clearly put power over virtue or any value outside of power....
what did Nixon stand for? a look at his legacy shows us he had nothing
he stood for.... outside of keeping power by any means necessary.....
or does anyone here remember Watergate? I am old enough to recall
Watergate.... and its value was an act of power, nothing more, nothing less.....

and that continue with Ronald Raygun.... both with the Iranian hostage
situation and the Iran-contra situation.... both had no virtue or values
being offered... both simply an exercise of power, nothing more,
nothing less....

and with Raygun, came the Culture Wars that still go on......
and are the Culture wars, wars of values? no, not at all...
once again, they were an exercise of power...
not of values... they did not protect a single American value
that I listed in the beginning of this post....

In fact, in looking at the Culture Wars, one can see the beginning of the
attack on the traditional America values.... the value of Freedom...
if we cannot choose our values, and they are chosen by others,
as the Culture wars want, then we have lost an important American
value...our ability to freely choose our values.. our Culture....

and in the next years, the Clinton years, we see the next phase
of the loss of American values.....in the entire Clinton ''scandal''
where Clinton has consensual sex with an intern, and was deemed
to be in violation of sexual morals and values.... by the GOP...

(who today support a presidential candidate who has admitted to
and was convicted of sexual assault and rape... my goodness, has the values
changed in the last 30 years)

and we have Bush Jr.... who played power politics... with the
Patriots act... for example....

and then we have IQ45.... who every action and response was, how
does this play politically, not by values or virtues... American virtues,
but how does this play politically? and it wasn't subtle, this
attack on American values and virtues....

and it is often wondered by the media and right wing, how have
we lost our moral values and American values today?

I would argue that the failure of morals in America today begins with
the loss of moral values in the leadership of America....if our leaders
don't follow the American values, why should we?
with every single appeal that IQ45 uses to delay his various trials,
that delay violates American values... of justice being done
the idea that all Americans are treated equally....
Justice delayed is justice denied.... if America's leaders are not
being held accountable, responsible for actions taken, why should
we be held accountable for our actions?

Just as the Roman Republic lost its way because the leadership
no longer valued or supported the traditional Roman values,
we have lost our way because the leadership of America no longer
supports or values traditional American values...

the practice of values, of following right and wrong comes from top-down,
the meaning and practice of justice, of right and wrong comes from the
top of the state/society.... not from the bottom-up to the state or society....

if you want an America that follows the laws and obeys the rules,
you have to begin from the leadership on down...
if the leadership fails to obey the laws and rules, there is
no reason in the universe for us to obey the rules and laws....

the major difference, as of right now, between Roman society/state
and us, after the rise of the Republic, is that the Roman society/state
was offered an alternative to the values of the Roman society/state.....
Christian values.... we don't have any such substitute to America values right
now.... the traditional American values are now and have been,
degraded and worthless..... they are not the America we see today....
and that leaves us to the point of not having values or beliefs that
we can trust or depend on to guide us into the future......

if the America values are dead, the American dream for example,
then what values should we or are we going to follow?
and that is the question..... if the American values are dead,
and they clearly are, then now what? What values are we
going to substitute for them?

but along with the death of American values, we can see the death
of religious values such as Christianity......if god is dead, so is Christian values....
and once again, we ask, now what?

what values do we offer that can be used to substitute for Christain values?

and that becomes the question.... what values do we substitute Christian values out
with, or what values can we sub out for American values?

Kropotkin

[attofishpi]

What Christian values need to be replaced? Is love thy neighbour as thyself not good enough for you?

[Peter Kropotkin]

What Christian values need to be replaced? Is love thy neighbour as thyself not good enough for you?

K: and missing my point... as I have made clear, time and time again,
I am an atheist.... non-believer in god, don't believe in any religion,
be it Christian or Jewish or Muslim....in fact, if asked, my favorite religion
is Jainism..... but that is another story.....

I maintained and have done so for decades, that religion and its beliefs
are the most dangerous beliefs we hold as human beings....and in the name
of religions, many brutal and vile things have been done to human beings...
in the name of god, Christain, Jewish, Islamic people are all guilty
of crimes against humanity...

I hold that without religion, we would have been far, far better off as
human beings..... for me, the Christain god is just as evil as the Jewish
god which is just as evil as the Islamic god....and it seems that
the path of late has been one of millions of people abandoning
religions... and about time in my book.... but better late than never, I
guess...

the values I seek are not religious values, but human values...
as I put human values above any sort of god or religious values...
when a Christian calls a Muslim person or religion, ''EVIL""
that is the ''pot calling the kettle black'' as far as I am concerned.....

but what values should we hold then? and therein lies the entire
course of 20th century philosophy.... what values should we be holding?

every philosopher since Nietzsche has attacked this problem, some
more successfully than others......so, the question that I ask is simple,
what values should we be holding and why those values and not other values?

Kropotkin

[attofishpi]

What Christian values need to be replaced? Is love thy neighbour as thyself not good enough for you?

K: and missing my point... as I have made clear, time and time again,

Well maybe you should be more succinct - ya know, cut the waffle.

I am an atheist.... non-believer in god, don't believe in any religion,
be it Christian or Jewish or Muslim....in fact, if asked, my favorite religion
is Jainism..... but that is another story.....

I maintained and have done so for decades, that religion and its beliefs
are the most dangerous beliefs we hold as human beings....and in the name
of religions, many brutal and vile things have been done to human beings...
in the name of god, Christain, Jewish, Islamic people are all guilty
of crimes against humanity...

I hold that without religion, we would have been far, far better off as
human beings..... for me, the Christain god is just as evil as the Jewish
god which is just as evil as the Islamic god....and it seems that
the path of late has been one of millions of people abandoning
religions... and about time in my book.... but better late than never, I
guess...

the values I seek are not religious values, but human values...
as I put human values above any sort of god or religious values...
when a Christian calls a Muslim person or religion, ''EVIL""
that is the ''pot calling the kettle black'' as far as I am concerned.....

But you still haven't provided reasonable account of that.

And we need to be clear that I am stating currently the Islam ideology (not ALL Muslims) is evil.

but what values should we hold then? and therein lies the entire
course of 20th century philosophy.... what values should we be holding?

every philosopher since Nietzsche has attacked this problem, some
more successfully than others......so, the question that I ask is simple,
what values should we be holding and why those values and not other values?

Kropotkin

So what are the "Christian values" that need to be removed in your opinion?

[Peter Kropotkin]

What Christian values need to be replaced? Is love thy neighbour as thyself not good enough for you?

K: and missing my point... as I have made clear, time and time again,

Well maybe you should be more succinct - ya know, cut the waffle.

I am an atheist.... non-believer in god, don't believe in any religion,
be it Christian or Jewish or Muslim....in fact, if asked, my favorite religion
is Jainism..... but that is another story.....

I maintained and have done so for decades, that religion and its beliefs
are the most dangerous beliefs we hold as human beings....and in the name
of religions, many brutal and vile things have been done to human beings...
in the name of god, Christain, Jewish, Islamic people are all guilty
of crimes against humanity...

I hold that without religion, we would have been far, far better off as
human beings..... for me, the Christain god is just as evil as the Jewish
god which is just as evil as the Islamic god....and it seems that
the path of late has been one of millions of people abandoning
religions... and about time in my book.... but better late than never, I
guess...

the values I seek are not religious values, but human values...
as I put human values above any sort of god or religious values...
when a Christian calls a Muslim person or religion, ''EVIL""
that is the ''pot calling the kettle black'' as far as I am concerned.....

But you still haven't provided reasonable account of that.

And we need to be clear that I am stating currently the Islam ideology (not ALL Muslims) is evil.

but what values should we hold then? and therein lies the entire
course of 20th century philosophy.... what values should we be holding?

every philosopher since Nietzsche has attacked this problem, some
more successfully than others......so, the question that I ask is simple,
what values should we be holding and why those values and not other values?

Kropotkin

So what are the "Christian values" that need to be removed in your opinion?

K: I did in fact answer this question, but I'll have another go at it.....

that in the New Testament, Jesus proclaimed that the highest Christian
value is love....and he said so, multiple times...
and you yourself noted.... so, how is attacking the Islamic religion
following the one commandment of Jesus, love thy fellow man?
How do you get from attacking Islam as being equal to loving your fellow man?

Kropotkin

[attofishpi]

K: and missing my point... as I have made clear, time and time again,

Well maybe you should be more succinct - ya know, cut the waffle.

I am an atheist.... non-believer in god, don't believe in any religion,
be it Christian or Jewish or Muslim....in fact, if asked, my favorite religion
is Jainism..... but that is another story.....

I maintained and have done so for decades, that religion and its beliefs
are the most dangerous beliefs we hold as human beings....and in the name
of religions, many brutal and vile things have been done to human beings...
in the name of god, Christain, Jewish, Islamic people are all guilty
of crimes against humanity...

I hold that without religion, we would have been far, far better off as
human beings..... for me, the Christain god is just as evil as the Jewish
god which is just as evil as the Islamic god....and it seems that
the path of late has been one of millions of people abandoning
religions... and about time in my book.... but better late than never, I
guess...

the values I seek are not religious values, but human values...
as I put human values above any sort of god or religious values...
when a Christian calls a Muslim person or religion, ''EVIL""
that is the ''pot calling the kettle black'' as far as I am concerned.....

But you still haven't provided reasonable account of that.

And we need to be clear that I am stating currently the Islam ideology (not ALL Muslims) is evil.

but what values should we hold then? and therein lies the entire
course of 20th century philosophy.... what values should we be holding?

every philosopher since Nietzsche has attacked this problem, some
more successfully than others......so, the question that I ask is simple,
what values should we be holding and why those values and not other values?

Kropotkin

So what are the "Christian values" that need to be removed in your opinion?

K: I did in fact answer this question, but I'll have another go at it.....

that in the New Testament, Jesus proclaimed that the highest Christian
value is love....and he said so, multiple times...
and you yourself noted.... so, how is attacking the Islamic religion
following the one commandment of Jesus, love thy fellow man?
How do you get from attacking Islam as being equal to loving your fellow man?

Kropotkin

Peter, I'd love them to not follow a religion clearly made up by a warlord, that is clearly not a prophet stemming from the Abrahamic religions that he has seeked to destroy since inception. I've loved many Muslim friends over the years, but if they raise the sword simply to force me to their will - fuck thou shalt not kill (which in Hebrew was originally "murder" so actually AOK in my book) - and as they love death more than life, I'd love to help them with that, to ya know, get away from the sane people and go get their paradise LMAO.

[Age]

What Christian values need to be replaced? Is love thy neighbour as thyself not good enough for you?

Even the saying and claim, 'Love they neighbour as thyself', is missing a huge point here, as well at least one other one.

Which partly explains why so-called "christians" keep abusing, permitting, ordering, and wanting to kill other human beings. Even the killing and murdering of human beings is ordered by, again so-called, "christians".

[Age]

What Christian values need to be replaced? Is love thy neighbour as thyself not good enough for you?

K: and missing my point... as I have made clear, time and time again,

Well maybe you should be more succinct - ya know, cut the waffle.

I am an atheist.... non-believer in god, don't believe in any religion,
be it Christian or Jewish or Muslim....in fact, if asked, my favorite religion
is Jainism..... but that is another story.....

I maintained and have done so for decades, that religion and its beliefs
are the most dangerous beliefs we hold as human beings....and in the name
of religions, many brutal and vile things have been done to human beings...
in the name of god, Christain, Jewish, Islamic people are all guilty
of crimes against humanity...

I hold that without religion, we would have been far, far better off as
human beings..... for me, the Christain god is just as evil as the Jewish
god which is just as evil as the Islamic god....and it seems that
the path of late has been one of millions of people abandoning
religions... and about time in my book.... but better late than never, I
guess...

the values I seek are not religious values, but human values...
as I put human values above any sort of god or religious values...
when a Christian calls a Muslim person or religion, ''EVIL""
that is the ''pot calling the kettle black'' as far as I am concerned.....

But you still haven't provided reasonable account of that.

And we need to be clear that I am stating currently the Islam ideology (not ALL Muslims) is evil.

Only after a so-called "muslim doctor" said your work and/or "jesus christ" was rubbish, correct?

but what values should we hold then? and therein lies the entire
course of 20th century philosophy.... what values should we be holding?

every philosopher since Nietzsche has attacked this problem, some
more successfully than others......so, the question that I ask is simple,
what values should we be holding and why those values and not other values?

Kropotkin

So what are the "Christian values" that need to be removed in your opinion?

The ones that lead to any and all abuse and murder of so-called "others".

[Age]

Well maybe you should be more succinct - ya know, cut the waffle.




But you still haven't provided reasonable account of that.

And we need to be clear that I am stating currently the Islam ideology (not ALL Muslims) is evil.




So what are the "Christian values" that need to be removed in your opinion?

K: I did in fact answer this question, but I'll have another go at it.....

that in the New Testament, Jesus proclaimed that the highest Christian
value is love....and he said so, multiple times...
and you yourself noted.... so, how is attacking the Islamic religion
following the one commandment of Jesus, love thy fellow man?
How do you get from attacking Islam as being equal to loving your fellow man?

Kropotkin

Peter, I'd love them to not follow a religion clearly made up by a warlord, that is clearly not a prophet stemming from the Abrahamic religions that he has seeked to destroy since inception.

I see, clearly, that you have, still, not considered at all that what you see, clearly, here could be a complete misinterpretation.


I've loved many Muslim friends over the years, but if they raise the sword simply to force me to their will - fuck thou shalt not kill (which in Hebrew was originally "murder" so actually AOK in my book) - and as they love death more than life, I'd love to help them with that, to ya know, get away from the sane people and go get their paradise LMAO.
[/quote]

So, you cannot see that 'your kind of attacking' is not love, at all.

And, in fact that 'your "christian" value' here is by far worse than the actual True and Right interpretation of the words in the book of peace/"islam".

[Peter Kropotkin]

K: that in the New Testament, Jesus proclaimed that the highest Christian
value is love....and he said so, multiple times...
and you yourself noted.... so, how is attacking the Islamic religion
following the one commandment of Jesus, love thy fellow man?
How do you get from attacking Islam as being equal to loving your fellow man?


ATT: Peter, I'd love them to not follow a religion clearly made up by a warlord, that is clearly not a prophet stemming from the Abrahamic religions that he has seeked to destroy since inception. I've loved many Muslim friends over the years, but if they raise the sword simply to force me to their will - fuck thou shalt not kill (which in Hebrew was originally "murder" so actually AOK in my book) - and as they love death more than life, I'd love to help them with that, to ya know, get away from the sane people and go get their paradise LMAO.
[/quote]

K: those words, "I'd love them not to follow a religion'''
that is not love..... ''I love them even if they were to follow a religion....''
that is love..... love isn't conditional...... to say to someone, ''I
will love you if, if you change religions'' is conditional.... you do not
and have not followed the words of Jesus....... where loving another is
not conditional....

Kropotkin

[attofishpi]

K: that in the New Testament, Jesus proclaimed that the highest Christian
value is love....and he said so, multiple times...
and you yourself noted.... so, how is attacking the Islamic religion
following the one commandment of Jesus, love thy fellow man?
How do you get from attacking Islam as being equal to loving your fellow man?


ATT: Peter, I'd love them to not follow a religion clearly made up by a warlord, that is clearly not a prophet stemming from the Abrahamic religions that he has seeked to destroy since inception. I've loved many Muslim friends over the years, but if they raise the sword simply to force me to their will - fuck thou shalt not kill (which in Hebrew was originally "murder" so actually AOK in my book) - and as they love death more than life, I'd love to help them with that, to ya know, get away from the sane people and go get their paradise LMAO.

K: those words, "I'd love them not to follow a religion'''
that is not love..... ''I love them even if they were to follow a religion....''
that is love..... love isn't conditional...... to say to someone, ''I
will love you if, if you change religions'' is conditional.... you do not
and have not followed the words of Jesus....... where loving another is
not conditional....

Kropotkin
[/quote]

Love IS conditional. People often make the mistake of saying "God's love is unconditional" - well, what were the 10 commandments if not CONDITIONS.

I'll say it again (and was tapped on the RIGHT knee- sage agreement) --> You are intellectually INEPT.

[Peter Kropotkin]

K: that in the New Testament, Jesus proclaimed that the highest Christian
value is love....and he said so, multiple times...
and you yourself noted.... so, how is attacking the Islamic religion
following the one commandment of Jesus, love thy fellow man?
How do you get from attacking Islam as being equal to loving your fellow man?


ATT: Peter, I'd love them to not follow a religion clearly made up by a warlord, that is clearly not a prophet stemming from the Abrahamic religions that he has seeked to destroy since inception. I've loved many Muslim friends over the years, but if they raise the sword simply to force me to their will - fuck thou shalt not kill (which in Hebrew was originally "murder" so actually AOK in my book) - and as they love death more than life, I'd love to help them with that, to ya know, get away from the sane people and go get their paradise LMAO.

K: those words, "I'd love them not to follow a religion'''
that is not love..... ''I love them even if they were to follow a religion....''
that is love..... love isn't conditional...... to say to someone, ''I
will love you if, if you change religions'' is conditional.... you do not
and have not followed the words of Jesus....... where loving another is
not conditional....

Kropotkin

Love IS conditional. People often make the mistake of saying "God's love is unconditional" - well, what were the 10 commandments if not CONDITIONS.

I'll say it again (and was tapped on the RIGHT knee- sage agreement) --> You are intellectually INEPT.
[/quote]

K: I have been married for 27 years... and if love is conditional, then it
is transactional... a parents love for a child means the child must fulfill
conditions for the parent to love them.... a wife must fulfill conditions
for the husband to love her.... that a human being must fulfill conditions
before god will love you..... so when the bible says ''to love thy fellow man''
that is transactional/conditional.... so, feel free to explain the
parable of the ''good Samaritan''....in terms of a transactional love?

Kropotkin

[attofishpi]

K: that in the New Testament, Jesus proclaimed that the highest Christian
value is love....and he said so, multiple times...
and you yourself noted.... so, how is attacking the Islamic religion
following the one commandment of Jesus, love thy fellow man?
How do you get from attacking Islam as being equal to loving your fellow man?


ATT: Peter, I'd love them to not follow a religion clearly made up by a warlord, that is clearly not a prophet stemming from the Abrahamic religions that he has seeked to destroy since inception. I've loved many Muslim friends over the years, but if they raise the sword simply to force me to their will - fuck thou shalt not kill (which in Hebrew was originally "murder" so actually AOK in my book) - and as they love death more than life, I'd love to help them with that, to ya know, get away from the sane people and go get their paradise LMAO.

K: those words, "I'd love them not to follow a religion'''
that is not love..... ''I love them even if they were to follow a religion....''
that is love..... love isn't conditional...... to say to someone, ''I
will love you if, if you change religions'' is conditional.... you do not
and have not followed the words of Jesus....... where loving another is
not conditional....

Kropotkin

Love IS conditional. People often make the mistake of saying "God's love is unconditional" - well, what were the 10 commandments if not CONDITIONS.

I'll say it again (and was tapped on the RIGHT knee- sage agreement) --> You are intellectually INEPT.

K: I have been married for 27 years... and if love is conditional, then it
is transactional... a parents love for a child means the child must fulfill
conditions for the parent to love them.... a wife must fulfill conditions
for the husband to love her.... that a human being must fulfill conditions
before god will love you..... so when the bible says ''to love thy fellow man''
that is transactional/conditional.... so, feel free to explain the
parable of the ''good Samaritan''....in terms of a transactional love?

Kropotkin
[/quote]

You said some time ago that you searched for years for God - studied studied and NOTHING.

I think I understand why people like you (or at least one important reason) never get gnosis (God never bothered with ya)- it's that for you its ALL or NOTHING. That is to say, that when you read the Bible from the start to the finish, you think it must ALL be taken as the word of God - even all the ridiculous crap - take the opening Genesis - God talking the Heavens and Earth into existence - buy_bull.
You can't accept that parts can be discarded. For me, ever since a child I thought - there is stuff in there that sounds like the wisdom of a divine being, or at least a wise man, and there is a load of crap in there that some bigot twat with his own values has clearly put into it.
So, I was being rational about what is in that book, whereas you just discount ALL of it as nonsense, since, again - its ALL or NOTHING.

All that effort and you are wrong (atheist) - God\sages never bothered to communicate and show you the very power of this intelligence over reality.