The non-religious now have their own Bible.

[Helm]

Anyone else own a copy or are planning to buy a copy of this? It's essentially a compilation of ethical philosophy and wisdom teachings from around the world.

I always felt that atheists, agnostics and humanists were a bit left out in the cold in the book of ethics department so it's about time. What you have their is the good bits of religious teaching minus all the supernatural elements that tend conflict with reason, logic, and all that sort of thing. All we need now is a grand temple of reason or something along those lines.

[tarvu]

Anyone else own a copy or are planning to buy a copy of this? It's essentially a compilation of ethical philosophy and wisdom teachings from around the world.

I always felt that atheists, agnostics and humanists were a bit left out in the cold in the book of ethics department so it's about time. What you have their is the good bits of religious teaching minus all the supernatural elements that tend conflict with reason, logic, and all that sort of thing. All we need now is a grand temple of reason or something along those lines.

I prefer the humanist collections of Huxley and several others before Grayling's. Pretty presumptuous of him to call his book the secular bible, especially when many notable humanist thinkers are missing.

[The Dude]

I prefer the humanist collections of Huxley and several others before Grayling's. Pretty presumptuous of him to call his book the secular bible

That's why he doesn't call it the secular bible. You may want to read the cover again.

[Helm]

This book was actually intentionally designed to read in much the same way as the Christian Bible, just with the supernatural elements removed.

[Col. Tartleton]

This book was actually intentionally designed to read in much the same way as the Christian Bible, just with the supernatural elements removed.

So it's an advocation and rationalization of human sacrifice, war, genocide, incest, mutilation, and other unpleasing ideas through the eyes of humanism? Sounds terrible.

[basics]

" This book was actually intentionally designed to read in much the same way as the Christian Bible, just with the supernatural elements removed. "

Helm,

Then it was not meant to be like the Bible as that book is totally about the supernatural and its effect on people.

[Helm]

Then it was not meant to be like the Bible as that book is totally about the supernatural and its effect on people.

It's set out in the style of the Bible, like this.

[basics]

" It's set out in the style of the Bible, like this. "

Helm,

Style may be one thing but compatability is quite another and as there is none it is quite wrong of you to propose that it is.

[Gromovnik]

epic fail.

[Helm]

It's just written in the style of the Bible, the substance is humanism. Not that there isn't some humanism in the actual Bible itself.

[Himster]

It's just written in the style of the Bible, the substance is humanism. Not that there isn't some humanism in the actual Bible itself.

Is it a selection of famous essays or is it just all the author's opinion?

[SigniferOne]

It's just written in the style of the Bible, the substance is humanism.

How is it humanism if it claims that man is a pitiful speck automaton within a wider much more interesting universe? Do you have an understanding of what the term humanism is, and where it came from?

Atheist humanism (taken from this thread):




Christian humanism:

[Helm]

How is it humanism if it claims that man is a pitiful speck automaton within a wider much more interesting universe? Do you have an understanding of what the term humanism is, and where it came from?

Well of course Humanism stems from a Christian culture I don't have anything against that. And humanists don't generally see humans as a pitful speck or automations, they are of course the core of the "religious" belief rather than supernatural deities. If there are supernatural deities I'm sure they would be more than happy enough with humanism as I imagine they're getting fed up of all the arse kissing. I think it's important to point out that human life would be as valuable whether or not we had souls or gods to worship, it wouldn't matter either way.

[Col. Tartleton]

How is it humanism if it claims that man is a pitiful speck automaton within a wider much more interesting universe? Do you have an understanding of what the term humanism is, and where it came from?

Atheist humanism (taken from this thread):




Christian humanism:

My Atheist humanism is that human rights are whatever we want them to be. I personally stand with the American list, but it's easier to sum up with the lone word respect.

That picture illustrates that there is more to the beauty of existence than what we see in our lives and that the universe doesn't revolve around the earth... Something the Christians had some trouble with figuring out.

Also Da Vinci was a heretic who hated the church and tried to paint as much anti Christian symbolism into his commissions as possible without getting caught. Your point is invalid. I mean even Vitruvius was a pagan if religious at all.

[Sphere]

How is it humanism if it claims that man is a pitiful speck automaton within a wider much more interesting universe? Do you have an understanding of what the term humanism is, and where it came from?

Suffering and injustice have to be prevented in this world because there isn't any other. However small a speck humans might be, we cannot outsource this core responsibility by inventing a diety that will right all wrongs in the next world. That is the driving urgency of secular humanism.

[Himster]

I always wondered how psychopathic atheists managed to have some sort of moral code and have a disproportionately small percentage in prison. I didn't know they had a holy book, good for them, every little helps.

[Vir Triumphalis]

Because we don't follow Jihad and its likes

[Gary88]

It falls in to the trap which often snares the religious when thinking about atheists or secularists which is that we share common ideals. My lack of belief in a god isn't going to make this book have any significance for me or any other atheists, a bible works because its readers agree with every statement in it an atheist book is based on its readers having one shared belief before reading it.

[Helm]

It falls in to the trap which often snares the religious when thinking about atheists or secularists which is that we share common ideals.

We do share common ideals bar the odd criminal and psychopath who dont play by the rules. Religious people have many of those shared ideals in some sort of magical book so secularists can now have those exact same ideals in some sort of book. Without the magical element but you don't necessarily need all that.

[Gary88]

We do share common ideals bar the odd criminal and psychopath who dont play by the rules. Religious people have many of those shared ideals in some sort of magical book so secularists can now have those exact same ideals in some sort of book. Without the magical element but you don't necessarily need all that.

I'm not saying we wont share any ideals or even that we would disagree on a majority of subjects, however the bible unites a group of people entirely because they do believe in its teachings whereas this book has been written back to front, assuming what beliefs its readers will have and trying to cater to those.