Stupid Ancient Desert People

Posted: March 14, 2012 in Arguments, History Related, Logic Related
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

A common remark I get when I talk to people about the Bible is related to the intelligence of the authors. It usually goes something like this, “Why would I believe something written by stupid desert people?” And they usually talk about the earth being flat, belief in Gods, and other things that obviously only stupid people would account for. It seems logical at first. After all, who wants to read a book about the most important subject of all time, if the authors were imbeciles?


How do we know they were stupid?

This is the first question we have to ask ourselves. How do we know they were stupid? Because they believed the earth was flat? That is actually a widely over used misconception. Nothing in the Bible says anything about the earth being flat. In fact, the Bible actually indicates the earth is a “circle” and “sphere,” (Job 26:10 & Isaiah 40:21-22). For more info on where the flat earth theory comes from I recommend reading another article I posted, The ancient people of the Bible did not believe the earth was flat.

One reason we think that the ancient people were stupid is based on a presupposition of evolution which maintains that humans are constantly evolving and improving. If we therefore go backwards in time we’ll stumble across less and less developed humans which are less and less mentally superior. But is this really the case? Instead of speculating on what we think we know, let us look at the actual facts.

Just how dumb were the authors of the Bible?

Well, not dumb at all actually. In fact, many of the authors were in fact very bright for the time and age they lived in. Moses was raised in the finest schools for Egyptian royalty. David was educated byBabylon’s highest ranking educators. Luke was a physician. Solomon, the author of Proverbs was given the Wisdom of God. Paul was highly educated as well.

In general, people were not “stupid” in the ancient world but incredibly inventive and clever, developing all the tools, languages and mathematics that our modern society and sciences rest upon. The Egyptian pyramids to this day baffle engineers and historians as to how such an ancient society could develop such a complex and massive building feat. Ancients knew how to create steel and combine metals to create alloys. They developed critical systems like the ramp, screw, pully, lever, ect. They could navigate using the stars, and plan remarkably precise building projects using the stars. They knew how to irrigate and farm. They knew how to artificially select livestock for stronger off spring. These are not achievements of “stupid” people. This is not to say that were not any less intelligent people in ancient times. Every population has a variety of people with intellectual capability. But this same variety exists to this day.

From a theological view point, the Biblical authors were inspired by the divine wisdom of God anyways. In such a case it wouldn’t matter to the IQ of the author, if he is being inspired by the all superior intelligence of God.

We’re not all that smart today…

We falsely assume we’re more intelligent because we can fly in airplanes, look up anything online, go to the moon, send robots to Mars, cure deadly disease that once wiped out thousands of people, ect. But ask yourself this; could we have achieved these things without the basic foundations laid down by our more “primitive”predecessors? You can’t design a jet engine if the basic chemistry for refining fuel had not been developed. You can’t travel through space if the fundamental laws of physics had not been known. What good is a car without the wheel? It is easy to boast about how intelligent you are when you are standing on the shoulders of the men and women of the past who did all the grunt work to discover the knowledge you so assertively take credit for.

Here is another question. Does access to more information really make you more intelligent? We can today access just about anything online. A real manifestation of education of the masses! But are there costs to today’s technology? There are sadly many. Most profoundly of which is memory. With information so accessible and devices like lab tops, phones, and even a pen and paper, our memories are seldom utilized. Ask yourself how many phone numbers of friends and family you know off the top of your head without resorting to your phone or a phone book. However, in the ancient world where such technology was not available, even writing utensils a rarity, people required strong memorization skills to retain information to pass down to later generations. Such memorization skills are demonstrated in the ancient use of oral tradition, which has been proven to be incredibly accurate. So accurate that it has been suggested that any average ancient lay person could easily memorize and retain MORE information than the average person today. Unfortunately such a scenario is only hypothetical.

A Relative Standard

The problem is that we think that because we know more today than people in the past, we are therefore smart and they stupid. But let’s put this into perspective: We today consider ourselves smart. Now hypothetically two hundred years from now humans will obviously know a great deal more of information than we do today. They’ll know so much in fact that surely they will overturn many of the theories and facts we hold to be true today. They will know so much that they will look back at people in the early 21st century and consider us… stupid. But wait… I thought we were smart? I thought that we today are advanced and intelligent?

You see, by comparing the wealth of information available today to the lesser amount of information in the past you are in essence creating an illogical standard by which to gauge intelligence. If such is the case then we are stupid because there is so much more we don’t know in today’s world that will be discovered in the future. Clearly there is a flaw is such reasoning because one could argue both ways that we are stupid or smart. The only way to properly rationalize the intelligence of people in my opinion is within the context of the age they live in. And thus, considering that many of the Bible’s authors were highly educated during the periods in which they existed, one cannot claim that the Bible was written by stupid desert people.

…many of them didn’t even live in the desert anyways.

  1. matthew2262 says:

    “Many people say, ‘They could believe in miracles in olden times because they had a false conception of the universe. They thought the Earth is the largest thing in it and Man was the most important creature. It therefore seemed reasonable to suppose that the Creator was specially interested in Man and might even interrupt the course of Nature for his benefit. But now we know the real immensity of the universe—now that we perceive our own planet and even the whole solar system to be only a speck—it becomes ludicrous to believe in them any longer. We have discovered our insignificance and can no longer suppose that God is so drastically concerned in our petty affairs.’

    The immensity of the universe is not a recent discovery. More than 1700 years ago Ptolemy taught that in relation to the fixed stars the whole Earth must be regarded as a point with no magnitude. His astronomical system was universally accepted in the Dark and Middle Ages….
    The real question is why the spatial insignificance of Earth, after being asserted by Christian philosophers, sung by Christian poets, and commented on by Christian moralists for some fifteen centuries, without the slightest suspicion that it conflicted with their theology, should suddenly in quite modern times have been set up as a stock argument against Christianity and enjoyed, in that capacity, a brilliant career.” – C.S. Lewis

    C.S. Lewis, Miracles (London: Fontana, 1960; first published 1947), p. 53, Ch. 7.

  2. matthew2262 says:

    “When might we have begun to loss these abilities? Most likely we started our slide with the invention of agriculture, which enabled high density living in cities. Selective pressure was then turned to resistance to diseases that naturally grow out of high-density, urban living. A principle of genetics is that when one selects highly for one trait (such as resistance to infectious disease) other traits are inadvertently selected against. It is also quite likely that the need for intelligence was reduced as we began to live in supportive, high-density cities that made up for lapses of judgment or failure of comprehension. Community life would, I believe, tend to reduce the selective pressure placed on every individual, every day of their life; indeed that’s why I prefer to live in such a society.

    Another way to state the same information is that every twenty to fifty generations we should sustain a deleterious mutation. Within 3000 years or about 120 generations we have all very likely sustained two or more mutations harmful to our intellectual or emotional stability.”

    -Gerald Crabtree of Stanford University
    as quoted from,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s