Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lpetrich · 09-12-2009, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn

Websites like [Skeptics Annotated Bible] will expose "supposed" errors, but they never attempt to correct or answer the problems. Why is that?

WHat do you mean by "correcting" or "answering" the problems? Accepting some specious whitewash?

And what's your opinion of the SAB's treatment of the Koran or the Book of Mormon?

Quote:

So, now what we have are Christians building websites. "The response to Skeptics Annotated Bible".

URL's, please?

Quote:

People attend college classes for five or six years to fully understand the bible. Because it was written and spoken in a language that is no longer in existence. I find it hard to believe any Joe Bloe (atheist) will pick up a bible and fully understand it without conflict.

While it's OK for believers in that book to believe in it without understanding it, right?

And while it's OK to reject every other sacred book without understanding it, right?

IBelieveInHymn, do you feel that you have to learn Classical Arabic and read the original text of the Koran in order to reject it?

Quote:

I displayed words in ancient Hebrew, and the atheists couldn't tell me what the word(s) meant. "Sherets", "Sin'ah". they had no clue what I was talking about, but they are quick to say "the bible is a lie". Come on now.

Who said that and where? I remember someone else here who often waved around his claimed knowledge of Hebrew, which he proudly conceded was limited to Strong's Concordance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I'm not sure how this deals with the point made; and as for accusations that Jesus said we must hate our parents, made by atheists, didn't I see just such a thread a while back?

Why not search for it?

Quote:

The demand for autograph copies is likewise rather odd, and again indicative of a deep lack of education. Didn't you question this one at all? For instance, I presume that you own a number of books; how many of these, I wonder, are extant in autograph?

Who makes that argument?

Roger Pearse, you really have to concede that scribal tampering is a serious problem with parts of the New Testament. Jesus Christ and the adulteress. The Johannine Comma. The ending of Mark. Matthew, Mark, and Luke have word-for-word copies of much of their text. Etc.

With cases like that, where does it end?

Roger Pearse · 09-12-2009, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrunicycler

I edited nothing. The quote feature may have edited something. I did not. If you think my context is wrong, please resupply it.

I'm afraid I must decline to edit your posts for you!

Quote:

The remainder of the post really just ignores my comments in favour of posting assertions copied from stock atheist polemic. None of deserves any comment.

I will comment on one particularly unfortunate statement.

Quote:

No one asked for autographed copies. She wanted to know who the original authors were, and where she can find the originals.

Quite what you imagine an "original" is, I'm not sure. A copy of a text written by the author is known as an "autograph."

LOL. So, you think that because I didn't know the word 'autograph' is used to refer to works in an author's handwriting,

Friend, it isn't my responsibility to ensure that, when you make a statement about something, that you know what you are talking about. It is yours.

Quote:

it dampens the impact of the fact that not only are there no such copies, but no one even knows who the original authors were.

Naturally I assumed that you had read what I wrote, since you posted a reply. But perhaps not, since this repeats a claim on which I commented.

Surely no argument can be rebutted merely by chanting second-hand excuses, but only by rational argument, based on actually reading it?

Here is what I said again.

Quote:

First and foremost, who authored the bible and where can I find the original documents? The answer is that in many cases the authors are unknown and the only documents that are available are copies of copies. That is the truth. That isn't what apologists are likely to tell you, however.

These are curious claims, and very, very stale. Have you considered whether these statements are true, sensible, or relevant? You're in BC&H; there are plenty of people here who know about the transmission of texts.

For instance, if you could produce ancient sources that pass your own criteria and tell us that the documents of the New Testament are by unknown authors, I'm sure we would be interested to see them. In fact all you're doing is repeating hearsay from modern times. I don't think that is a very impressive argument.

The demand for autograph copies is likewise rather odd, and again indicative of a deep lack of education. Didn't you question this one at all? For instance, I presume that you own a number of books; how many of these, I wonder, are extant in autograph?

How many ancient texts are extant in autograph? If none, what is the point of such an observation? Are you saying that no text is an accurate copy unless it is a photocopy? Or what?

One reason why atheist apologetic leaves me cold is that so much of it consists of believing whatever sounds convenient and denying what is inconvenient. It's no way to establish the facts.

Quote:

You think that ...Ad hominem, again. Nice fail. Next time, try pointing out my misunderstanding in the polite way a meek christian should, and then address the rest of the arguments that the mistake doesn't impact.

If we cannot deploy a rational argument, and you don't seem to be able to do this, it is quite doubtful that we will do our cause much good by personal attacks or gratuitous religious abuse.

Quote:

What I mean by 'original' is the original manuscript...which I recognize now, (snip abuse)

And was there one? In an age of dictation? <hint>

It's best to think these things through BEFORE posting second-hand certainties. This is why whoever you copied when you posted this was uneducated; had he known anything about how ancient texts reach us, he wouldn't have tried to make that claim.

Please think for yourself.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 09-12-2009, 08:48 AM

Quote:

First and foremost, who authored the bible and where can I find the original documents? The answer is that in many cases the authors are unknown and the only documents that are available are copies of copies. That is the truth. That isn't what apologists are likely to tell you, however.

These are curious claims, and very, very stale. Have you considered whether these statements are true, sensible, or relevant? You're in BC&H; there are plenty of people here who know about the transmission of texts.

Of course I have.

And that, it seems, is all that you have to say. For your reply to everything else I said was:

Quote:

Please provide me with the names of the OT and NT authors.
...
Then please provide me with the names of the OT and NT authors.
...
Provide me with the information I asked for and we'll go from there.
...
Then please list for me the authors of the OT and the NT and refer me to some original documents, rather than copies of copies.
...
It is a statement of fact. Give me the names of the authors of the OT and the NT.
...
Show me the original works that the copies were made from.
...
What I said and will continue to say is: No one knows who authored the OT and there are very few known authors of the NT.
...
I will continue to state what I know: We do not know who authored the OT and do not know all of the authors of the NT save some of the Pauline Epistles.

(and several more)

Unfortunately I don't feel any need to deal with non-rational "arguments" of this kind. Try again, if you can, and rationally this time.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

DancesWithCoffeeCups · 09-12-2009, 08:51 AM

As I fail to see what is irrational about asking for authorship for the bible, I'll have to assume you can't provide it for me. Thanks for responding, though!

mrunicycler · 09-12-2009, 08:52 AM

For someone who bitches about edits and context, you sure do alot of editing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrunicycler

I edited nothing. The quote feature may have edited something. I did not. If you think my context is wrong, please resupply it.

I'm afraid I must decline to edit your posts for you!

I didn't ask for you to. I asked you to give the context you felt my post needed in order for the original argument to be understood as it should be. I don't think my post lacked anything important. You seem to disagree, and so it is incumbent upon you to show what it is exactly my post was missing.

Quote:

Friend, it isn't my responsibility to ensure that, when you make a statement about something, that you know what you are talking about. It is yours.

Don't patronize me by calling me friend. Either call me by my nickname mrunicycler (or mruni), or call me nothing.

I don't have to apologize for not knowing every definition of every word. I admit that I'm not perfect.

As a christian, it very well is your responsibility to treat people with respect, as you would your brother. Condescension is no way to treat family.

Quote:

Naturally I assumed that you had read what I wrote, since you posted a reply. But perhaps not, since this repeats a claim on which I commented.

So, you claim to know who the authors were, when the writers of the NIV of the babble do not.

I'm sure they'd love it if you could supply them with this, as well as the evidence you've got.

Quote:

Surely no argument can be rebutted merely by chanting second-hand excuses, but only by rational argument, based on actually reading it?

...

I'm not the one doing the hand-waving.

Quote:

Here is what I said again.

If we cannot deploy a rational argument, and you don't seem to be able to do this, it is quite doubtful that we will do our cause much good by personal attacks or gratuitous religious abuse.

It is not known who wrote many books of the xian bible. The NIV even attests to this when it admits that the authorship of books is disputed.

If you have evidence to the contrary, great. Supply it.

Quote:

What I mean by 'original' is the original manuscript...which I recognize now, (snip abuse)

And was there one? In an age of dictation? <hint>

Oh, I'd settle for a copy in the hand of a scribe who can be shown to have copied his edition directly from teh words of the man himself. This, btw, would be considered an original manuscript (after the author checked for mistakes and corrected them...dictation is still done today, you know).

I won't get lost in the example. If you can show me evidence for who authored--which can mean either wrote or dictated--these books, great. Supply it.

But, we don't know. More to the point, even though you like to pretend otherwise, you don't know, but have an interest in demanding that the babble not be wrong.

Quote:

It's best to think these things through BEFORE posting second-hand certainties. This is why whoever you copied when you posted this was uneducated; had he known anything about how ancient texts reach us, he wouldn't have tried to make that claim.

Please think for yourself.

I hope you realize that god won't let you in heaven with this attitude. I think for myself, and it's insulting and unbrotherly of you to claim otherwise.

I mean, it's your soul you're risking here with your arrogance. Are you sure you don't want to tone down the patronism?

Quote:

All the best,

Roger Pearse

same

Wooster · 09-12-2009, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DancesWithCoffeeCups

The reason that I wanted to discuss this issue with IBIH is because it's common for Christians to come to this forum and they spend their time in GRD or EoG (which is also where I hang out). Over the years I've often invited them to come to BC&H. I'm well aware that many of the participants here know a hell of a lot more than I do. This was really just a little test. In all my years here, this is one place that a lot of the hit and run Christians avoid like the plague, and I've always wondered why that is.

Oh they read this forum alright, it's just they realize, just like myself, that it's better to remain silent than to open your mouth and make it blatantly obvious for everyone to see how little in reality I know about the topic.

But contrary to the religious sheeple, I try to learn at least.

Now, I'll go back to remaining silent and read...

Roger Pearse · 09-12-2009, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DancesWithCoffeeCups

As I fail to see what is irrational about asking for authorship for the bible, I'll have to assume you can't provide it for me. Thanks for responding, though!

You might consider that you got into this undignified mess in the first place because you asserted, with the utmost arrogance and certainty, things of which you knew no more than that you found them convenient.

Worse still, you chose to do it in a forum where there were people better educated than yourself. That was foolish, and you have been forced to resort to the lowest tactics to try to fend off a rebuke.

Reducing atheists to snarling, barking wretches is amusing, if you are cynical; I merely find it a little sad to see. Yet here we are again, and you're again asserting things which you don't know, on the basis that they are convenient. Do you want to bark again?

We all get choices in this life. We can be honest with ourselves, and others, we can use whatever minds we have and acquire whatever education we can, and try to work out how things work and how to do the best for ourselves we can.

Or we can abandon intelligence and reason, follow what we imagine ignorantly to be convenient (for this means following the direction of others who ARE thinking), and deal with any queries by the equivalent of barking like a dog.

I have no real interest in which you choose to do! Hey, go to hell if you wish. Or not. You tell us that you are a religious renegade: that's your choice. But I'd do something more positive if I were you, than picking fights with strangers if it forces you to descend to this depth. Why is it worth it?

But this all seems somewhat OT.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 09-12-2009, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrunicycler

For someone who bitches about edits and context, you sure do alot of editing.<snip reiteration>

Friend, if you can't respond rationally, it is probably best not to respond irrationally as you have done.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Deus Ex · 09-12-2009, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I have no real interest in which you choose to do! Hey, go to hell if you wish. Or not.

the love of Jesus is strong in this one. :lol:

Susan2 · 09-12-2009, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by DancesWithCoffeeCups

As I fail to see what is irrational about asking for authorship for the bible, I'll have to assume you can't provide it for me. Thanks for responding, though!

You might consider that you got into this undignified mess in the first place because you asserted, with the utmost arrogance and certainty, things of which you knew no more than that you found them convenient.

Worse still, you chose to do it in a forum where there were people better educated than yourself. That was foolish, and you have been forced to resort to the lowest tactics to try to fend off a rebuke.

Reducing atheists to snarling, barking wretches is amusing, if you are cynical; I merely find it a little sad to see. Yet here we are again, and you're again asserting things which you don't know, on the basis that they are convenient. Do you want to bark again?

We all get choices in this life. We can be honest with ourselves, and others, we can use whatever minds we have and acquire whatever education we can, and try to work out how things work and how to do the best for ourselves we can.

Or we can abandon intelligence and reason, follow what we imagine ignorantly to be convenient (for this means following the direction of others who ARE thinking), and deal with any queries by the equivalent of barking like a dog.

I have no real interest in which you choose to do! Hey, go to hell if you wish. Or not. You tell us that you are a religious renegade: that's your choice. But I'd do something more positive if I were you, than picking fights with strangers if it forces you to descend to this depth. Why is it worth it?

But this all seems somewhat OT.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Well Roger, someone has to feed the dogs, so that they too can remember that they are dogs.

Now, having been fed you should be a good little doggy, and thank DWCC. I accept thank you's as well.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-12-2009, 08:51 AM	#34
DancesWithCoffeeCups Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 8,077	As I fail to see what is irrational about asking for authorship for the bible, I'll have to assume you can't provide it for me. Thanks for responding, though!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.