Can this quote be refuted?


Twila
+1
#1
Can this quote be logically and factually refuted?

 
Timetrvlr
+2 / -1
#2
No. Dawkins tells it like it is.
 
MHz
+1
#3
If he can't figure out that the narrow spot between the Bitter Lakes is the site of the 'parting of the water' (by a strong wind) then he should be getting paid to publish anything, let alone if it pertains to the Bible.
 
Murphy
+2
#4
"...disjointed documents, composed...distorted..." Says who? This needs to be cited. Bits and pieces always come together given time.

"...unknown to us and unknown to each other..." So? Archaeologists make new finds regularly. What is unknown or not understood today, may have an explanation tomorrow.

It sounds like Dawkins is either spoiling for an intellectual fight, trolling, or merely stirring the pot to see what floats...Patience, dude!

Mazel Tov, sugar! Je vous en prie!
 
gerryh
#5
nope, it can't.
 
MHz
+1
#6
"...disjointed documents, composed...distorted..."

Perhaps he missed this verse (and many others).

Isa:28:9-10:
Whom shall he teach knowledge?
and whom shall he make to understand doctrine?
them that are weaned from the milk,
and drawn from the breasts.
Isa:28:10:
For precept must be upon precept,
precept upon precept;
line upon line,
line upon line;
here a little,
and there a little:

If there are 24 references to 'day of the Lord' in the OT then he should realize you have to read them all rather than if God didn't put them all in one location then it must be 'fiction'.

Since the OT in the 1611KJV was translated by Jews in Israel does he realize he is mocking Jews and their ability to keep the story straight? (after getting it back into perfect condition by Daniel and a few friends while in exile in Babylon)
 
Motar
+2
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by Twila View Post

Can this quote be logically and factually refuted?

What can be said in response to the very logical and factual, not to mention academic term "weird", Twila? : )
 
Cliffy
+3
#8  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Motar View Post

What can be said in response to the very logical and factual, not to mention academic term "weird", Twila? : )

Strange and illogical belief in the literal interpretation of this collection of revised, mistranslated, misinterpreted and misunderstood book that dozens of studies show that Dawkins is right. Thousands of additions and omissions have occurred since it was first put together. What is weird is that people still believe it is literal truth.
 
BornRuff
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

"...disjointed documents, composed...distorted..."

Perhaps he missed this verse (and many others).

Isa:28:9-10:
Whom shall he teach knowledge?
and whom shall he make to understand doctrine?
them that are weaned from the milk,
and drawn from the breasts.
Isa:28:10:
For precept must be upon precept,
precept upon precept;
line upon line,
line upon line;
here a little,
and there a little:

If there are 24 references to 'day of the Lord' in the OT then he should realize you have to read them all rather than if God didn't put them all in one location then it must be 'fiction'.

Since the OT in the 1611KJV was translated by Jews in Israel does he realize he is mocking Jews and their ability to keep the story straight? (after getting it back into perfect condition by Daniel and a few friends while in exile in Babylon)

Can you really site the book itself as proof?
 
WLDB
+1
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Strange and illogical belief in the literal interpretation of this collection of revised, mistranslated, misinterpreted and misunderstood book that dozens of studies show that Dawkins is right. Thousands of additions and omissions have occurred since it was first put together. What is weird is that people still believe it is literal truth.

Fortunately not as many percentage wise as before.
 
BornRuff
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Murphy View Post

"...disjointed documents, composed...distorted..." Says who? This needs to be cited. Bits and pieces always come together given time.

How many different versions of the bible are there?

Quote: Originally Posted by Murphy View Post

"...unknown to us and unknown to each other..." So? Archaeologists make new finds regularly. What is unknown or not understood today, may have an explanation tomorrow.

They could also find evidence that Scientology is real.
 
WLDB
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post


Since the OT in the 1611KJV was translated by Jews in Israel does he realize he is mocking Jews and their ability to keep the story straight? (after getting it back into perfect condition by Daniel and a few friends while in exile in Babylon)

He is referring to more than just the OT and didn't specifically mention the KJV specifically, so no he isn't mocking Jews at all. Perhaps he is mocking some people who happened to be Jews but thats about it.
 
Cliffy
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

"...disjointed documents, composed...distorted..."

Since the OT in the 1611KJV was translated by Jews in Israel does he realize he is mocking Jews and their ability to keep the story straight? (after getting it back into perfect condition by Daniel and a few friends while in exile in Babylon)

The OT was not even written until captivity in Babylon. Before that it was just a collection of oral traditions. The NT was not put together until 300+ years after the supposed death of Jesus. Before that there were hundreds of Christian writings. Most didn't make it into the final draft because they did not suit Constantin's political agenda.

There are literally thousands of different interpretations of the literal meanings of the bible. I have personally spoken to dozens of people who have had "divinely inspired" interpretations of the literal meanings of many passages of the bible. All have been of the evangelical persuasion. But you Htz take the cake.
 
pgs
+1
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

The OT was not even written until captivity in Babylon. Before that it was just a collection of oral traditions. The NT was not put together until 300+ years after the supposed death of Jesus. Before that there were hundreds of Christian writings. Most didn't make it into the final draft because they did not suit Constantin's political agenda.

There are literally thousands of different interpretations of the literal meanings of the bible. I have personally spoken to dozens of people who have had "divinely inspired" interpretations of the literal meanings of many passages of the bible. All have been of the evangelical persuasion. But you Htz take the cake.

Yup and I wonder how accurate your history of the extinct tribe is .
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by pgs View Post

Yup and I wonder how accurate your history of the extinct tribe is .

Because if his history is inaccurate, that makes your bible accurate.
 
captain morgan
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Strange and illogical belief in the literal interpretation of this collection of revised, mistranslated, misinterpreted and misunderstood book that dozens of studies show that Dawkins is right. Thousands of additions and omissions have occurred since it was first put together. What is weird is that people still believe it is literal truth.

How do you (or Dawkins) know what the accurate interpretation/translation, etc is such that you are capable of making this broad-based statement?


Quote: Originally Posted by pgs View Post

Yup and I wonder how accurate your history of the extinct tribe is .


Funny how that works, eh?
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

Funny how that works, eh?

What, attacking the other guy to try to deflect attention from the fact that your own position is indefensible?
 
petros
#18
Why do atheists need a front man and iconography?



Identity issues?
 
Twila
#19
Bible mistranslated? Seems one research group believes that is the case

News article on the research
Researchers Prove Bible Grossly Mistranslated - CNN iReport

The group that did the research
The Chronicle Project .org - Home
 
petros
#20
Except for the untranslated Hebrew and Greek texts?
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Why do atheists need a front man and iconography?

Identity issues?

1. Who says they do?

2. If so, probably for the same reasons many Christians do.
 
petros
#22
Apparently those who need a frontman and his iconography do. If you need somebody else to argue your point, it's not your point.
 
Twila
#23
Who's the frontman?
 
petros
+1
#24
Who is the guy you're quoting who is unaware or deliberately misinformed you of translation issues.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Apparently those who need a frontman and his iconography do. If you need somebody else to argue your point, it's not your point.

And how many are those? What's your sample size? Your methodology?
 
Twila
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Who is the guy you're quoting who is unaware or deliberately misinformed you of translation issues.

Who said he was the frontman? Was a vote held that I missed? Cause I'd have voted for Neil DeGrasse Tyson or possibly Daniel Dennett. Maybe even Stephen Hawking...There are just so many possibilities to choose from...
 
petros
#27
So why did you quote this putz and his misinformation?
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

So why did you quote this putz and his misinformation?

Maybe she was trying to provoke an inaccurate and unsupported conclusion from an alleged scientist.

If so, it worked a rare treat!
 
Nuggler
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by Twila View Post

Can this quote be logically and factually refuted?


Why refute the truth
 
petros
#30
It's the truth or Dawkin's truth?
 

Similar Threads

3
Quote of the day
by SwitSof | Jul 9th, 2007