# Response to David Cross's Quote Re: the Bible **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 23, 2015, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501 "2015-10-23T02:34:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/41 "2015-10-24T07:22:01Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Oh… Well, in that case… > > That’s really dumb. We all spend a lot of time discussing things that don’t exist: we discuss fictional characters from books, TV, and movies. We have debates over the Star Trek Transporter. (And whether .999… = 1) We play poker and bridge – for money! We scan online porn. Has anyone published the Nitpickers Guide to the Bible? Oh, wait - nearly every theology book ever published. 🙂 **note** that was a joke. You do not need to post a list of theology books which ae not Nitpickers’ Guides to the Bible. ---
**Author:** ![B.Serum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/b.serum/32/14266_2.png) [@B.Serum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/B.Serum)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 10:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/42 "2015-10-24T10:00:27Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m amazed at how much time atheists like to comment on God and religion. They sure do spend a lot of time on something they absolutely do not believe in. Imagine living in a modern society dominated by people prone to justifying cruel or contemptuous behavior based solely on arbitrary interpretations of far-fetched literature of a bronze-age nomadic desert culture. Such a bizarre predicament has a way of preoccupying one’s life, especially when one is unable to escape it. ---
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/43 "2015-10-24T17:23:20Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Agreed in all respects. > > It’s also worth noting that Cross, in the opening quote, overstates the facts dramatically. It didn’t quite come about that way. There are lots and lots of excellent books about the origin of the Bible, and the facts are fascinating. The various manuscripts that were assembled into the Torah – why we have two different tellings of creation, Adam and Eve, the Flood, etc. – is, in itself, one of the great mysteries of history. I know Cross was joking, and that 'splaining kills the funny, but he wasn’t as far off the mark as you might think. At least according to New Testament scholar [Bart Ehrman](http://www.bartdehrman.com/misquoting-jesus-the-story-behind-who-changed-the-bible-and-why/), who points out that in all the ancient manuscripts we have, there are more variations than there are words in the whole New Testament. (Although the majority of them are simply what we now call typos.) But there are several variant readings that affect the meaning of the verse, and point to very different theological interpretations. [The Johannine Comma](http://www.bible-researcher.com/comma.html), for example, which is an extra line or two added to 1 John 5:7-8, that are the only scriptural support for the Trinity. The implication is that they were added for that purpose. Given the fact that the earliest Christian writings that became the NT were copied by amateur rather than professional scribes, and that the earliest actual documents that we possess are copies of copies of copies of copies, with all the opportunity for errors and revisions that that affords, Cross’s joke is not as exaggerated as it seems. (And I’ve just slain about every bit of humor it held.) ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/44 "2015-10-24T18:50:59Z")
> [@Aquadementia](#): > > Men could say the same about women’s bodies but mansplaing is looked down on. Women and their bodies are right here to speak for themselves. Not the same thing as interpreting millennia of writings and their journeys to modern language and editions. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/45 "2015-10-24T18:57:30Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > As an atheist, here’s how I’d answer – “Because religion is fascinating and hugely important in the world. It’s had huge impacts on human history and continues to do so. It’s a big influence in most people’s lives. It’s almost an endlessly fascinating topic.” Or… “We’ll shut up when you do.” ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/46 "2015-10-24T18:58:13Z")
When you quote it out of context, to someone who probably has no idea who David Cross is, they’re going to take you literally. And what he said is factually wrong. The books that became the Bible may have been edited as they were passed down. But all translations try to go back to the original source as best they can. They do not edit the translation and then translate the translation. The Bible we have today is as close as we can get to the original given the data we have. That’s not at all like the game of Telephone. As for what she said, I think you guys are ignoring the context. She’s responding to a post that appears to be about mocking the religion of others. On Facebook, where you’re ostensibly talking to your friends. And apparently, not only to friends who aren’t literalist Christians. Of course atheists can be fascinated by religion. Of course they can learn about it to understand the religious people around them. But it is indeed strange that many atheists spend more time mocking religion that most religious people spend actually talking about their religion. Essentially, she’s mocking you (via proxy of “atheists”) because she perceives your post as mocking her via proxy of “Christians.”) So my response would be something along the lines of “Oh, that’s a joke I find funny. I’m not saying anything bad about Christians. I don’t like it when Christians mock atheists, so I’d be a hypocrite to mock Christians.” ---
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/47 "2015-10-24T19:59:27Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > When you quote it out of context, to someone who probably has no idea who David Cross is, they’re going to take you literally. And what he said is factually wrong. The books that became the Bible may have been edited as they were passed down. But all translations try to go back to the original source as best they can. They do not edit the translation and then translate the translation. The Bible we have today is as close as we can get to the original given the data we have. That’s not at all like the game of Telephone. But that’s the serious point behind the joke - we don’t _have_ the originals. Nor the copies of the originals, nor the copies of copies. Yeah, modern translations - _some_ modern translations - try to get back to the earliest sources we have. But we really don’t know what those originals were. And it’s unquestionable that later translators and copiers of the Bible added and subtracted from the text; see my comment about the Johannine Comma in post #43. Or the different ways that (some) Protestants and Catholics number the Ten Commandments. Or even exclude whole books from the canon. The Bible is a human document that has been copied and recopied, printed and reprinted, translated and retranslated into hundreds of languages, for three thousand years. _Of course_ it’s been altered; it’s almost impossible for it not to have been. So yeah, it’s fair to compare it to a game of telephone. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/48 "2015-10-24T20:01:35Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > When you quote it out of context, to someone who probably has no idea who David Cross is, they’re going to take you literally. And what he said is factually wrong. The books that became the Bible may have been edited as they were passed down. But all translations try to go back to the original source as best they can. They do not edit the translation and then translate the translation. The Bible we have today is as close as we can get to the original given the data we have. That’s not at all like the game of Telephone. > > As for what she said, I think you guys are ignoring the context. She’s responding to a post that appears to be about mocking the religion of others. On Facebook, where you’re ostensibly talking to your friends. And apparently, not only to friends who aren’t literalist Christians. > > Of course atheists can be fascinated by religion. Of course they can learn about it to understand the religious people around them. But it is indeed strange that many atheists spend more time mocking religion that most religious people spend actually talking about their religion. > > Essentially, she’s mocking you (via proxy of “atheists”) because she perceives your post as mocking her via proxy of “Christians.”) > > So my response would be something along the lines of “Oh, that’s a joke I find funny. I’m not saying anything bad about Christians. I don’t like it when Christians mock atheists, so I’d be a hypocrite to mock Christians.” _That’s_ what you got from her friend’s comment? That she was playfully teasing back? ---
**Author:** ![Aquadementia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aquadementia/32/555_2.png) [@Aquadementia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aquadementia)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/49 "2015-10-24T20:11:38Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > You should agree with her, and tell her how sick and tired you are of your long, cross-country drives where you can get nothing on your AM radio except atheists trying to raise money by assuring donors that through their generosity, they will not get to heaven. You are totally right about how tiresome it is the hear atheist constantly badger you for money on the radio but calling new episodes of “Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me” heaven is a little much. I mean it’s good, but without Paula Poundstone… > [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Women and their bodies are right here to speak for themselves. Not the same thing as interpreting millennia of writings and their journeys to modern language and editions. Well, put it this way, I may not spend a whole lot of time thinking about feminism but I think I know a little bit more about it then people that devote their lives to it, sweetie. ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/50 "2015-10-24T20:48:09Z")
“given to kings for them to take their favorite parts out” I presume that refers to James I of England and Ireland and VI of Scotland? Why would the Pope work on the famously Protestant KJV? Otherwise, a subset of religion believes that it is the True Work of God™, but many treat it as a good moral guide but not 100% true. Your mistake (you and your friend) is to make discussion on Facebook. Or politics. Or conspiracy theories. Or cat pictures. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2015, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/51 "2015-10-24T22:51:00Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > When you quote it out of context, to someone who probably has no idea who David Cross is, they’re going to take you literally. And what he said is factually wrong. I never heard of Cross before, still thought it was funny and there being some truth to it, but assumed it may have come from a comedian, which turned out to be the case. Who’s next for their criticism of the bible and/or of Christians, George Carlin? Think he needs a fact check too? > [@BigT](#): > > The books that became the Bible may have been edited as they were passed down. {snip} May? The bible is probably the most edited book in history. There are thousands of interpolations that scholars have identified through additions, deletions, some by honest mistake, but many deliberately. And there is no such thing as an original bible. Even the Jews borrowed heavily, with many credible scholars subscribing to the JEPD documentary hypothesis for the Pentateuch and this spanned centuries in time to say nothing for the rest of it. > [@BigT](#): > > Of course atheists can be fascinated by religion. Of course they can learn about it to understand the religious people around them. But it is indeed strange that many atheists spend more time mocking religion that most religious people spend actually talking about their religion. I realize judging from how many false belief systems there are, most people prefer to be deceived. Don’t bother them too much, but there is certainly nothing wrong if someone enjoys talking and making arguments for one side or the other either especially on this board and other outlets. Perhaps why atheist don’t have any problem talking about it, is because they find their arguments and reasoning the most sound, while religious folks, not so much, and prefer to be surrounded only by like-minded individuals. The internet has let many a cat out of the bag, and I don’t think some religious folk are quite ready to accept anything but the traditional way the bible has always been passed down to them. Maybe the internet isn’t for them, but should reconsider staying at home and going to the church that still gives them that old-time religion. > [@BigT](#): > > So my response would be something along the lines of “Oh, that’s a joke I find funny. I’m not saying anything bad about Christians. I don’t like it when Christians mock atheists, so I’d be a hypocrite to mock Christians.” Shall we all hold our tongue for fear of offending some superstitious soul? I’ll tell the person to please point out where I have erred, I can assure I’m not offended by a good argument, quite the contrary, I’d very much appreciate it, and if I really flubbed up and wouldn’t listen to logic no matter how much the facts were stacked against my argument, I could probably use a certain amount of ridicule too since nothing else was getting through. ---
**Author:** ![mistymage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mistymage/32/459_2.png) [@mistymage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mistymage)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2015, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/52 "2015-10-25T20:28:02Z")
> [@razncain](#): > > Who’s next for their criticism of the bible and/or of Christians, George Carlin? Think he needs a fact check too? He’s dead, Jim. And that’s a fact, Jack. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/53 "2015-10-26T03:07:02Z")
> [@mistymage](#): > > He’s dead, Jim. And that’s a fact, Jack. [Doesn’t slow down some of the humor impaired.](http://www.soulwinning.info/fr/atheist/george_carlin.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/54 "2015-10-26T03:31:15Z")
It’s my impression - correct me if I’m wrong - that all books of the Bible are currently extant in their probable original composed language - Hebrew and Aramaic for the OT, Greek for the NT. So while I understand where he got all those “retranslates” and “re-retranslates” from (KJV, presumably), at this point it’s pretty much for humour value only. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/55 "2015-10-26T03:56:40Z")
The “documentary hypothesis,” which has much support, suggests that the Pentateuch, plus Judges, Kings, Chronicles, and a few others, are, in fact, very heavily edited, an assembly of four or more original documents. This is pretty much the prevailing view, nowadays (although, of course, heavily resisted by certain varieties of literalists.) The Gospels and epistles, not so much. They don’t seem to be the result of overt tinkering. **Slow Moving Vehicle** pointed to one or two suspicious bits that might have been revised. ---
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/56 "2015-10-26T04:28:49Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > It’s my impression - correct me if I’m wrong - that all books of the Bible are currently extant in their probable original composed language - Hebrew and Aramaic for the OT, Greek for the NT. So while I understand where he got all those “retranslates” and “re-retranslates” from (KJV, presumably), at this point it’s pretty much for humour value only. Originally composed _language_, yes - originally composed texts, not so much. But I assumed Cross was talking about the Bible in English, which has been translated from Hebrew and Greek to Greek, then from Greek to Latin, then from Latin to English, then retranslated directly from Greek, then retranslated from Greek but with bits from the Latin version and also considering other English translations, then retranslated directly from Hebrew… ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/57 "2015-10-26T07:07:34Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > When you quote it out of context, to someone who probably has no idea who David Cross is, they’re going to take you literally. And what he said is factually wrong. The books that became the Bible may have been edited as they were passed down. But all translations try to go back to the original source as best they can. They do not edit the translation and then translate the translation. The Bible we have today is as close as we can get to the original given the data we have. That’s not at all like the game of Telephone. Huh? I thought that was exactly how the game of Telephone is played? Each person passes on the message as best they can but the errors nonetheless accumulate till the message is barely recognisable. Do you play it some other way? ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/58 "2015-10-26T07:49:12Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > Originally composed _language_, yes - originally composed texts, not so much. > > But I assumed Cross was talking about the Bible in English, which has been translated from Hebrew and Greek to Greek, then from Greek to Latin, then from Latin to English, then retranslated directly from Greek, then retranslated from Greek but with bits from the Latin version and also considering other English translations, then retranslated directly from Hebrew… Yeah, and all the cross-checking that this implies is the _exact opposite_ of Telephone, where the whole point is that Person 5 never gets a chance to ask Person 1 what their message was. If every Telephone player heard from all the previous players one after the other before passing on the message, it’d be a pretty easy game. ---
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/59 "2015-10-26T11:25:18Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > Yeah, and all the cross-checking that this implies is the _exact opposite_ of Telephone, where the whole point is that Person 5 never gets a chance to ask Person 1 what their message was. > > If every Telephone player heard from all the previous players one after the other before passing on the message, it’d be a pretty easy game. Um, no. Because by the time the message the message gets to Person 5, Person 1 has buggered off to go play _Grand Theft Auto_. Your metaphor assumes we can go back to the original texts and check our modern translations against them. And indeed we can. But our “original” texts _themselves_ are five or six iterations removed from the very first versions of the writings. (I’m talking New Testament, here.) And when we go back to those versions, we find many many variants. To put it in terms of a game of Telephone, it’s as if Person 1 told four people, and they each told seven, and those seven each told three, and the three each told eight, and so on. The closets we can get is to ask each of the eight what the message was. And they each report it a little differently. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/60 "2015-10-26T11:38:52Z")
Dan Brown says the Emperor Constantine completely re-wrote the Bible, and that’s good enough for David Cross. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501.md?page=4)