# 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:** 14\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![jz78817](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jz78817/32/1028_2.png) [@jz78817](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jz78817)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/61 "2015-10-26T11:52:25Z")
> [@Hazle\_Weatherfield](#): > > I posted this quote on FaceBook and a friend responded: > 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. > > Her comment makes me squint really hard. How would you respond to her response. Sorry if this is in the wrong forum. I haven’t been here in awhile. Thank you. “Because there are a hell of a lot of people who are trying to _make_ me live by it whether I want to or not.” ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/62 "2015-10-26T12:52:22Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Dan Brown says the Emperor Constantine completely re-wrote the Bible, and that’s good enough for David Cross. At any rate, David Cross got his information from someone, who got it from someone else, who got it from somewhere else… And we’re just taking the OP’s word for it that that’s what he posted that Cross said. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/63 "2015-10-26T15:07:00Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > 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. And add in the fact that each telling is done years after the previous telling. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/64 "2015-10-26T15:09:04Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Dan Brown says the Emperor Constantine completely re-wrote the Bible, and that’s good enough for David Cross. Where did you get this info from, that this is where David Cross got the idea the Bible being rewritten? edited to add: And where does Dan Brown ever say that to begin with? ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/65 "2015-10-26T17:00:55Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > I can think of a few responses: > > Firstly, she’s being sly, implying something without wanting to say it, so my standard response in that case is “Your point being?” Make her come into the open. > > Secondly, you could go more directly to the heart of the matter; “Christians sure do spend a lot of time forcing their religion and religious mores on those who absolutely do not believe in them” > > Thirdly you could comment on her obvious _ad hom_: “Why is it a problem for you that atheists comment? Is Cross’s analysis wrong or far too close to the truth?” Fourthly, you could quit trying to[teach a pig to sing](http://www.gurteen.com/gurteen/gurteen.nsf/id/L004143/). If she believes that the bible is inerrant there is nothing you are going to say that will convince him otherwise. You can respond if you enjoy squabbling for the sake of squabbling (which given that you’re here in the dope you probably do ;)), but otherwise it’s probably best just to ignore her response and get on with your life. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/66 "2015-10-26T18:50:21Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Yes. Cross is a comedian, not a Biblical scholar. He’s going for laughs, not accuracy. Isn’t “comedy” supposed to be “funny”? ---
**Author:** ![Your\_Great\_Darsh\_Face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ac8455/32.png) [@Your\_Great\_Darsh\_Face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Your_Great_Darsh_Face)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/67 "2015-10-26T19:04:44Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Fourthly, you could quit trying to[teach a pig to sing](http://www.gurteen.com/gurteen/gurteen.nsf/id/L004143/). If she believes that the bible is inerrant there is nothing you are going to say that will convince him otherwise. You can respond if you enjoy squabbling for the sake of squabbling (which given that you’re here in the dope you probably do ;)), but otherwise it’s probably best just to ignore her response and get on with your life. You could maybe get her to quit casting her [pearls before swine](http://biblehub.com/matthew/7-6.htm), while we’re on the porcine metaphors. People who want to snark on Christianity aren’t going to be reasoned out of it. ---
**Author:** ![tullsterx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tullsterx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tullsterx)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/68 "2015-10-26T19:39:43Z")
Have a complete set of autographs been found? Those of you that say he is wrong about the number of translations can’t be sure about that until the all of the autographs are found. Plus you can’t be sure about every book. Genesis? And he’s practicing comedic exaggeration but is basically correct. You need to tell your friend “Cause it’s funny.” ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/69 "2015-10-26T19:44:12Z")
> [@Your\_Great\_Darsh\_Face](#): > > You could maybe get her to quit casting her [pearls before swine](http://biblehub.com/matthew/7-6.htm), while we’re on the porcine metaphors. People who want to snark on Christianity aren’t going to be reasoned out of it. Just once, Christians could try it for a change. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/70 "2015-10-26T19:56:03Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Isn’t “comedy” supposed to be “funny”? Although I am totally non-religious I am far to the right of David Cross. I think he’s hilarious. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2015, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/71 "2015-10-26T20:45:50Z")
> [@razncain](#): > > Haven’t kept up with the latest, so did some quick search engines, and got mixed reviews, with one putting it succinctly, “depends which archaeologist you are asking.” How concrete is this? > **[David](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David#Archaeology)** > > (Italics indicate a disputedreign or non-royal title) > David (/ˈdeɪvɪd/; Biblical Hebrew: דָּוִד‎, romanized: Dāwīḏ, "beloved one")\[a\] was a king of ancient Israel and Judah and the third king of the United Monarchy, according to the Hebrew Bible and Old Testament. > According to Jewish works such as the Seder Olam Rabbah, Seder Olam Zutta, and Sefer ha-Qabbalah (all written over a thousand years later), David ascended the throne as the king of Judah in 885 BCE. The Tel Dan stele, an Aramaic-i... \*Two archaeological finds, the Tel Dan Stele and the Mesha Stele, have direct bearing on the question of the existence of a historical David. The first of these is an Aramean victory stele (inscribed stone) discovered in 1993 at Tel Dan and dated c. 850–835 BCE: it contains the phrase ביתדוד (bytdwd), which has been interpreted as “House of David”.[22] The Mesha Stele from Moab, dating from approximately the same period, may also contain the name David in line 12, where the interpretation is uncertain, and in line 31, where one destroyed letter must be supplied, but apparently no other letter produces a word that makes sense in the context.[23] … In December 2014, archaeologists from Mississippi State University announced the discovery of six bullae which suggests that some type of government activity was being conducted in the 10th century, and thus support the existence of David.[28] In 2015 a 10-year-old Russian volunteer at Jerusalem’s Temple Mount Sifting Project found a seal from the time of King David in the 10th century BCE.[29]\* ---
**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 27, 2015, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/72 "2015-10-27T01:12:03Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > 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. You’re talking _New_ Testament? Well - respect, I guess, that you’re not afraid to go where your argument’s weakest. But what your saying is very much a political position - and one that only applies to the first four books of the NT, at that. Especially if you’re going to combine “translate re-translate edit re-edit” etc etc with “composed 30 to 90 years after the event”. If the Gospel of John, frex, was written 90 years after the event then _shrug_ game over, that’s the age of the oldest John manuscript we have. No editing, no translating. (I make no statement here about what happened BEFORE it was written, how it came to be written, or who it was written by - that’s very much a political issue, and probably not in scope of this discussion). No dead languages involved. You’d be on firmer ground if you were going JEDP hypothesis. But even there - if you go back to my first post you’ll note that I specifically referred to _translations_ and _languages_. I’m not really going to get into a “how many times were parts of the Bible _edited_” argument here, not least because when you head back to OT territory the answer to that question is basically unknowable. ---
**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 27, 2015, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/73 "2015-10-27T03:43:21Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > You’re talking _New_ Testament? Well - respect, I guess, that you’re not afraid to go where your argument’s weakest. But what your saying is very much a political position - and one that only applies to the first four books of the NT, at that. Especially if you’re going to combine “translate re-translate edit re-edit” etc etc with “composed 30 to 90 years after the event”. If the Gospel of John, frex, was written 90 years after the event then _shrug_ game over, that’s the age of the oldest John manuscript we have. No editing, no translating. (I make no statement here about what happened BEFORE it was written, how it came to be written, or who it was written by - that’s very much a political issue, and probably not in scope of this discussion). No dead languages involved. > > You’d be on firmer ground if you were going JEDP hypothesis. But even there - if you go back to my first post you’ll note that I specifically referred to _translations_ and _languages_. I’m not really going to get into a “how many times were parts of the Bible _edited_” argument here, not least because when you head back to OT territory the answer to that question is basically unknowable. Not sure I’m following your point. It’s not “political” to say that we cannot get closer to the original texts of the Gospels - _and_ Acts, and _the_ epistles - than copies of copies of copies of copies. Your example about John, for instance - yes, scholars think that the Gospel of John was written around 90 C.E. But the very earliest sample of John that we have - the very earliest sample of any NT text, as it happens - is the [P52 fragment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rylands_Library_Papyrus_P52), a little 3 1/2" x 2 1/2" scrap of papyrus that contains parts of seven lines of John 18:31-33 on the front, and parts of seven lines of vss 37-38 on the back. It might date as early as 117 CE. Or it might date to early third century. As far as “editing”, well, did you see my earlier post about the [Johannine Comma](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comma_Johanneum&redirect=no)? That’s lines from 1 John (not one of the first four books of the NT, note) that are the only Scriptural support for the doctrine of the Trinity: [QUOTE=The King James Bible] 7.For there are three that bear record _in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8. And there are three that bear witness in earth,_ the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. [/QUOTE] Thing is, those lines I italicized? They don’t actually show up in any very early texts of the writing. They don’t appear, in fact, until the seventh century. There are other examples, too. Hebrews 2:9 is usually translated: [QUOTE=Revised Standard Version] But we see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for every one. [/QUOTE] . But some texts say that rather than dying “by the grace of God”, Jesus died “apart from God”. The two phrases are similar in Greek, but lend themselves to very different theological interpretation. So which is the original? We dunno; an argument can be made for each. There is plenty of textual evidence for the NT, but the fact is, to quote Bart Ehrman: > [@](#): > > “It is true, of course, that the New Testament is abundantly attested in the manuscripts produced through the ages, but most of these manuscripts are many centuries removed from the originals, and none of them perfectly accurate. They all contain mistakes - altogether many thousands of mistakes. It is not an easy task to reconstruct the original words of the New Testament…” ---
**Author:** ![rdub](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rdub/32/18452_2.png) [@rdub](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rdub)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2025, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501/74 "2025-02-03T22:15:12Z")
Well religious people MAINLY christians won’t stfu so why should we? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/response-to-david-crosss-quote-re-the-bible/735501.md?page=3)