SomeBODIEShero: @sapparo

So what? If I went up to my friend tomorrow and killed him for a hulcrux, does that automatically take Harry Potter of the best sellers list?

What relevance does the Bestsellers list have to do with the distribution of texts that condone violence? What relevance does such a list have to do with the merit of a book?

SomeBODIEShero: And considering it has sold more copies than any other book on the planet, kinda suggests its valuable in some way.

The bible is the world's most stolen book. What are we to infer from that?

SomeBODIEShero: The contents of the bible have had an inestimable impact on world culture (especially Western)

It has certainly been responsible for many deaths.

SomeBODIEShero: and so much so some of our time's "Greatest writers" have taken influence from the bible for their famous worksThis list includes authors such as the anonymous writer of Beowulf, the Arthurian romances of Chrétien de Troyes, John Milton, Charles Dickens, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Leo Tolstoy, Charlotte Bronte, Herman Melville, Mark Twain, Lord Byron, John Steinbeck, Ernest Hemingway, Toni Morrison, and William Faulkner. Even Shakespeare "uses a staggering 1,300 biblical allusions throughout his plays, according to a study by Naseeb Shaheen."

You make it sound like it is surprising that the bible is a often-cited book, even though for much of history, most people could not read, and the only literature they would have heard would have been from the bible if anything, and most likely not even in their own language. If they could read, they were still actively discouraged from reading the bible for most of the history of Christianity, and yet if they did read any book, that book would have been the bible.

"Anyway, if we can't even agree that the Bible is a great piece of literature, I'm afraid our conversation can stop here. No way anyone will convince you it's full of truth on top of that."

Well there are objective standards for truth claims, and the claim it is great literature can be examined objectively as well. I think if you had said it contains some great literature I might have baulked at even that, but to claim it is great literature without any qualifying remarks is manifestly absurd. Seriously there are some passages that only copious amounts of coffee and cocaine could get you through. There are also a great many passages that condone and even endorse things like ethnic cleansing and sex trafficking female prisoners if they are virgins, buying and owning slaves etc etc etc.

Now I know you're going to say the repugnant passages don't negate it being written well, but it not written well in many places, and it is impossible to ignore that it has been offered as a moral tome from a perfectly moral deity. So I can only judge it in that context, it is neither great literature or a moral guide.

The truth of it's claims, many of which are now been shown to be objectively and absurdly false, can only be established through sufficient objective evidence.

Can you demonstrate any objective evidence that a deity exists? As if you cannot that is far more of a barrier to discussing such unevidenced beliefs than the quality of literature in the bible.

SomeBODIEShero: This is exactly the response I would expect from someone with a bias against religion.

Are you saying that if a person is opposed to genocide, slavery, rape, torture etc. they have a bias against religion?

@EverybodiesBODIEsZero

Your expectations have no relevance, and your unevidenced and fallacious accusation of bias is risible.

"I imagine you agree with me, and are just to cowardly to admit in public that you believe the Bible to be great literature."

What a particularly stupid claim, and this is pretty weak trolling even by theistic standards. Nor do I think a keyboard warrior like you should really be bandying words like coward around. Why are theists incapable of being disagreed with without sulking, and throwing tantrums? It's as if theists think atheists are not entitled to an opinion, what an arrogant myopic worldview you have.

@ SomeBODIEShero

Unless you want us to think the jesus dude, is angry please specify who you are replying to in future.

The forums are confusing unless you follow the conventions...i.e use @ and respondents name and then maybe the quote from the post you want to reply to.

Makes life so much easier. Even for insulting pricks like you.

@ Nobody's Hero

OK Folks! Listen up. We have found another Religious Absolutist who makes a neutron star look as fluffy as a marshmellow.

Angry? Never. Just adamantly opposed to religion. Oh, and the gullible ones who believe its lies.

There is no such thing as an average believer. You are either a theist or an atheist. In the case of being a theist, those are most harmful and toxic persons to ever exist. Much like yourself. Hate to tell you this, but religion is on its way out. Eventually, the human species will ascend to where it was meant to be now if it had not been for religion's absolutely abhorrent and frightful suppression of the human species for 800 years. Keep supporting the most harmful and toxic bullshit and horse hoowhee created by megalomaniacal psychotic sociapaths.

And what is it that said about the truth? "It cuts deeply." Thus, it must hurt as is proof of you being butt-hurt.

Here is a list of how one can spot a Religious Absolutist and they only need match just ONE:

1. They LIE without ever thinking about the veracity of their statement.
2. They LIE without ever providing any evidence of their statement.
3. They LIE by believing inexorably everything they state, regardless of how inaccurate.
4. They LIE by being absolute in their statements (either I believe you or I am worthless scum).
5. They LIE by using beguiling dialectical semantics.
6. They LIE by using distorted and perverted data.
7. They LIE by creating irrational excuses.
8. They LIE by utilizing whiney-ass pleas.
9. They LIE by not realizing why they need to defend their beliefs.
10. They LIE by utilizing presupposed conclusions with no evidence.
11. They LIE by making accusations they never apologize for even when they are proven wrong.
12. They LIE by changing the subject.
13. They LIE by taking text out of context and twisting and perverting said text to fit their presupposed confirmation bias.
14. They LIE by shifting the burden of proof.

So far, you have hit on seven. Figure out which.

rmfr