My reactions to those studies made me stop calling myself a xian, because I really wasn’t anymore; I was sort of a neo-pagan/deist/sometimes agnostic. I considered myself “spiritual” as opposed to “religious.”

And then I moved on out of all that altogether!

This is why scientists use peer review to ensure that their conclusions are not the results of bias.

So basically what this Claude Mariottini ass is saying is that only people that believe something is true and correctly interpret the “information” that “proves” that it is true.

xians are always confused by the word “interpret”. If they meant “interpret” to understand the historical and social context of the various writers, and maybe the view of a few particular authors, then atheists are interested and have studied the bible.

But they mean “interpret” to be to understand the supposed purpose of a hypothetical supreme being. Then there is no interest in it because there is nothing to “interpret. One can’t interpret something that doesn’t exist.

As to the Iliad, it is well worth reading Robert Graves, “The Greek Myths”. He gives many of the contradictions in the text and Greek mythology in general, especially what the various gods with their various names were supposed to represent.He also makes the links with gods from other religions.

A good companion volume by Graves is “The Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis”, which was in collaboration with Raphael Patai. They do the same analysis.

Graves often uses the introduction to a topic, “Some say ….”, which about sums it up.

As the authors use many sources, including Hebrew Talmud and Midrash, there are many juicy additions to biblical stories.

The story of Lilith and Eve is amusing.

http://www.piney.com/ApocLilith.html

http://www.piney.com/ApocAdHelpM.html

From the introduction about Genesis writers,

“In both case the authors included much mythical material, because myth has always as a succinct validation of puzzling laws, rites, and social customs.”

As to historical context, they say,

“These prophets saw that Israel’s sole hope of national independence lay in an authoritarian monotheism, and ceaselessly declaimed against goddess-worship in the Canaanite sacred groves.”

…

“Hebrew myths are mainly national charters: the myth of Abraham for the possession of Canaan, and for patrilocal marriage; the myth of Jacob for Israel’s status as a chosen people; the myth of Ham for the owning of Canaanite slaves.”

The decoder ring necessary to interpret the Buy-Bull in an acceptable manner- one that lives up to the expectations of those like Mariottini, is quite common. It’s called insanity and, though it may range from mere eccentricity to full-blown psychosis, it’s all just different levels of crazy.

So, how can strident atheists interpret the Bible when they do not believe in God, deny the possibility of revelation, reject the concept of inspiration, do not believe in divine intervention, faith, prayer, the possibility of miracles, or the concept of divine justice?

As you say, it’s indeed devoid of actual content. It’s an appeal to wonder, all-rightie.
Simplest reply: I used to believe in all of that.
That changed when I did the homework.
Small wonder the NT cautions against the ‘wicked reasonings’.
Because it flails against all reason.