Does the Bible call Atheists fools?

[Jester]

It came up in another thread that there was some disagreement over the translation of Psalm 53:1, which (in clasic King James) is:

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

It has been presented (by myself), that "There is no God." should be translated as "No, God." My reasons for doing so will be listed in the first response.

The official question, then: What is the most accurate translation of this verse?

[Jester]

I know this isn't quite dead-on the topic, but perhaps it is pertinent that a pastor once pointed out to me that the "there is" is added into that scripture for the English translations. It is arguable that the actual scripture is "a fool says in his heart 'no, God'".

1. Have you checked up on this? You have to either acknowledge that your pastor is lying, or every bible - except mine - is lying.

The trouble with this passage, as it’s been explained to me, is that this line can be translated either way, and that English translators have apparently been unanimous about the particular interpretation. Even the pastor that argued this pointed out that there is no translation that actually removes the “there is�, but this argument is easy to confirm if you can check the Hebrew in Strong’s dictionaries.
The Hebrew word "�ין" is generally translated as “no� or “not�. It is a negation that can simply mean no, but can also mean “does not exist�. As such, both translations are grammatically correct. As to which one is meaningfully accurate:

The reason why I believed the pastor, other than that he seemed to have no reason to be lying, was that the standard translation doesn’t make historical sense. Atheism didn’t exist at the time of writing. Unless we’re considering the idea that God inspired the writer to comment on a future belief (which doesn’t strike me as true at all), then the translation I pointed out makes much more sense.

2. Since I don't follow the heretical bible most people do, my bible doesn't say this.

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying here.

3. So, I checked the Modern Xian's Bible. It doesn't say "fool". Quote below.

I may just be misunderstanding, but perhaps there’s some confusion about which verse we’re discussing? The reference is Psalm 53:1.
If, however, you were making the point that there are other places in the Bible where people are referred to as being disobedient to God without being specifically referred to as fools, I’ll agree. I would add, however, that the implication that this is a foolish act would be implicit in such cases.

4. This is a Psalm: a song. Has anyone wondered what kind of nuts wrote this?

Many people have wondered a great deal about who wrote each section of the Bible. More to your point, I’d say that all people are a bit nutty, but that this is not particularly so. Poems and songs are not logical dissertations, the images are not supposed to be practical.

If your bible says something different, then you have the wrong bible.

My Bible is a different translation, of course, but I’ve checked enough to know that it’s not any more “wrong� than any translation.

I also might add that the entire Psalm calls EVERYONE foolish and stupid.

Indeed it does. The Bible maintains that no one follows God as we should, and any comment talking about those who foolishly rebel against God specifically references “believers� and “unbelievers� alike.

Let me translate: God looked down on the children of men and didn't see one person understand and seek God. Not one.

I agree.

It's just a passage from a hideous book that ugly people with menial minds quote because they lack so much other power over their own lives. They hide behind the authority of their heretical book - that was made by fools (as proven by the Psalm) and lash out at people who don't want to believe in their evil Santa.

Be careful here, this is debating a group of people, rather than the issue.

[Goat]

I know this isn't quite dead-on the topic, but perhaps it is pertinent that a pastor once pointed out to me that the "there is" is added into that scripture for the English translations. It is arguable that the actual scripture is "a fool says in his heart 'no, God'".

1. Have you checked up on this? You have to either acknowledge that your pastor is lying, or every bible - except mine - is lying.

The trouble with this passage, as it’s been explained to me, is that this line can be translated either way, and that English translators have apparently been unanimous about the particular interpretation. Even the pastor that argued this pointed out that there is no translation that actually removes the “there is�, but this argument is easy to confirm if you can check the Hebrew in Strong’s dictionaries.
The Hebrew word "�ין" is generally translated as “no� or “not�. It is a negation that can simply mean no, but can also mean “does not exist�. As such, both translations are grammatically correct. As to which one is meaningfully accurate:

The reason why I believed the pastor, other than that he seemed to have no reason to be lying, was that the standard translation doesn’t make historical sense. Atheism didn’t exist at the time of writing. Unless we’re considering the idea that God inspired the writer to comment on a future belief (which doesn’t strike me as true at all), then the translation I pointed out makes much more sense.

2. Since I don't follow the heretical bible most people do, my bible doesn't say this.

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying here.

3. So, I checked the Modern Xian's Bible. It doesn't say "fool". Quote below.

I may just be misunderstanding, but perhaps there’s some confusion about which verse we’re discussing? The reference is Psalm 53:1.
If, however, you were making the point that there are other places in the Bible where people are referred to as being disobedient to God without being specifically referred to as fools, I’ll agree. I would add, however, that the implication that this is a foolish act would be implicit in such cases.

4. This is a Psalm: a song. Has anyone wondered what kind of nuts wrote this?

Many people have wondered a great deal about who wrote each section of the Bible. More to your point, I’d say that all people are a bit nutty, but that this is not particularly so. Poems and songs are not logical dissertations, the images are not supposed to be practical.

If your bible says something different, then you have the wrong bible.

My Bible is a different translation, of course, but I’ve checked enough to know that it’s not any more “wrong� than any translation.

I also might add that the entire Psalm calls EVERYONE foolish and stupid.

Indeed it does. The Bible maintains that no one follows God as we should, and any comment talking about those who foolishly rebel against God specifically references “believers� and “unbelievers� alike.

Let me translate: God looked down on the children of men and didn't see one person understand and seek God. Not one.

I agree.

It's just a passage from a hideous book that ugly people with menial minds quote because they lack so much other power over their own lives. They hide behind the authority of their heretical book - that was made by fools (as proven by the Psalm) and lash out at people who don't want to believe in their evil Santa.

Be careful here, this is debating a group of people, rather than the issue.

Hum. I looked at both Psalm 14 and Psalm 53 in my Jewish translation (JPS 1985), and has 'The benighte man thinks' 'Go does not care", not a comment about a fool.

So, the modern Jewish translation does not have that phrase.

[daedalus 2.0]

..., as it’s been explained to me, ...

What has your own research suggested?

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying here.

I am saying that if it is not the true Bible of Marcion, it is heretical. Marcion doesn't have this passage, so I imagine anyone's Bible could say anything.

I may just be misunderstanding, but perhaps there’s some confusion about which verse we’re discussing? The reference is Psalm 53:1.
If, however, you were making the point that there are other places in the Bible where people are referred to as being disobedient to God without being specifically referred to as fools, I’ll agree. I would add, however, that the implication that this is a foolish act would be implicit in such cases.

Again, I don't see it.

I quoted Psalm 14

Here is Psalm 53 (which happens to be similar):

Psalm 53:1-3

Psalm 53
A David Psalm

1-2 Bilious and bloated, they gas, "God is gone."
It's poison gas—
they foul themselves, they poison
Rivers and skies;
thistles are their cash crop.
God sticks his head out of heaven.
He looks around.
He's looking for someone not stupid—
one man, even, God-expectant,
just one God-ready woman.

3 He comes up empty. A string
of zeros. Useless, unshepherded
Sheep, taking turns pretending
to be Shepherd.
The ninety and nine
follow the one.

I don't know what you guys are saying about fools. Maybe your bible is a bad translation?

Many people have wondered a great deal about who wrote each section of the Bible. More to your point, I’d say that all people are a bit nutty, but that this is not particularly so. Poems and songs are not logical dissertations, the images are not supposed to be practical.

Lets not hope so. But it certainly gives you insight into the mind of the believer and who was considered Holy enough to have his song included into the Bible:

Psalm 137:9

7-9 God, remember those Edomites,
and remember the ruin of Jerusalem,
That day they yelled out,
"Wreck it, smash it to bits!"
And you, Babylonians—ravagers!
A reward to whoever gets back at you
for all you've done to us;
Yes, a reward to the one who grabs your babies
and smashes their heads on the rocks!

They sure were nice people who were determined to be wonderful enough to be immortalized in God's Holy and Eternal Word to all generations....

My Bible is a different translation, of course, but I’ve checked enough to know that it’s not any more “wrong� than any translation.

That's comforting... How do you know? You don't even know if your translation is ", No, God" or "no God".

How did you decide on the translation you use? Your pastor?

Indeed it does. The Bible maintains that no one follows God as we should, and any comment talking about those who foolishly rebel against God specifically references “believers� and “unbelievers� alike.

Which opens up the whole problem of Xianity that declares everyone a sinner. None is worthy of Heaven. Everyone is a wretch, a liar, sinner, abomination.

I'm not calling you, or even TBM, that I'm just telling you what your God thinks of you.

Let me translate: God looked down on the children of men and didn't see one person understand and seek God. Not one.

I agree.

Then we both agree.

It's just a passage from a hideous book that ugly people with menial minds quote because they lack so much other power over their own lives. They hide behind the authority of their heretical book - that was made by fools (as proven by the Psalm) and lash out at people who don't want to believe in their evil Santa.

Be careful here, this is debating a group of people, rather than the issue.

[/quote] I think the psychology of a People is important. After all, its not me saying that: its God.

[Jester]

Hum. I looked at both Psalm 14 and Psalm 53 in my Jewish translation (JPS 1985), and has 'The benighte man thinks' 'Go does not care", not a comment about a fool.

So, the modern Jewish translation does not have that phrase.

That is really interesting.

Is there an online version that I could read?

[Jester]

What has your own research suggested?

That it can, linguistically, be translated either way, but that the traditional form of translation doesn’t make historical sense.

I’m not quite sure what you’re saying here.

I am saying that if it is not the true Bible of Marcion, it is heretical. Marcion doesn't have this passage, so I imagine anyone's Bible could say anything.

The Bible of Marcion has not been established in the debate as the only true Bible. If you mean to do so, please state your case.

I may just be misunderstanding, but perhaps there’s some confusion about which verse we’re discussing? The reference is Psalm 53:1.
If, however, you were making the point that there are other places in the Bible where people are referred to as being disobedient to God without being specifically referred to as fools, I’ll agree. I would add, however, that the implication that this is a foolish act would be implicit in such cases.

Again, I don't see it.

I quoted Psalm 14

Here is Psalm 53 (which happens to be similar):

This seems to be a matter of the two of us checking different texts (the Bible of Marcion, and the canonized Bible).
If you’d rather, I will happily amend my original question to limit it to the canonized Bible, and we can discuss the relative validity of the two texts.

I don't know what you guys are saying about fools. Maybe your bible is a bad translation?

The word fool in my Bible is a translation of נבל (or “nâbâl�). It’s description from Strong’s Hebrew and Greek dictionaries is as follows.

stupid; wicked (especially impious): - fool (-ish, -ish man, -ish woman), vile person.

If you find a different translation of this word, feel free to post it.

Many people have wondered a great deal about who wrote each section of the Bible. More to your point, I’d say that all people are a bit nutty, but that this is not particularly so. Poems and songs are not logical dissertations, the images are not supposed to be practical.

Lets not hope so. But it certainly gives you insight into the mind of the believer and who was considered Holy enough to have his song included into the Bible:

I would say that the author wasn’t considered “holy enough� but rather “forgiven enough�.

Beyond that, what insight would you say it gives?

Psalm 137:9

7-9 God, remember those Edomites,
and remember the ruin of Jerusalem,
That day they yelled out,
"Wreck it, smash it to bits!"
And you, Babylonians—ravagers!
A reward to whoever gets back at you
for all you've done to us;
Yes, a reward to the one who grabs your babies
and smashes their heads on the rocks!

This section, quite rightly, bothers many people. But may I point out some historical context?

This poem was written during the Babylonian exile. This means that the author is part of a conquered race, and likely could have had members of his family killed before he and everyone he knew was drug off to slavery. Though we in modern western culture tend to lead such comfortable lives, can’t we empathize a little with why someone in this situation might write such a poem?

My Bible is a different translation, of course, but I’ve checked enough to know that it’s not any more “wrong� than any translation.

That's comforting... How do you know? You don't even know if your translation is ", No, God" or "no God".

My own bad grammar notwithstanding, I have specifically checked the translation of this particular line. If you are interested in posing a counterpoint, please do so. If you are questioning my choice of a translation, however, please state your case for your own choice.

How did you decide on the translation you use? Your pastor?

No, actually. I use several. None of them are the translation my pastor uses.
Again, I am open to being convinced that your choice of translation is best, but do need an argument to consider before this can happen.

Indeed it does. The Bible maintains that no one follows God as we should, and any comment talking about those who foolishly rebel against God specifically references “believers� and “unbelievers� alike.

Which opens up the whole problem of Xianity that declares everyone a sinner. None is worthy of Heaven. Everyone is a wretch, a liar, sinner, abomination.

The idea that everyone is sinful is, indeed, a major point of Christianity. It is a point that self-righteous Christians would do well to remember. All people do bad things at times, which is why Christianity proposes that no one deserves a perfect life, and must instead be given it in spite of not deserving it.
I’m not really sure why this is a problem, however. It seems to make sense to me, but let me know if you see a logical issue there.

Be careful here, this is debating a group of people, rather than the issue.

I think the psychology of a People is important. After all, its not me saying that: its God.

The comment being referenced (which I’d rather not quote directly) was not based on any statement in the Bible, but rather your personal view of a specific group of people. While I agree that psychology is important, such a comment was not at all relevant to this discussion.

[Goat]

Hum. I looked at both Psalm 14 and Psalm 53 in my Jewish translation (JPS 1985), and has 'The benighte man thinks' 'Go does not care", not a comment about a fool.

So, the modern Jewish translation does not have that phrase.

That is really interesting.

Is there an online version that I could read?

Not of the 1985 version, as it is still in copyright . The 1917 version was based for a large part on the KJV. I did look up in the 1955 translation that I had on my bookshelf, and it has the 'Fool in his heart said there is no God ' in it.

[JoeyKnothead]

To me it only matters what is said 'now'. Whether the translation is wrong is somewhat immaterial. It's there now, it says what it says, and to try to rephrase it to fit anything else is wrong. Where the Bible is taught as the inerrant word of God, those being taught this will continue to hate anyone who disagrees. Anyone who tries to argue against it will be treated like they're some kind of satan.

Religion has a motive to demonize anyone who does not accept it, and this is proof of it. When I twisted the statement, I was seen as being hateful, but if used by a theist it is just a 'logic' statement. To me more proof or religion's 'hidden agenda'; when one can declare it logical that anyone who disagrees is a fool, but anyone who feels slighted by the statement should accept it, because its in the Bible.

[McCulloch]

[row]New American Standard Bible (NASB)[col][size=117]The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God,"[/size][col][size=67]Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation[/size][row]New International Version (NIV)[col][size=117]The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."[/size][col][size=67]Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society[/size][row]King James Version (KJV)[col][size=117]The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.[/size] [col][size=67]Public Domain[/size][row]English Standard Version (ESV)[col][size=117]The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."[/size][col][size=67]The Holy Bible, English Standard Version Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers.[/size][row]American Standard Version (ASV)[col][size=117]The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. [/size][col][size=67]Copyright © 1901 Public Domain[/size][row]Young's Literal Translation (YLT)[col][size=117]A fool said in his heart, `There is no God.' [/size][col][size=67]Public Domain[/size][row]Douay Rheims [col][size=117]The fool hath said in his heart: There is no God, [/size][col][size=67]The Catholic Bible - Douay Rheims is the first official English translation of the Latin Vulgate written by Saint Jerome. He translated it from the The Greek and Hebrew languages. [/size]

There seems to be a consistency and consensus among the translators from various Christian perspectives. Without compelling evidence, I would tend to side with the unanimity of the linguistic experts.

[Jester]

To me it only matters what is said 'now'. Whether the translation is wrong is somewhat immaterial. It's there now, it says what it says, and to try to rephrase it to fit anything else is wrong.

Though you definitely have a point, I’d say that there is a great deal of importance attached to what is said by the original texts, if for no other reason than that those who quote it consider it to be important.

Where the Bible is taught as the inerrant word of God, those being taught this will continue to hate anyone who disagrees.

I’ll disagree here. In fact, that’s part of my point with this topic. Personally, I believe that the Bible actually opposes the idea of hating people that disagree, and that it takes a certain lack of understanding to have this attitude.

Though, as a side note, I don't claim that the Bible is "the inerrant word of God". I've never understood that phrase myself.

Religion has a motive to demonize anyone who does not accept it, and this is proof of it. When I twisted the statement, I was seen as being hateful, but if used by a theist it is just a 'logic' statement.

I am personally very opposed to the idea of throwing this verse at atheists. It is uncivil and unproductive, not to mention an implication of things I feel to be untrue.
Beyond that, I would oppose twisting it at all. It seems to me that, in order to accept or reject the claims of the Bible on a rational basis, we should first figure out what its actual claims are.

To me more proof or religion's 'hidden agenda'; when one can declare it logical that anyone who disagrees is a fool, but anyone who feels slighted by the statement should accept it, because its in the Bible.

I agree that such claims are pointless and hurtful. I would add, however, that these kinds of attacks are not limited to the religious. I’ve received them from theist and non-theist alike.