> If you have read the gospel of Mary, why don't you tell us more about your take on in? How does it differ from the other male written accounts? What in your opinion makes it more authentic? What does it talk about that the others don't? Please give us something more details that the generic "not authentic" refrain.
Given the conversation that lead up to this point, I’m going to respectfully decline this offer because I’m not really in the mood to risk another argument on another topic.
> If you don't remember the books in the bible that give a females account despite saying that's what the bible lacks
I didn’t say the Bible lacked any female accounts. I said it lacks specific accounts from specific people who, in my opinion, absolutely should have been in there.
> It's also really interesting how you said that it is "harder to grok than Shakespeare", then turn around and say that reading the whole book isn't that impressive anyways ..
Reading Shakespeare isn’t all that impressive either.
And yes, I did say the Bible is harder to grok than Shakespeare. But that doesn’t mean completing either is a spectacular achievement.
I’ve got to say, I’m not loving the sub-text you keep deriving from my comments given you’ve been wildly off on pretty much every assumption.
> There is actually a whole profession that revolves around modifying the work of the original author. They are called "book editors".
Book editors generally work in conjunction with the author but at least we are now on topic. :)
I take it from that is that you don’t see an issue with reading a reinterpretation that happened without the authors input?
Weirdly I enjoy that sort of thing in music but dislike it in literature. Which probably doesn’t make much sense but you like what you like.
> If I want to hear someones pure, pristine, unedited account, I'll have a face to face conversation with them. Not read their books.
Unfortunately Mary and Jesus aren’t around to converse with but I do take your point.
Putting aside questions about the truth behind Bible specifically, can I assume from your comment that you view non-fiction works as a dramatisation too?