Do mimsy atheists gyre and gimble in the wabe?

[Kyuuketsuki]

What gets me is the way these theists dismiss the contradictions so evidently there in their bible.

Theists who simply dismiss these allegations are unimportant on the issue, but what do you make of those scholars who have taken the time to refute the allegations (which is very different from dismissing them)? There is a wealth of publications on these refutations which spans centuries (from at least the mid-17th century, so far as I know; e.g., Joannes Thaddaeus, c. 1662). Would I be correct in assuming that you have interacted with at least a couple of reputable publications and are, therefore, dispensing an intellectually honest conclusion that is responsibly informed? For instance, can you name a publication, cite an example of one of its refutations and prove how it fails?

I haven't read the articles directly any more than I typically read scientific papers but I see no particular need to given that I have experience of dozens of idiots willing to tell me all their intricacies ... it goes like this:

Me: Subject X (usually a reasonably detailed description as part of some ongoing debate).
Theist: Go to this web page and it will answer all your questions on subject x

So I go, I read and I find that not only does it typically not get even marginally close to dealing with subject x it fails as a coherent or rational argument to boot with the result that I now refuse point-blank to do theist URL's or references and insist they post their own.

Or is this just gratuitous invective boldly engaging in the Prejudicial Language fallacy?

Well I wouldn't call it that but I have the sneaky feeling you're going to say just that so let's cut to the chase ... why don't you explain these specific arguments and then we can all dump on them?

Kyu