• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Lies and Phony Caricatures of Christianity

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
If it pleases you to believe variants are 'changes!' in the bible, go for it. It is in keeping with the indictrination, and promotes your precious anti-Christian narratives.

I see no point in continuing this discussion, as you distort my points, ignore the rebuttals, and just keep pounding the anti-christian propaganda drum. I'm sure we could do the same thing, with all the other points, as you seem very devoted to discrediting Christianity.

But many have tried, before you, and are forgotten, while the life giving, soul redeeming power of Jesus continues to change lives, in spite of the ceaseless efforts of hostile enemies, intent on destroying the only hope for a dying world.

There is a difference between Truth and lies, even if the waters are muddied by deceivers.

Anyway, its all just beliefs and opinions, and I'll leave you with yours. Good luck.
Your projections and other defense mechanisms are transparent here. I haven't distorted any of your points or ignored any of your rebuttals; anyone reading our conversation can see that. I pointed out factual inaccuracies and weaknesses in your worldview and you've had to walk back basically every substantive point you've tried to make once I showed the actual evidence to you.

I can see why you don't want to go any further in our conversation, because the deeper we go, the more baseless your claims are shown to be. And so now you're lashing out with personal attacks and preaching at me.

You're right that there is a difference between truth and lies - it's too bad your worldview is so short on the truth.

Have a good night.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
This thread has nothing to do with atheists. Why do some people think everything is about them?
I'm not an atheist, and you didnt specifically make it about atheist, but it reads like it when you have a list that countless others have used, especially and mostly about how those evil atheists have it out for Christians.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Various manuscripts with different word choices yield to obscure meaning. Doesn't that make sense?
..seems like the same old narrative we've already gone around and around over:

13. The bible is full of errors.
14. The bible has changed many times.

As usual, we have the repeated propaganda memes, with no evidence.

The truth:

The bible is NOT full of errors. It is a human record of eyewitness events, mostly, with only alternate theories about what might have happened. That does not compel a conclusion of error.

The bible has not changed. There have been copying variances, but all extant sources, fragments, vulgate translations, and complete copies from the earliest times have been boringly homogeneous. Biblical scholars and translators have noted variances, (and noted them in footnotes), for millennia , with no change to the exegetical message.

The false narrative, is that evil christian manipulators from the earliest centuries, engineered these 'changes!' into the biblical canon. Late night conspiracy meetings, where they met, secretly, to change commas to semicolons, or deliberately misspell words, to convey a false meaning from the originals.

Laughing maniacally, they produced distortions of what actually happened, and what was said, as they fabricated a fantasy. None of the events depicted by the nt writers happened, they were concocted centuries later.

The problem, is there is absolutely no evidence that any scenario like this ever happened. Every manuscript, fragment, and complete copy, from the earliest time (2nd century or so) AFFIRM the accuracy and credibility of the originals.

Christ either [1] deceived mankind by conscious fraud, or [2] He was Himself deluded and self-deceived, or [3] He was Divine. There is no getting out of this trilemma. It is inexorable. John Duncan (1796-1870)

The assumption for the trilemma is that Jesus was a real, historical human being. There is no evidence to refute this, so it is as reasonable as assuming Raamses or Caesar.

If He was a made up person, then the words He spoke are fraudulent and meaningless... pretty much the same as a point of the trilemma.

So if we go with the historical evidence, that Jesus was a real person who lived and said things, recorded for posterity, the trilemma stands. He was either a liar, or madman, or He was Whom He claimed to be.

There is no evidence of changes or revisions in the original manuscripts, or that He said differently than was recorded in the biblical texts. So believing in 'changes!' or 'errors!', is just prejudicial dismissal of the historical texts, with no evidence.

The words were His, and they can be rejected as the ravings of a lunatic, dismissed as a liar, or considered, as valid truth.

Any charges of 'error! or 'change!' will need to be backed by evidence, with examples of the alleged changes or error. Pretending variances have 'changed!' the bible is a gross misrepresentation.

Show me. Quote the passages that have allegedly changed, with a known earlier text.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
..seems like the same old narrative we've already gone around and around over:

13. The bible is full of errors.
14. The bible has changed many times.

As usual, we have the repeated propaganda memes, with no evidence.

The truth:

The bible is NOT full of errors. It is a human record of eyewitness events, mostly, with only alternate theories about what might have happened. That does not compel a conclusion of error.

The bible has not changed. There have been copying variances, but all extant sources, fragments, vulgate translations, and complete copies from the earliest times have been boringly homogeneous. Biblical scholars and translators have noted variances, (and noted them in footnotes), for millennia , with no change to the exegetical message.

The false narrative, is that evil christian manipulators from the earliest centuries, engineered these 'changes!' into the biblical canon. Late night conspiracy meetings, where they met, secretly, to change commas to semicolons, or deliberately misspell words, to convey a false meaning from the originals.

Laughing maniacally, they produced distortions of what actually happened, and what was said, as they fabricated a fantasy. None of the events depicted by the nt writers happened, they were concocted centuries later.

The problem, is there is absolutely no evidence that any scenario like this ever happened. Every manuscript, fragment, and complete copy, from the earliest time (2nd century or so) AFFIRM the accuracy and credibility of the originals.

Christ either [1] deceived mankind by conscious fraud, or [2] He was Himself deluded and self-deceived, or [3] He was Divine. There is no getting out of this trilemma. It is inexorable. John Duncan (1796-1870)

The assumption for the trilemma is that Jesus was a real, historical human being. There is no evidence to refute this, so it is as reasonable as assuming Raamses or Caesar.

If He was a made up person, then the words He spoke are fraudulent and meaningless... pretty much the same as a point of the trilemma.

So if we go with the historical evidence, that Jesus was a real person who lived and said things, recorded for posterity, the trilemma stands. He was either a liar, or madman, or He was Whom He claimed to be.

There is no evidence of changes or revisions in the original manuscripts, or that He said differently than was recorded in the biblical texts. So believing in 'changes!' or 'errors!', is just prejudicial dismissal of the historical texts, with no evidence.

The words were His, and they can be rejected as the ravings of a lunatic, dismissed as a liar, or considered, as valid truth.

Any charges of 'error! or 'change!' will need to be backed by evidence, with examples of the alleged changes or error. Pretending variances have 'changed!' the bible is a gross misrepresentation.

Show me. Quote the passages that have allegedly changed, with a known earlier text.

Look at the origins of the Bible stories.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
I'm not an atheist, and you didnt specifically make it about atheist, but it reads like it when you have a list that countless others have used, especially and mostly about how those evil atheists have it out for Christians.
Thats funny. So, its not directed at atheists, my intent and OP did not even mention or allude anything about atheists or atheism, yet you can read between the lines, and see 'code words' that indicate i am just attacking the poor, misunderstood, atheists. :D

:rolleyes:

I am attacking no one. I am defending the worldview of Christianity from smears and false accusations. If you get, 'mean xtian attacking poor atheists!' from that.. i don't know what to say..
:shrug:
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Thats funny. So, its not directed at atheists, my intent and OP did not even mention or allude anything about atheists or atheism, yet you can read between the lines, and see 'code words' that indicate i am just attacking the poor, misunderstood, atheists. :D

:rolleyes:

I am attacking no one. I am defending the worldview of Christianity from smears and false accusations. If you get, 'mean xtian attacking poor atheists!' from that.. i don't know what to say..
:shrug:

What world view? Everyone seems to be competing for most persecuted.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Look at the origins of the Bible stories.
Go for it. Give it your best shot! Why slink in the shadows with innuendo, half truths, distortions, and opinion presented as fact, when you can easily demonstrate all these 'errors!' and 'changes!' from the originals?

Show me the earliest evidences of change, in your opinion. Or is your 'opinion' here based only on decades of Indoctrination from phony narratives?
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Go for it. Give it your best shot! Why slink in the shadows with innuendo, half truths, distortions, and opinion presented as fact, when you can easily demonstrate all these 'errors!' and 'changes!' from the originals?

Show me the earliest evidences of change, in your opinion. Or is your 'opinion' here based only on decades of Indoctrination from phony narratives?

Scrolls and cuneiform texts from Dilmun, Ras Shamra, Elam, Babylon and Sumer are quite real and much older than the creation story in Genesis.

Do you care? I mean to say aren't you curious where the stories come from?
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
What world view? Everyone seems to be competing for most persecuted.
Ah yes. The 'pick a word to deflect with and dodge the point', ploy. ;)

You think muslims are 'most persecuted', and misunderstood, iirc. Some here think the poor, hapless atheists are just viciously attacked for no reason. This thread is not about xtian persecution, which has continued throughout history, and is ongoing, now, but is a defense of truth about Christianity, from the lies and false narratives from hostile enemies.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Scrolls and cuneiform texts from Dilmun, Ras Shamra, Elam, Babylon and Sumer are quite real and much older than the creation story in Genesis.
Do you care? I mean to say aren't you curious where the stories come from?
Ironic that you believe this, based only on speculative theory, but reject the accuracy and historicity of the NT texts..
:shrug:
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Ah yes. The 'pick a word to deflect with and dodge the point', ploy. ;)

You think muslims are 'most persecuted', and misunderstood, iirc. Some here think the poor, hapless atheists are just viciously attacked for no reason. This thread is not about xtian persecution, which has continued throughout history, and is ongoing, now, but is a defense of truth about Christianity, from the lies and false narratives from hostile enemies.

Why are you trying to tell me what I think?
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Ironic that you believe this, based only on speculative theory, but reject the accuracy and historicity of the NT texts..
:shrug:

There's very little anywhere in the Bible that would ever pass for history. Its didactic literature .. If you are waiting for the second coming and boulder sized hail stones, it already happened in 70 AD using catapults and really big rocks.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
There's very little anywhere in the Bible that would ever pass for history. Its didactic literature .. If you are waiting for the second coming and boulder sized hail stones, it already happened in 70 AD using catapults and really big rocks.
You are quite wrong. Historians have gleaned a wealth of information from the biblical accounts. Archaeologists refer to biblical texts to guide them in research and reassembling the past.

"There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of Old Testament tradition." - Dr. William F. Albright

"I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen." - Dr Clifford Wilson, formerly director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
More quotes about history, archaeology, and the validity of the bible:

"Through the wealth of data uncovered by historical and archaeological research, we are able to measure the Bible's historical accuracy. In every case where its claims can thus be tested, the Bible proves to be accurate and reliable." - Dr. Jack Cottrell

"In every instance where the findings of archaeology pertain to the Biblical record, the archaeological evidence confirms, sometimes in detailed fashion, the historical accuracy of Scripture. In those instances where the archaeological findings seem to be at variance with the Bible, the discrepancy lies with the archaeological evidence, i.e., improper interpretation, lack of evidence, etc. -- not with the Bible." - Dr. Bryant C. Wood, archaeologist

"It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical description has often led to amazing discoveries." - Dr. Nelson Glueck

"The excessive skepticism of many liberal theologians stems not from a careful evaluation of the available data, but from an enormous predisposition against the supernatural." - Professor Millar Burrows (Professor of Archaeology at Yale University)

Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of facts trustworthy; he is possessed of the true historic sense...In short this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians." - Sir William Ramsey (archaeologist)
 

sooda

Veteran Member
You are quite wrong. Historians have gleaned a wealth of information from the biblical accounts. Archaeologists refer to biblical texts to guide them in research and reassembling the past.

"There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of Old Testament tradition." - Dr. William F. Albright

"I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen." - Dr Clifford Wilson, formerly director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology

You must be joking...

Dr. Clifford A. Wilson (1923-2012) was an Australian young-earth creationist archaeologist, author, and psycholinguist. He was formerly the Director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology (1967-70), and then served as senior lecturer at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. He was widely known as an educator and lecturer.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
You must be joking...

Dr. Clifford A. Wilson (1923-2012) was an Australian young-earth creationist archaeologist, author, and psycholinguist. He was formerly the Director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology (1967-70), and then served as senior lecturer at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. He was widely known as an educator and lecturer.
Are you trying to poison the well? Can you refute his statement, or any of the others, who affirmed the same thing?
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
CHRISTIAN SCIENTISTS ARE NOT REAL SCIENTISTS!
Agreed. This false narrative should be included in the list, though i covered it, generally, with,

1. Christians hate science.
12. Christians cannot reason or follow science, as they are blinded by their superstitions.

It is the same narrative, implying 'Christians!' are so deluded that they cannot inquire via scientific methodology. It is absurd, of course, as are most of the phony narratives. But, that is the nature of propaganda:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.
" ~J. Goebbels
 
Top