The Forged Origins of The New Testament

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
What the Church doesn't want you to know
It has often been emphasised that Christianity is unlike any other religion, for it stands or falls by certain events which are alleged to have occurred during a short period of time some 20 centuries ago. Those stories are presented in the New Testament, and as new evidence is revealed it will become clear that they do not represent historical realities. The Church agrees, saying: "Our documentary sources of knowledge about the origins of Christianity and its earliest development are chiefly the New Testament Scriptures, the authenticity of which we must, to a great extent, take for granted." (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 712.)

Foto: Alexander Schick © Bibelausstellung mit freundlicher Genehmigung
von St. Catherine Monastery / Sinai (Source)

The Church makes extraordinary admissions about its New Testament. For example, when discussing the origin of those writings, "the most distinguished body of academic opinion ever assembled" (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface) admits that the Gospels "do not go back to the first century of the Christian era" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6). This statement conflicts with priesthood assertions that the earliest Gospels were progressively written during the decades following the death of the Gospel Jesus Christ. In a remarkable aside, the Church further admits that "the earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD" (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp. 656-7). That is some 350 years after the time the Church claims that a Jesus Christ walked the sands of Palestine, and here the true story of Christian origins slips into one of the biggest black holes in history. There is, however, a reason why there were no New Testaments until the fourth century: they were not written until then, and here we find evidence of the greatest misrepresentation of all time.

for the whole article (it is long but well documented):

Voices - The Forged Origins of The New Testament

What most Protestants don't want to admit is that it was the catholic church that gave them the bible. The King James version is a plagiarized version of the catholic bible so this revelation affects all of christianity and believers that the bible is the holy word of god.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
I have never read the Quran or the writings of Bahá'u'lláh. I have no interest in reading them. I have my own path to follow. I am just asking you to look at other writings because you are so ridgid in your beliefs and condemning of others that you do not understand. I am asking you to open up your mind to the possibility that others may be right too. You are not the only person on earth that is on a path. Others may be on the right path for them.

hypocrite much?
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
hypocrite much?
If you are going to believe in something, at least look into whether or not it has validity. Information presented is only a scratch of the surface of what I have learned over the years that lead me away from the church. The bible is pure fabrication and the church fabricated it purely for political reasons.

Most christians will not read the article because they will not read anything that disputes the validity of their belief. So I don't expect them to. You obviously didn't, so your belief is unshaken. I posted this more specifically for those like MHz and herald who proselytizer their beliefs as if they are guardians of truth, when nothing could be farther from the truth. You don't proselytize so I wasn't aiming it at people like you.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
If you are going to believe in something, at least look into whether or not it has validity. Information presented is only a scratch of the surface of what I have learned over the years that lead me away from the church. The bible is pure fabrication and the church fabricated it purely for political reasons.

Most christians will not read the article because they will not read anything that disputes the validity of their belief. So I don't expect them to. You obviously didn't, so your belief is unshaken. I posted this more specifically for those like MHz and herald who proselytizer their beliefs as if they are guardians of truth, when nothing could be farther from the truth. You don't proselytize so I wasn't aiming it at people like you.


The assumptions you make are astounding.
 

selin

Electoral Member
Feb 8, 2010
510
6
18
37
Turkey
and I would waste that much time on a fanatic because..........?

but we also would like to know why he is wrong according to you. what he talks about sounds sensible although he considers my religion as contradictory too.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
...because just denying without reason is unjustified denial?


Here's the thing LW. Cliffy has proven over and over again that he is not interested in a "Christians" perspective of anything. He has repeatedly degraded those that do not believe what he believes. He does EXACTLY what he purports to dislike about what others do, namely proselytize.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
What the Church doesn't want you to know
It has often been emphasised that Christianity is unlike any other religion, for it stands or falls by certain events which are alleged to have occurred during a short period of time some 20 centuries ago. Those stories are presented in the New Testament, and as new evidence is revealed it will become clear that they do not represent historical realities. The Church agrees, saying: "Our documentary sources of knowledge about the origins of Christianity and its earliest development are chiefly the New Testament Scriptures, the authenticity of which we must, to a great extent, take for granted." (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 712.)

Foto: Alexander Schick © Bibelausstellung mit freundlicher Genehmigung
von St. Catherine Monastery / Sinai (Source)

The Church makes extraordinary admissions about its New Testament. For example, when discussing the origin of those writings, "the most distinguished body of academic opinion ever assembled" (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface) admits that the Gospels "do not go back to the first century of the Christian era" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6). This statement conflicts with priesthood assertions that the earliest Gospels were progressively written during the decades following the death of the Gospel Jesus Christ. In a remarkable aside, the Church further admits that "the earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD" (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp. 656-7). That is some 350 years after the time the Church claims that a Jesus Christ walked the sands of Palestine, and here the true story of Christian origins slips into one of the biggest black holes in history. There is, however, a reason why there were no New Testaments until the fourth century: they were not written until then, and here we find evidence of the greatest misrepresentation of all time.

for the whole article (it is long but well documented):

Voices - The Forged Origins of The New Testament

What most Protestants don't want to admit is that it was the catholic church that gave them the bible. The King James version is a plagiarized version of the catholic bible so this revelation affects all of christianity and believers that the bible is the holy word of god.
Big shock. lol It's just more of the same: stating things as fact without having any supporting evidence. Misguided and mistaken faith.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Here's the thing LW. Cliffy has proven over and over again that he is not interested in a "Christians" perspective of anything. He has repeatedly degraded those that do not believe what he believes. He does EXACTLY what he purports to dislike about what others do, namely proselytize.
The best thing to shut proselytizers up is evidence that contradicts what they say. Calling them names is just calling them names.
 

eh1eh

Blah Blah Blah
Aug 31, 2006
10,749
103
48
Under a Lone Palm
I'd be a Christian if it weren't for the Bible. It messes up any chance of ever understanding the creator. I put my bible on the shelf with works from Marx and Lenin when I started school and took science class. Education helped me realize that whoever or whatever the creator is or was, was not explained in that book because humans don't really know. I remain waiting for proof.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Here's the thing LW. Cliffy has proven over and over again that he is not interested in a "Christians" perspective of anything. He has repeatedly degraded those that do not believe what he believes. He does EXACTLY what he purports to dislike about what others do, namely proselytize.

Perhaps Christian perspective would be more appealing if it didn't fall in with the I-am-better-than-you syndrome of almost all religion. Faith is supposed to be comforting - not empowering.