Much of the New Testament Is a Forgery According to Book

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Guy who was trained at multiple christian universities and seminaries writes a book analyzing the ancient texts and comes to the sensible conclusion that a lot of it was just made up nonsense.

Anyway this is the book:

http://www.amazon.com/Forged-Writing.../dp/0062012614

Here is one review with exerpt:

http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news...of-forged.html

Readers also would learn that the two oldest surviving complete New Testaments are the codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus. Sinaiticus is a fourth-century Greek Bible discovered in the middle of the nineteenth century that not only contains the complete New Testament, but also The Shepard of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas, books that were considered to be part of the New Testament for several centuries. Vaticanus also is a fourth–century Greek Bible that has been housed in the Vatican Library at least since 1475.

Because approximately 5,000 Greek manuscripts containing all or part of the New Testament have been identified, textual criticism became a necessity. As Professor Metzger put it, “The necessity of applying textual criticism to the books of the New Testament arises from two cir stances: (a) none of the original do ents is extant, and (b) the existing copies differ from one another.”

(These are facts to keep in mind whenever some biblical literalist, presumably incapable of reading Greek, tells you that the New Testament is inerrant.)

Here is a review from the other side:

http://www.patheos.com/community/bib...-introduction/

This book should not be confused with some of Bart’s previous efforts, in particular Misquoting Jesus, as Bart is not arguing in this book merely that are errors or mistakes in the Bible. No, in this book he takes the next step in arguing that there is deliberate fraud going on in the canon, deceitful practices undertaken to convince or bamboozle some audience into believing something, on the basis of the authority of some apostle or original disciple, who in fact did not write the book in question. In other words, Bart is taking on not merely the conservative view that the NT is written by those authors to whom it is attributed but also the widespread notion that pseudonymity was a regular and widely recognized literary practice in antiquity, and that no one was deceived, nor was there an intent to deceive by such a practice. This book is likely to addle scholars and lay people all across the spectrum of belief, including quite liberal ones who have for a long time argued that pseudonymity was an accepted practice in antiquity. To judge from the early reviews on Amazon, those who are looking for an excuse to call the early Christians liars and deceivers are delighted with this book.

You are right they are obviously mistakes but they were all just big whoopsies all the repeated consistent and systematic ones included.

I actually read one review saying that people giving credence this book is just proof that people will believe the most outlandish things. Yeah like translocation of demonic possession from humans to pigs, fertilization without sex and resurrection are just so passe...

Anyway, have fun with this guys.

[mouse]

Do you live for Satan?

[redzero]

Aw , here we go.

[koriwhat]

the whole damn "book" is a travesty and lie.

[koriwhat]

Do you live for Satan?

we live in unison.

[Blake]

the whole damn "book" is a travesty and lie.

So how do come to the conclusion that satan exists?

[MannyIsGod]

Good thread, Fuzzy.

:popcorn

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Good thread, Fuzzy.

:popcorn

I do try.

[Nick Manning]

This thread needs more WC, angel_luv, and all the other bible beaters.

[symple19]

http://www.amazon.com/Divinity-Doubt.../dp/1593156294

The chief prosecutor of the Manson family trials, Vincent Bugliosi, wrote the above.

Review below

http://www.seattlepi.com/lifestyle/b...nt-1340632.php

Bugliosi, who wrote Helter Skelter, is one of the Sharper minds of our times and attacks the subject with a prosecutor's eye for detail.

I'm really looking forward to reading it

[symple19]

comes to the sensible conclusion that a lot of it was just made up nonsense.

lol, I was able to come to that conclusion myself after reading the Bible. Ever read Revelations?

[symple19]

exerpt from the review

Divinity of Doubt states reasonable proofs for 1) the all powerful, all knowing God (theism) and 2) the non existent God (atheism). Reading how author Bugliosi demolishes both beliefs is quite amusing. An example: theists profoundly believing in an all perfect God who is imperfect enough to allow the earthquake/tsunami in Japan to take place, or even the heinous holocaust. Then too, we have reduction to absurdity when atheists deny that God exists, but they themselves have existence from, from, from what? from nothingness?

Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/lifestyle/b...#ixzz1MHKHfMEw

[Booharv]

lol, I was able to come to that conclusion myself after reading the Bible. Ever read Revelations?

Revelations really makes the Bible 10x worse than it already was.

[symple19]

Revelations really makes the Bible 10x worse than it already was.

Indeed

Here's your cliche' moment of the day

I read it in Jail, because that's the only book the ultra-conservative s would allow us to have (I was 18 and in on an assault charge while living in Alabama)

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Indeed

Here's your cliche' moment of the day

I read it in Jail, because that's the only book the ultra-conservative s would allow us to have (I was 18 and in on an assault charge while living in Alabama)

who did you stab?

[symple19]

who did you stab?

lol, no stabbing, just punching.

Wasn't a big deal, really. Dad left me in there a few days to teach me a lesson

I completed a few courses and the judge dropped the charges, meaning nothing on my record to follow me around

[baseline bum]

exerpt from the review

Divinity of Doubt states reasonable proofs for 1) the all powerful, all knowing God (theism) and 2) the non existent God (atheism). Reading how author Bugliosi demolishes both beliefs is quite amusing. An example: theists profoundly believing in an all perfect God who is imperfect enough to allow the earthquake/tsunami in Japan to take place, or even the heinous holocaust. Then too, we have reduction to absurdity when atheists deny that God exists, but they themselves have existence from, from, from what? from nothingness?

That review makes the book sound like it has some horrible arguments in it. The existence of divinity shouldn't depend on that divinity having any kind of decent morals. And LOL at the god of the gaps argument being used against atheists. I don't know where I came from so I came from whatever thing I feel like inventing to meet the requirements of being able to create me?

[symple19]

That review makes the book sound like it has some horrible arguments in it. The existence of divinity shouldn't depend on that divinity having any kind of decent morals. And LOL at the god of the gaps argument being used against atheists. I don't know where I came from so I came from whatever thing I feel like inventing to meet the requirements of being able to create me?

Here ya go BB, a little long but directly from the horse's mouth.

He starts talking about the content at about 330

[koriwhat]

So how do come to the conclusion that satan exists?

because we're both in the same jam band... phish forever!

only satan would plague this world with the likes of phish, so he must be real.

[symple19]

sorry bout the hijack Fuzzy, I'll probably check out the book you referenced as well

[FuzzyLumpkins]

sorry bout the hijack Fuzzy, I'll probably check out the book you referenced as well

Its fine. Its cogent to the discussion at hand.