Zone1 But the Books of the Bible Were Written After the Events Took Place, Proving Its Not True

What was amended, exactly? I'm just curious.

Proteges and scribes may have added to some OT books. And perhaps even other prophets did, as with the book of Isaiah.

But if the faithful had to correct erroneous assumptions, and hence commence the long tedious task of rewriting a book from the point of the error forward, then he probably wasn't really that faithful.
Genesis, Exodus.. I don't know anything. Just going by what the scholars say about doublets and the politics of Omri's reign.
 
Alexander the Great. Known to exist because of these 5 men documenting his life:

Arrin
Plutarch
Diodorus
Curtius
Justin

These 5 men lived one hundred to 500 years after the stated death of Alexander the Great.

You can’t accept one without the other.
Oh look, a strawman thread.
 
There were too many copies around for anyone to get away with faking writings and changing up anything. Finding the Dead Sea scrolls and other finds make that even more unlikely.
tell all penguin - the 4th century c-bible ... 100 years in writing the document and the archives of the material they used to write the book - not a single page - left for verification or posterity. than what they wrote - their makebelieve book of forgeries and fallacies.

- if they were as described why were they hidden in caves than preserved in libraries ...

* they are as phony as the makebelive c-bible itself. and those that worship it - dud-smith.
 
Cities are named after Christ, too. Corpus Christie, TX and Christchurch, England, as examples.

And culture? Definitely impacted by Christ and his church.

You have said nothing.
He didn't compare it to just Christ, who probably existed. He compared it to the validity of the Bible in general. If you actually think Alexander the Great's existence is no more verified than the validity of the Bible you're delusional. His actions created echoes that still persist today. The Greek conquest of eastern Europe is verifiable history.

We going to do this with Genghis Khan?

Julius Caesar?

Leif Erickson?
 
Last edited:
- if they were as described why were they hidden in caves than preserved in libraries ...

* they are as phony as the makebelive c-bible itself. and those that worship it - dud-smith.
They're still digging up things from the sand, spoken of in the OT, that the "4th century writers" were unaware of. ;)
 
He didn't compare it to just Christ, who probably existed. He compared it to the validity of the Bible in general. If you actually think Alexander the Great's existence is no more verified than the validity of the Bible you're delusional. His actions created echoes that still persist today. The Greek conquest of eastern Europe is verifiable history.

We going to do this with Genghis Khan?

Julius Caesar?

Leif Erickson?
If the history of the Israelites was written after the fact (not all of it was) and the history of Alexander was written after the fact, then the OP's comparison is valid.

Again, you added nothing to this thread.
 
Does that include me? :omg:

the point was there were enclaves, councils, and every means of discourse known to humanity to write their 4th century book, written over all but 100 years ... where are their archives, minutes of their meetings who were involved - even a copy of their original completed document ... no where to be found.

and certainly not one word written by jesus included that speaks for itself the authenticity of the - state church of the roman empire.

liberation theology, self determination is what they died for in the 1st century - that was their new religion.
 
It's a shame that Jesus was illiterate. We really don't know what he said, only what his biographers said. There is one story where Jesus is alone in the wilderness but we know the conversation he had with Satan. "Get thee behind me". That's how it reads, quotation marks and all.
 

Forum List

Back
Top