Was "Jesus" a "bastard" & the Church tried to Cover it up with the VirginBirth Stories?, page 12

Self delusion is grandeur I suppose, resting a premise on the fantasies contained within as being real simply because historically it provides names and places. Yet none of those fantasies have ever been proven. It never occurs to the blind believers that to record a fantasy as fact, is best served when using known names and faces. Those of who look at the resurrection for example, as recounted, do not question the towns, cities or even kings and queens. But the four accounts of one single event, where the object is to present a divine being, are so blatantly inaccurate, distorted and contradictory between themselves, the story can only be swallowed by those who just want to believe that this was in fact the saviour. I can only imagine how the legend of Bin Laden will pass through the ages as having been commanded by God to smite the enemy. From the way the Christian apologists look at it, they would have to conclude it was by the hand of God, for surely there is proof all over the place of the calamity known as 9/11. And that leads me

When faced with the glaring truth of their scriptures, they can only retort to the effect that we are atheists, or that we rely on books from others to make our case, yet all contradictions to the NT which I have introduced are those taken directly from the NT or the epistles of the church fathers, rendering their mute responses to those, proof that they have no counter, save for empty deflective rhetoric. The blatant lies they live by is not only found in those contradictory scriptures I bring front and centre, but by their generalization of atheism. I suppose the one who made this claim sees the Jews, the authors of the books he himself is offering as proof, as atheists. Confusion obviously reigns for them when it comes to trying to find clarity of mind in their convoluted thoughts. Such is the narrow-minded and unworldly view of exactly those who rely on �a� book as their proof, because they lack the wherewithal and or common sense necessary to notice the hundreds of contradictions within its covers.

Then they offer up the names of men of renown and their beliefs as proof, once more showing how incapable of reasoning they actually are, as they obviously expect us to believe that only these great minds existed, and that their superstitions renders the like superstitions of the neophytes in here indisputable. More importantly they totally sidestep the documented evidence put before them from the church fathers themselves, for that would be far too painful to acknowledge that yes indeed, the facts as reported in the Bible are not in synchronicity with those of the forgers of the church.

Then they toss out little nuggets like: �Before archeologists confirmed the existence of Sodom and Gomorrah,� as though that is proof of anything other than a city of salt in an area where the salt concentration of the Dead Sea is 5 times that of the oceans, and such that not a single organism could live in it. Or chime in about a Roman court, which somehow is supposed to prove that Jesus was not just another thief or one of the Jewish seditionists of the day. The historical references they say prove everything, yet there is not even the minutest proof of any of any event ever been done by God on behalf of the Jews, much less even a roll with the roman courts or Jewish scribes, these very same scribes previously exalted for being meticulous, of a man performing miracles. I can only imagine all the times the Jews were conquered, and butchered, where the enemy went off claiming their god or gods brought destruction upon the enemy, and the Jews pass it off without a word in the OT, or as the God who promised them everything and saved them for so much, as being angry�yet again.

It is an unmistakably unworldly view without any basis of merit, which causes one to state: �We know there is a God because no one can prove otherwise and science eludes to it through intelligent design theory.� Where the obvious is that no one can prove there is a God, and therefore he does not exist. Never mind the myopic presentation of the scientific view proffered as though the only school of thought is that there is a God.

But not to stop there, the author of the above quote declares exactly how little or next to nothing s/he knows of the Old Testament authors: �We know that the tradition of transcribing the Torah and the writings of the prophets was a very strict practice and if any mistake was made in transcribing they had to burn the page and start over again. You could trust the transcriptions to be accurate becuase of comparing contemporary translations to the old manuscripts, which are exactly the same (i.e. Dead Sea Scrolls).�

Had this person the credentials to put forward a half reasonable argument, s/he certainly would not have so with the above, for Moses supposedly wrote the Pentateuch some 3,500 years ago, which, along with all the rest, according to the Esdras II, was lost and had to be rewritten circa 6BCE, where God recited the laws to Ezra and his band of scribes. Of course I expect nothing more than a chorus of yes but God told him what to write, from the apologists. How easily manipulated they are, why this makes the warnings against the devil and false prophets far too ominous and real. But then to state the Dead Sea scrolls provide the same translations, as further proof is laughable. For yes, those using the DSS as back-up never stop to think that only few fragments in the hands of Christians are allowed to be published, likewise the same with the Jews. Some 60%, how many decades later still lingers in stasis and why? because the heads of the churches and synagogues do not want you to know the truth.

The apologists don�t tell you the DSS are 12 to 1600 years after Moses, and 2 to 600 after Edras. They either do not know of the controversy over the LXX also around the 3rd century BCE, or they don�t want you to know. They would also have you believe that in the absence of a printing press, the only way to copy and disseminate writings was by copying same. They don�t tell you of all the marginal changes on the papyri. They don�t tell you that not all copies of each text were in agreement. They don�t tell you that just last month, the challenge leans to be that the DSS were a collection of various manuscripts with differing texts used as a central library, and collected by a very wealthy sect and had nothing to do with delineating the word. They don�t tell you that the Christian church prefers to think these were poor fools living in penury, for they either don�t know, or hope to keep you in the proverbial dark, the former most likely being the case.

If I were as licentious as they and their various church masters who do not want the truths revealed, I would put a moratorium on who can translate the scrolls and what can be published too, after all, who in their right minds would give their hard earned money to knowingly support frauds? And I would certainly not respond to the blatant contradictions as I have shown, for how can they possibly be explained save for making a mockery of the authors, themselves and the other half of their congregation who happens to believe that the Bible is the divine word of God?

With that epistle, I have nothing further to add on this thread.