Quote# 59082

IF the NT were a false document, i would have been proven false and abolished before the end of the second century.

defense:

manuscripts of the new testament date back to the year 100.
not even 70 years after the events described. to say that the new testament is entirely or even mostly false would be the same as saying that today we could write that the holocaust never happened and that hitler was a generous german leader and everyone would accept it without opposition.


if the new testament were false, the jews and other non-christians would have opposed the stories and had them destroyed rather than re-written (almost 15,000 times, more than any other peice of ancient literature) and widely distributed.

if you believe it was all made up, then test this. write a book about WWII and omit the holocaust and hitler's hatred of the jews. if it becomes widely accepted, then you may be right.

ryanviolence, WWGHA Forum 55 Comments [2/19/2009 12:46:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 3 | bottom

Efrain

Err... It would be accurate, it just wouldn't mention those parts.

2/19/2009 12:50:04 AM

Old Viking

This is the very rare "Nobody Complained at the Time Defense."

2/19/2009 12:55:15 AM

Blue J

Yeah, and if Joseph Smith never had an encounter with the angel Moroni, then Mormonism would have been snuffed out by the year 1900! And if Haile Selassie wasn't the Messiah, then surely there would be no Rastafarians anymore.

...Heck, now that you mention it, there are millions of people alive today who don't believe that there was a Holocaust! It must not have happened, or somebody would have proved them wrong by now!

2/19/2009 1:01:10 AM

szaleniec

"write a book about WWII and omit the holocaust and hitler's hatred of the jews."

A novelisation of Hearts of Iron II?

2/19/2009 1:04:36 AM

Ashfish

You do know that there's a rather large portion of people who DON'T think there was a Holocaust...right?

And I really don't think the Jews, Muslims and other non-Christians were the ones reprinting the New Testament. That particular book centers around a guy none of those sects think are the messiah/savior/prophet/what have you.

2/19/2009 1:09:26 AM

RoyToy

I'd argue that, in their respective times, Hitler was a more widely known figure than Jesus.

2/19/2009 1:14:15 AM

Blackvoice

People usually just ignore the freaky sects, not try to correct their "Holy Books" since it is and always has been a waste of time.

2/19/2009 1:16:43 AM

Doctor Whom

And this is different from any other holy book exactly how?

2/19/2009 1:31:16 AM

perdurabo

@ Old Viking

Shouldnt that be the "Nobody Complained at the Time Due to Fear of Being Killed Outright by a Bunch of Psychotic, Asshole Religious Nutballs Defense"? Or were you merely summing up?

/salute

2/19/2009 1:31:34 AM

Dark_Lord_Prime

"manuscripts of the new testament date back to the year 100."

Because that's when they were originally written, idiot. None of the stories about Jesus were written anywhere close to when he supposedly existed.


"if the new testament were false, the jews and other non-christians would have opposed the stories and had them destroyed..."

Yeah, 'cause that's what we do with every work of fiction, just because they're not true.


As for the bit about writing a book claiming Hitler was a good guy and the holocaust never happened... well, unlike your Jesus, there are multiple historical records of both Hitler and the atrocities he perpetrated.

The only record of Jesus Christ is the bible, and that's a work of fiction.

2/19/2009 1:32:45 AM

Zabimaru

I often disagree with their political views, but Penn and Teller's show Bullshit often has some good things to say about things like this.

Here it is the famous "Elvis never did no drugs"-line that they said a lot. Just a generation or so after the death of Elvis, there are people who believe that he never used drugs, and there are numerous conflicting stories about the "real" recipe for his favorite chicken wings.

When recordkeeping isn't perfect, our knowledge of the past degrades very quickly. Especially when people's wishful thinking is involved.

2/19/2009 1:33:13 AM

anevilmeme

Right, that's why Jesus found out about the Trinity around 325 CE

2/19/2009 1:34:43 AM

Nihlum

IF the Quran were a false document, it would have been proven false and abolished before the end of the ninth century.

Fixed.

IF the Evolution of species by means of natural selection were a false document, it would have been proven false and abolished before the end of the twentieth century.

Fixed again

Repeat ad infinitum.

2/19/2009 1:34:58 AM

Nowonmai

The stories of the Greek Gods and Goddesses predate The New Testament, and the stories are still out there, with just as many magical, and are about as scientifically accurate as the bible. They just aren't put forth as 'true'.

2/19/2009 1:36:20 AM



The NT as we know it didn't exist in the 2nd century. The different books of the Bible existed but no one could agree over which ones were accurate at that point in time.

2/19/2009 1:44:06 AM

Illuminatalie

Old Viking's summary is concise and to the point. Sometimes brevity is the soul of wit.

2/19/2009 1:53:27 AM

?!?!

Re-written almost 15,00 times, and you think its still accurate?@!

2/19/2009 1:54:57 AM

Antichrist

Except the New Testament wasn't put together until the 16th century.

oops.

2/19/2009 1:55:15 AM

mike-mike

What the hell?

2/19/2009 1:55:38 AM

Pule Thamex

Did you actually think before you wrote that or did you even think as you were writing it? That's the 'you are a brainless clod' scenario.

You did think both before and as you wrote it and realized it was full of holes, but didn't care, because you thought that the others on WWGHA Forum were simply brainless clods anyway. That's the 'you are a piece of shit' scenario.

So I take it, that you are either a brainless clod or a piece of shit, or most likely both. Whatever you are, you were hammered on the forum.

2/19/2009 2:10:46 AM

Headache

even mostly false would be the same as saying that today we could write that the holocaust never happened and that hitler was a generous german leader and everyone would accept it without opposition.

See www.stormfront.org

2/19/2009 2:19:16 AM

D Laurier

Several historians have writen books about WW2 which omit or simply do not touch upon "The holocaust", or upon Hitlers supposed hatred of jews.
These books are widely accepted.

2/19/2009 2:25:10 AM

Osiris

manuscripts of the new testament date back to the year 100.
Over fifty years after the events happened. Because there were not photographs, cameras, or other objective physical means of recording, those manuscripts, if they did cover actual events, must have been drawn from memory. Memory however is not only subjective, but unstable. Have you ever heard your grandfather talk about his childhood?

not even 70 years after the events described. to say that the new testament is entirely or even mostly false would be the same as saying that today we could write that the holocaust never happened and that hitler was a generous german leader and everyone would accept it without opposition.
Some people do accept that. But here's the thing. During the Holocaust photos were taken, films were made, and orders were documented. We don't have to read in a book somewhere that the Holocaust happened, we can verify that with objective evidence. But when it comes to Christ we have only the word of the Gospels as proof he existed. Words that by your admission were subject to the faulty, subjective nature or memory. This is assuming as well that the people who wrote the Gospels actually did witness these events in their lives, and that they weren't second hand accounts or ghost written.

if the new testament were false, the jews and other non-christians would have opposed the stories and had them destroyed rather than re-written (almost 15,000 times, more than any other peice of ancient literature) and widely distributed.
Re-written 15,000 times?!? This is almost adorable in a tragic sense. You have no idea how well of argument who have made here for the inaccuracy of the Bible do you? How can any story that was written from memory a half century after the supposed events took place, and then re-written 15,000 times by different authors in different languages possibly remain accurate? It's like the telephone game but played over 1,000 years. Even if Jesus was a real person the events in the New Testament have be so embellished that it can't be taken seriously anymore, not by any legitimate scholar. And the lack of any other evidence or documents speaking of this character further lend credence to the claim that the New Testament is either highly inaccurate and embellished, or an outright lie.

2/19/2009 2:26:41 AM

Thinking Allowed

IF the NT were a false document, i would have been proven false and abolished before the end of the second century.

So just how OLD are you ryanviolence?

manuscripts of the new testament date back to the year 100.

So 65 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, they finally wrote it down. Eye witness after 10 years is shaky at best.

2/19/2009 2:35:26 AM

Chi

The epic of Gilgamesh is still floating around, isn't it?

2/19/2009 2:46:01 AM

1 2 3 | top: comments page