Forged Origins of The New Testament?

Question

http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/NewTestament.html

THIS time, if you're gonna (try) and debunk it - at least attempt to add references to prove your point (as the author of this has!) Without them, you simply are ranting without proof. (How unusual for a christian...)

I HAVE some of the books the author refers to, and those references ARE CORRECT, so you'll really have to come up with better than: "Conspiracy theory" and "Lies".

*Rolls eyes...

Answer 1

Interesting link. At least some of it's true. Maybe, though unlikely, all of it.

Too damned many axes being ground on the issue, too much selective collection of evidence.

But it's a good link. I've bookmarked it for study.

Answer 2

That's the problem with conspiracy theories. They use real sources sometimes, but misrepresent them, or only use one side. The sources that the author of the article uses were written BEFORE many historical and archaeological discoveries pointed towards an earlier date for the writing of the New Testament.

And NEXUS magazine is WELL KNOWN as a conspiracy theorist's magazine. They also write about alien abductions and other such things. Yup, sounds like a REALLY reliable source to me!

My references? Oh, there are so many.
Most RELIABLE historians have researched the issue, and have found extant manuscripts dating back to the 2nd century which quote the New Testament. If the New Testament was not written until the 4th century, this would not be possible. The purpose of the Council of Nicea was not to WRITE the New Testament, but to decide which of the books that ALREADY EXISTED were canonical.
http://www.carm.org/questions/written_after.htm
http://www.british-israel.ca/Interview.htm
http://www.ccel.org/contrib/exec_outlines/ca/ca_04.htm
http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/manuscripts.html
http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?ID=233
http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?cid=656&
http://www.christianlibrary.org/authors/Mark_A_Copeland/ca/ca_06.htm
http://www.grmi.org/renewal/Richard_Riss/evidences/12date.html
http://www.christianity.co.nz/eye-3.htm
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/bib-docu.html
http://www.probe.org/content/view/30/77/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/14452.htm
http://www.orthodox.net/faq/canon.htm

There are plenty of contemporary historians that wrote about the early Christians: Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Josephus mentions Jesus's brother James, Thallus, and many others. Unfortunately, the largest extent of historical writings were probably destroyed when Jerusalem fell in A.D. 70. It's possible that thousands of manuscripts were burned. However, there are STILL more than 100 historians who wrote about Jesus and/or early Christians.

But you probably won't read ANY of that, will you? Look, I've studied this for more than thirteen years, and I CONTINUE to study it, even now. And thus far, I have found NO evidence that suggests that the New Testament was written later than apologetics SAY it was written. And believe me, I've tried. I've only been a Christian for nine months. Until that time, I did not WANT to find that any of it was true. However, when faced with overwhelming historical and archaeological evidence, I had to admit that I was beat.

Answer 3

When you wrote "those references are correct", what you *should* have written is "the references do exist". Nevertheless, I can explain most of this without racking my brain. (And so could you, if you really wanted to explore the issue.)

1) "..the authenticity of which we must, to a great extent, take for granted." - Of course, the events in the NT have not been proven by any secondary source. Like so many relatively minor events (from a secular point of view), the execution of the leader of a group of twelve who are an offshoot of a relatively small sect (the Jews) would hardly make it into the world histories of the time. We can say with a great deal of certainty that the Romans executed hundreds, or perhaps thousands, of people without any of the records being discovered. Likewise, life of the Jews at that time (excepting the royal family) is almost completely unknown outside of the bible. The Dead Sea Scrolls are perhaps the only Jewish account of life in first century Judea outside of the bible - and *they* speak only in passing of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

'the Gospels "do not go back to the first century of the Christian era"' - from 'Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed' - yes, from the *1912* edition! If I went back far enough, I could find a text book claiming that the earth was flat! Research that has occurred since this time has provided these figures: Mark - date uncertain; Matthew - "most likely written about A.D. 90"; Luke & Acts - "The outside chronological range for the writing of Luke-Acts would be ca. 70-90"; John - date uncertain, but likely after the first century. Source: HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, ISBN 0060600373, 1996. We can see from modern science that the *final* form of Luke, at least, can be definitely assigned to the first century. Whether other gospels were extant, in a more primitive form or complete, cannot be stated with certainty, nor can it be denied with any certainty.

"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" - taken from the same source. Today we have P46 - an early 3rd century copy of Hebrews; P66 - a partial copy of John from 200 C.E.; P72 - a 3rd century copy including Jude, 1 and 2 Peter; P75 - a copy of most of John and Luke from about 200 C.E. Source: HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, ISBN 0060600373, 1996.

In the 1st paragraph on Canstantine and the "Church Fathers", the author of this web site quotes Origen (one of the most highly-respected early Church fathers) speaking against Celsus, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsus, *an opponent of Christianity*. The author was using a quote *from a 'Church Father'" speaking against an opponent of Christianity, and *representing* it as a quote *against* a "Church Father"!

At this point, I am disappointed in the miserably unscholarly attempt to undermine Christianity, but I will continue...

"Clusters of presbyters had developed "many gods and many lords" (1 Cor. 8:5)." Another case of plain fraud. This quote of a partial verse from 1Co does not mention presbyters, nor is any mention of presbyters made in this chapter.

"numerous religious sects existed, each with differing doctrines" - Indeed, the Jews, the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians, etc, etc, etc, all had different doctrines and, indeed, multiple sects within each of these broad groupings.

I don't feel the need to continue, because:
1) I have proven that the author of this page is quite willing to use fraud to make his point (in 2 instances in just the 1st 4 paragraphs)
2) I am lacking several of the references mentioned in the section on Constantine
3) You'll really have to come up with better than: "Conspiracy theory" and "Lies" (and so will this "author")

Jim

Answer 4

The canon of scripture was already completed from the septuagint and the apostles writings before this. Although this could very well be true as there are many false texts that have been put together over the years saying they are the word of God but it is not the authentic canon of scripture which had nothing to do with the official protestant church bible we have today, we have many of the authentic manuscripts and that is how today many men try to make newer english translations.

Answer 5

Interesting piece. I prefer to attack the bible on scientific grounds, as a scientist, I am on more familiar turf there than I would be on history. Another questioner has noted a relevant site; see:
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/NewTestament.html

Answer 6

The Bible in its entirety was plagiarized from earlier Pagan religions, rendering it useless. There is zero empirical evidence that anything out of the ordinary took place in Biblical times. Many deities existed through many religions previous to Christianity who paralleled Jesus's story in many ways. If you were a Christian, you would know this without me having to source it, because pastors merely shrug off these pagan heroes as a test placed by Satan.

Answer 7

I know the NT was tampered with by the Nicene Counsel. This is old news my friend. However, I still believe in God and Jesus.

I'm not writing a dissertation, so I'm not quoting any sources.

Answer 8

Can we not just allow Christians to believe what they believe and hope that they allow the rest of the world to believe what the rest of the world believes? Is it not important enough to you that YOU know the truth?

Answer 9

If you begin with an anti-Christian bias, you will produce anti-Christian articles.