NewStats: 3,259,553 , 8,170,485 topics. Date: Sunday, 25 May 2025 at 02:39 PM 2b1j3l

Dtruthspeaker:


See why you deserve to plunge and die with Satan your father and why God can never allow you to repent when you see like Esau that you are a Fool?

You are stúpid and useless. Your brain is less than -1%.

Uptownerd:

You are stúpid and useless. Your brain is less than -1%.

Your response proves you are super foolish with your brain all leaked out.

SIRTee15:


Who told U satan can die?
What do U understand by the word death?

I don't blame U, I blame prosperity and miracle chasing churches that fails to teach the scriptures.

Now we seeing the effects on social media with children running around asking senseless question.

Lol.

You should blame yourself for having cheap brain.

So Satan cannot die huh? No wonder oyinbo people said you guys have 70% IQ, lesser than a chimp.

SIRTee15:

How do U know the Jews at that time fought Jesus followers.
What's your source?




The death of James the just- brother of Jesus is well documented in history by both christians and non Christians.

His manners of death is very important to our discussion here. When he was killed, Jerusalem almost erupted in riot if not for timely intervention of the Roman procurate.

So tell me, how did he die?

Always pretending to know history of a Middle East county. But doesn't know his own history.

Nawa4nl:
Mumu time for Satan's judgement dey come.
The immediate wahala na to save mankind.

I beg saving mankind does not involve rewarding with 72 oloshos, God is not a p1mp

So you mean all the millions of thieves, murderers and pedophiles that have their life to Christ on death bed won't see olosho to knack in heaven? Chai.

Babinski:


If you think Satan is the root cause of sin, then you do not understand the nature of sin. The moment you have free will, you have the capacity to rebel. Even though the devil made suggestions to Eve, it was Eve that for her own reasons chose the path of rebellion against God. The sin that Jesus came to eradicate is not an action but a "nature", that is why salvation is iabout being reborn in a new nature.

Do you people even read the junk you write? So God wants to change human nature, but couldn't do it when there was only 2 people in the so called Bible world. He had to wait when millions of people have filled the earth?

Your education (if you are educated), is a waste. Why can't you people use your goddamn head for once and stop speaking like some preprogrammed robot with no thoughts of their own.

God forbid.

Dtruthspeaker:


Your response proves you are super foolish with your brain all leaked out.

Spoken like a person with a -1% brain.🤣😂🤣😂🙌😂

Uptownerd:

Spoken like a person with a -1% brain.🤣😂🤣😂🙌😂

Spoken like a person with no brain in him

SIRTee15:


Very good U did some research. Now U are transiting from just being a beer parlour atheist based on gossips and gists rather than real factual evidence.

Now James the brother of Jesus was killed by the Sanhedrin. The open minded Jews didn't like it and petitioned the Roman procurate to have those who killed him be punished.
This is because James was well loved by the people- jews or Christians, he often preach in the synagogue and temple.
James was killed around 62 AD, 30 yrs after lifetime of Jesus. Most Jews who loved James and whom he preached to were very much alive during Jesus ministry.

Now if the Jews knew Jesus as a common rabbi, Do U think they will tolerate people like James going about making legendary statements about him.
Won't they call him out for lying?
Would he have such significant following and command respect among the Jews if he's known for fabricating stories about a former rabbi?
Why would they fight their own Jewish leaders for killing James if he was known as a liar and gospel fabricator. I bet they would be glad the blasphemer had been dealt with.

Think my friend, think.

There's a reason no reputable bible scholar has come out to condemned the gospel as work of fiction.
Evidence we keep discovering goes against such narrative.

😅 Wait o! Is the bolded a joke or just typical brazen ignorance.

Babinski:


If you think Satan is the root cause of sin, then you do not understand the nature of sin. The moment you have free will, you have the capacity to rebel. Even though the devil made suggestions to Eve, it was Eve that for her own reasons chose the path of rebellion against God. The sin that Jesus came to eradicate is not an action but a "nature", that is why salvation is iabout being reborn in a new nature.

A brainless person like the op can not assimilate that information

SIRTee15:


And nobody living at that time could call them out for lying against Jesus.?

Exactly.

danvon:

The Jews did not keep quiet infact they fought hard against the madness, unfortunately their fight against insanity was simply free ment the mad people needed to brand themselves as victims and gain .

I do not know how James the brother of Jesus died and I'm not sure you know either.

I'm not even sure Jesus had a brother.

And yet none of them said they were lying? You are just trying to fuel your delusions

danvon:


A better question should be, if Jesus performed all those miracles and wonders why were there so many Jews who didn't accept Jesus, mind you the Pharisees were very educated moral abiding people who would have common sense to see the truth.

James was a Christian but he was a conservative Christian he strictly abided by the teachings of the Torah (unlike Paul), which is why his madness was tolerated, i use the word 'tolerated' because eventually he was killed by the highest moral authority in the land..

Now you have shifted post to miracles and wonders

Look at the world today and even before today, do people follow God and want His Praise raised up? No.

Even Isreal who heard from God directly and saw His Miracles over their lives still ran away from Him.

And did you not see that even before Christ these same educated and important people killed God's Prophets?
So how can they accept Christ?

Lucifyre:


😅 Wait o! Is the bolded a joke or just typical brazen ignorance.

Bring evidence to the contrary.
Evidence that says our gospel is a fabrication.

Pls I want evidence from academic reputable bible scholars not some beer parlour gist.

Uptownerd:

Always pretending to know history of a Middle East county. But doesn't know his own history.

Guy I take my spirituality very seriously.
If I'm to follow a foreign religion, common sense dictates I do a thorough historical research about it b4 believing it to be true.

That doesn't mean I don't know the history of my people. It's equally important to know why the spirituality of my ancestors isn't the true one.

Uptownerd:

Lol.

You should blame yourself for having cheap brain.

So Satan cannot die huh? No wonder oyinbo people said you guys have 70% IQ, lesser than a chimp.

I'm not surprised that someone who doesn't understand the concept of death would swallow anything from his god called the white man.

Attributing physical human being characteristics to an entity regarded as non physical.
I'm sure he's never heard of MR NIGER D.

so obviously the problem is not the church but also the school.
Lack of quality education has turned him to dunce. No wonder he's on social media asking if satan can die.
Ode.

Uptownerd:

Do you people even read the junk you write? So God wants to change human nature, but couldn't do it when there was only 2 people in the so called .

Your head is obviously leaking else you would have ed that those only 2 people had become corrupted and they are completely condemned.

But this is God trying to save their children from that same certain condemnation.

And apparently, you are lamenting because you are one of those who God has rejected and and will not be saving.

So, now you are lamenting and wishing that this problem had never begun.

Abeg just wail in silence after all we were not there when you were rejecting God's help

Dtruthspeaker:


Your head is obviously leaking else you would have ed that those only 2 people had become corrupted and they are completely condemned.

But this is God trying to save their children from that same certain condemnation.

And apparently, you are lamenting because you are one of those who God has rejected and and will not be saving.

So, now you are lamenting and wishing that this problem had never begun.

Abeg just wail in silence after all we were not there when you were rejecting God's help

🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

Damn! The matrix is real!

Uptownerd:

🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

Damn! The matrix is real!

See movie brainwashed person oooo. Kai some humans stupid gaaaan! They just brainlessly swallow up every statement made in movies.

No be only matrix na spiderman multiverse

danvon:


A better question should be, if Jesus performed all those miracles and wonders why were there so many Jews who didn't accept Jesus, mind you the Pharisees were very educated moral abiding people who would have common sense to see the truth.

I hope U know the first Christians were Jews- they were called Nazarenes by their own people.
Some were coverts from other Judaism sects like Pharisees and Essenes.
They actually wrote their own gospel called the Hebrew gospel.
Matthew also wrote a gospel to the Christian Jews in Hebrew language.
They had their prayer book called the Didache which is very much around today.
As at the turn of the 1st century AD, judiasm had 4 sects- Pharisee, zealots, Sadducees and Essenes.
As at the collapse of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the sects had become 5, the 5th one are Jesus followers- they call themselves THE WAY. Gentiles called them Christians.

danvon:


James was a Christian but he was a conservative Christian he strictly abided by the teachings of the Torah (unlike Paul), which is why his madness was tolerated, i use the word 'tolerated' because eventually he was killed by the highest moral authority in the land.

Guy that's the problem with U atheist. Neither here nor there, most times everywhere- changing goalpost at will or once U cornered.
Initially U said the gospel was a fiction work by Jesus followers. Now U don't change mouth to some of his followers didn't lie too much. Which is which- did Jesus followers write the truth about him or not?

James regularly preached in the temple in Jerusalem. He would be killed instantly by the people if he utters any blasphemous statement on the altar.
They let him alone albeit didn't accept his teaching because he wasn't uttering heresy. He was simply pointing to them that Jesus is the fulfilment of their scriptures as The Messiah foretold.
Jews have zero tolerance for blasphemy when it comes to thier beliefs.
They went to war with Greece because one of their kings slaughtered pig on temple altar and forced the priests to eat it.

danvon:

Jews caring about James death was simply because of the abuse of authority and the hasty trial, so it was classified as murder to them which was a violation of the Torah.

U gotta be kidding me. Extra judicial killing was rampant in the last 70 years of Jerusalem existence.
The zealots were keen to go to war against the Roman occupation and the Sanhedrin were keen to avoid this.
Perceived enemies were eliminated quietly while the Romans looked the other way
Some of Jesus apostles were mobbed to death in Judea and nothing happened. James case was different only because he was very popular amongst the people.

Dtruthspeaker:


See movie brainwashed person oooo. Kai some humans stupid gaaaan! They just brainlessly swallow up every statement made in movies.

No be only matrix na spiderman multiverse

Ignorant and dumb.

Uptownerd:

Do you people even read the junk you write? So God wants to change human nature, but couldn't do it when there was only 2 people in the so called Bible world. He had to wait when millions of people have filled the earth?

Your education (of you are educated), is a waste. Why can't you people use your goddamn head for once and stop speaking like some preprogrammed robot with no thoughts of their own.

God forbid.

It is symptomatic of shallow minds to resort to insults when they encounter superior argument in discussions.

For you, it makes sense and it is easier to change human nature when they are 2 rather than millions. But the Creator of the world has His own plans and those are arrived at based on a reasoning level far above your own.

If you have learnt about "counterintuitive strategy", you will know that what appears to be the simple and direct solution to the ordinary man is not the ideal as known by people experienced in the field.

Ask an experienced Civil Engineer why it makes sense to intentionally weaken a structure in seismic design or ask a seasoned software engineer the reasoning behind the technique of "fault injection" or "error seeding" in software development. I can go on with several examples from different fields.

If this can be happening even at our own human thinking level, how much more at a level far above us? You need to learn and acknowledge how limited your thinking or knowledge is and do away with the pomposity, little man.

SIRTee15:


I'm not surprised that someone who doesn't understand the concept of death would swallow anything from his god called the white man.

Attributing physical human being characteristics to an entity regarded as non physical.
I'm sure he's never heard of MR NIGER D.

so obviously the problem is not the church but also the school.
Lack of quality education has turned him to dunce. No wonder he's on social media asking if satan can die.
Ode.

E shock me

Babinski:


If you think Satan is the root cause of sin, then you do not understand the nature of sin. The moment you have free will, you have the capacity to rebel. Even though the devil made suggestions to Eve, it was Eve that for her own reasons chose the path of rebellion against God. The sin that Jesus came to eradicate is not an action but a "nature", that is why salvation is iabout being reborn in a new nature.

Freewill huh?

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart - Jeremiah 1:5.

Uptownerd:
This is like knowing the root cause of a problem but dancing around it. It's like chasing rat when your house is on fire.

who told you the story of Him killing His own son for your sins?

Uptownerd:

E shock me

My message is for U not someone else.
Dumb.

SIRTee15:


Bring evidence to the contrary.
Evidence that says our gospel is a fabrication.

Pls I want evidence from academic reputable bible scholars not some beer parlour gist.

The amount of confidently ignorant people on this platform is too damn high😅. Like the frigging irony of saying you want evidence from scholarship when anyone with the daintiest clue about the stance of basic academic scholarship wouldn't make the outstandingly ignorant statement you did is beyond laughable. Then again its the typical apologist way of making assertions before even understanding the context of said assertions cause they think it s their conclusion, so not suprised there.

Anyway, first off, which is basic knowledge and a fact and consensus among the academic community, is that there is no single "Bible." There are multiple Bibles, and they say different things depending on the adopted canon, translation method, and source manuscripts. They range from 24 to as many as 82 books, depending on the sect, from the Codex Sinaiticus to the Tanakh to the Targum, to the Septuagint, to NA28, etc. This is just to paint a backdrop of the confusing mess of zero objectivity.

Now, whatever Bible you use or choose, one thing is certain, and that is the fact that it is not univocal. Different authors say different things with different agendas, directed at different audiences, which is why there are so many contradictions. The Gospels contradict themselves at virtually every turn, from the birth narrative to the death narrative, with no harmony and no objectivity. This is despite the fact that the authors basically copied each other but tweaked the story to appeal to their particular audience, as there were numerous Gospels in circulation, all wanting to drive their narrative. Many of these Gospels and their narratives didn't make it into the canon, as they brought about even more contradictions.

The Gospels and other books are historically inaccurate. Various s depicted in them, when verified with external sources, are found wanting, pointing to creative liberty. For example, the census in Luke, which was conducted at Jesus' birth, was used to fix location contradictions from the other Gospels. However, the census, as claimed by the Gospels, took place during the reign of Herod the Great (who wanted to kill Jesus, by the way), which we know is flat-out wrong. According to other sources, the census took place during the reign of Quirinius, 10 years after Herod's death.

These contradictions and historical inaccuracies are not surprising, considering that the earliest Gospel (Mark) was written at least four decades after the said event and wasn't even written by eyewitnesses. Most of it was made up after the fact, sometimes drawing motifs from other older myths (similar to most of the Bible), like the virgin birth of Dionysus and his turning water into wine...

...The earliest books we have are the letters of Paul, with 1 Thessalonians being the first, written 20 years after the fact. So, no surprise that it contradicts itself and is littered with inaccuracies. The actual authors are basically unknown, and most of the books are forgeries, but, as Dr. Bart Ehrman would say, that's a morally loaded term, so it's called pseudepigraphy in scholarship. Out of the 13 letters claimed to be written by Paul, only seven were actually written by him. The only other book we are sure was written by who claimed to have written it is Revelation, written by a John, not necessarily John son of Zebedee. So, only eight out of 27 books are not forgeries.

Even the writers make it known in the Bible that people should be aware of forgeries, because they knew what was going on, with lots of forgery and counter-forgery going on, alongside people claiming to be who they're not.

Lastly, the original manuscripts are lost, and what we have are basically copies of copies of copies, where no two manuscripts are exactly alike. These copies have been edited, re-edited, redacted, and retconned over time, changing the narrative as it goes, like how we got to find out the original ending of Mark before more was added to retcon the narrative as the fictional story was adjusted over time.

This is what you call non-fiction, non-fabricated, or historically accurate. I can only laugh!

Virtually all scholars agree on the above as a consensus in academic scholarship, even those with Christian backgrounds. Bart Ehrman's books, such as "Introduction to the New Testament," "Forgeries and Counter Forgeries," or "Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don't Know About Them)," are perfect sources. Reputable scholars like E.P. Sanders, Dale Martin from Yale, and even religious scholars like Dan McClellan, Paula Fredriksen, and Dale Allison have discussed this extensively in their works. Virtually any reputable scholars work would cite this as its bible context 101. Chop evidence😁

Lucifyre:


The amount of confidently ignorant people on this platform is too damn high😅. Like the frigging irony of saying you want evidence from scholarship when anyone with the daintiest clue about the stance of basic academic scholarship wouldn't make the outstandingly ignorant statement you did is beyond laughable. Then again its the typical apologist way of making assertions before even understanding the context of said assertions cause they think it s their conclusion, so not suprised there.

Anyway, first off, which is basic knowledge and a fact and consensus among the academic community, is that there is no single "Bible." There are multiple Bibles, and they say different things depending on the adopted canon, translation method, and source manuscripts. They range from 24 to as many as 82 books, depending on the sect, from the Codex Sinaiticus to the Tanakh to the Targum, to the Septuagint, to NA28, etc. This is just to paint a backdrop of the confusing mess of zero objectivity.

Now, whatever Bible you use or choose, one thing is certain, and that is the fact that it is not univocal. Different authors say different things with different agendas, directed at different audiences, which is why there are so many contradictions. The Gospels contradict themselves at virtually every turn, from the birth narrative to the death narrative, with no harmony and no objectivity. This is despite the fact that the authors basically copied each other but tweaked the story to appeal to their particular audience, as there were numerous Gospels in circulation, all wanting to drive their narrative. Many of these Gospels and their narratives didn't make it into the canon, as they brought about even more contradictions.

The Gospels and other books are historically inaccurate. Various s depicted in them, when verified with external sources, are found wanting, pointing to creative liberty. For example, the census in Luke, which was conducted at Jesus' birth, was used to fix location contradictions from the other Gospels. However, the census, as claimed by the Gospels, took place during the reign of Herod the Great (who wanted to kill Jesus, by the way), which we know is flat-out wrong. According to other sources, the census took place during the reign of Quirinius, 10 years after Herod's death.

These contradictions and historical inaccuracies are not surprising, considering that the earliest Gospel (Mark) was written at least four decades after the said event and wasn't even written by eyewitnesses. Most of it was made up after the fact, sometimes drawing motifs from other older myths (similar to most of the Bible), like the virgin birth of Dionysus and his turning water into wine...

Ok after writing your long opiniated opinion U failed woefully to bring any evidence from any scholar that says the gospel is fabricated.

Your opinion counts for nothing. It's at best beer parlour gist.

Now let me bring U the writings of topmost bible scholars and what they have to say about the reliability and integrity of the gospel.

1. Bruce M. Metzger
Renowned New Testament scholar and textual critic.
Professor at Princeton Theological Seminary for over 40 years. He's regarded as the greatest NT scholar of the 20th century.

"The amount of evidence for the text of the New Testament, whether derived from manuscripts, early versions, or patristic citations, is so much greater than that available for any ancient classical author, that the need for resorting to emendation is reduced to the smallest dimensions. Despite some scribal errors, the core message of the New Testament is intact and well-preserved.


2. F.F. Bruce
Distinguished biblical scholar and historian.
Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester.
Specialized in the historical reliability of the New Testament.

"There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament. The New Testament is one of the best-attested works of antiquity, with thousands of manuscripts ing its textual integrity. The variations among manuscripts do not affect essential Christian doctrines because the unparalleled textual evidence ing the New Testament authenticity.
(The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, p. 15)

3. Daniel B. Wallace
Leading textual critic and New Testament scholar.
Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary.
Founder and executive director of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (CSNTM), focusing on digitizing ancient manuscripts.


"The New Testament has far more manuscripts that are also much earlier than any other ancient text. The average classical author’s literary remains number no more than twenty copies, whereas the New Testament boasts over 5,800 complete or fragmented Greek manuscripts... Such an embarrassment of riches is unequaled by any other ancient literature. The overwhelming quantity and early dating of New Testament manuscripts, ing its preservation.
(Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament, p. 28)

4. Bart D. Ehrman
Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Leading scholar in textual criticism, known for his work on scribal practices and variations in New Testament manuscripts.

"The New Testament is by far the best-attested work of any work from the ancient world."
(Misquoting Jesus, p. 7)
Significance: Although Ehrman critiques scribal practices, he acknowledges the exceptional textual attestation of the New Testament.

5. John A.T. Robinson

Biblical scholar and theologian.
Dean of Trinity College, Cambridge university, and author of influential works on the dating and historical context of the New Testament.


"The wealth of manuscripts, and above all the very substantial papyri dating from the second and third centuries, makes it overwhelmingly probable that we have a text which is very close to that originally written this very reliable."
(Redating the New Testament, p. 36)

I brought U evidence from 5 bible scholars some of them atheist who all confirm the reliability and integrity of the new testament.
You brought none, not even one.

So the question is who should I believe, bible scholars or Your beer parlour baseless opinion?

Lucifyre:


The amount of confidently ignorant people on this platform is too damn high😅. Like the frigging irony of saying you want evidence from scholarship when anyone with the daintiest clue about the stance of basic academic scholarship wouldn't make the outstandingly ignorant statement you did is beyond laughable. Then again its the typical apologist way of making assertions before even understanding the context of said assertions cause they think it s their conclusion, so not suprised there.

Anyway, first off, which is basic knowledge and a fact and consensus among the academic community, is that there is no single "Bible." There are multiple Bibles, and they say different things depending on the adopted canon, translation method, and source manuscripts. They range from 24 to as many as 82 books, depending on the sect, from the Codex Sinaiticus to the Tanakh to the Targum, to the Septuagint, to NA28, etc. This is just to paint a backdrop of the confusing mess of zero objectivity.

Now, whatever Bible you use or choose, one thing is certain, and that is the fact that it is not univocal. Different authors say different things with different agendas, directed at different audiences, which is why there are so many contradictions. The Gospels contradict themselves at virtually every turn, from the birth narrative to the death narrative, with no harmony and no objectivity. This is despite the fact that the authors basically copied each other but tweaked the story to appeal to their particular audience, as there were numerous Gospels in circulation, all wanting to drive their narrative. Many of these Gospels and their narratives didn't make it into the canon, as they brought about even more contradictions.

The Gospels and other books are historically inaccurate. Various s depicted in them, when verified with external sources, are found wanting, pointing to creative liberty. For example, the census in Luke, which was conducted at Jesus' birth, was used to fix location contradictions from the other Gospels. However, the census, as claimed by the Gospels, took place during the reign of Herod the Great (who wanted to kill Jesus, by the way), which we know is flat-out wrong. According to other sources, the census took place during the reign of Quirinius, 10 years after Herod's death.

These contradictions and historical inaccuracies are not surprising, considering that the earliest Gospel (Mark) was written at least four decades after the said event and wasn't even written by eyewitnesses. Most of it was made up after the fact, sometimes drawing motifs from other older myths (similar to most of the Bible), like the virgin birth of Dionysus and his turning water into wine...

I will daze you with bible scholars evidence.unril U are purged of those beer parlour opinion.

This is what Bart Erhman have to say about the New testament reliability.
FYI Bart Erhman is a confirmed atheist and is the foremost crusader in the argument of NT textual corruption.
At the end of it all, this is what he has to say in his book called misquoting Jesus




Bruce Metzger is one of the great scholars of modern times, and I dedicated the book to him because he was both my inspiration for going into textual criticism and the person who trained me in the field. I have nothing but respect and iration for him. And even though we may disagree on important religious questions – he is a firmly committed Christian and I am not – we are in complete agreement on a number of very important historical and textual questions. If he and I were put in a room and asked to hammer out a consensus statement on what we think the original text of the New Testament probably looked like, there would be very few points of disagreement – maybe one or two dozen places out of many thousands. The position I argue for in ‘Misquoting Jesus’ does not actually stand at odds with Prof. Metzger’s position that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.

Uptownerd:

This is like knowing the root cause of a problem but dancing around it. It's like chasing rat when your house is on fire.

A professor is teaching students in his class how to perform excellently with their project but one of the students started mocking the professor asserting that the pro is using an obsolete style of approach before the professor could utter a word other students are beginning to take sides with their classmate.

To prove himself worthy.

What should the professor do?

[1] Call for the expulsion of this critic.

[2] Dismiss the class.

[3] Call the student to prefer a better solution.

[4] Kill the critic.


Which do you think is the best option!

SIRTee15:


I The position I argue for in ‘Misquoting Jesus’ does not actually stand at odds with Prof. Metzger’s position that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.[/b][/i]

🤣 My gosh! Your comments literally made me lol! When i said confident and ignorant it sounded demeaning but just look. Seriously how do you guys do it, how can you be so confident yapping about something u've obviously got no clue about, its fascinating. I could bet #50k u've never read any of the sources you cited and an additional #10k u've literally never read any peice of scholarship if not you wouldn't commit this kind of embarrassing blunder. At least i cited what ive read and put the thought process in my words.

So this doesn't fully turn to just ad hominems let me school/educate you. To begin, don't you see you couldn't literally refute a single thing i said, which are all basically facts in scholarship, not one. Not with words and thought processes of your own, not even with the chat gpt you resorted to, to find your sources and buttress your point, that you hadn't even read and ended up quoting out of context as you do your bible. You just had to ignorantly conflate textual integrity with historical validity and inerrancy.

If you had managed to read even just the context of your sources you would have seen that virtually all of em were taking about textual attestation, integrity and preservation in relation to the the original manuscripts not historical accuracy or inerrancy or original authorship. In other words as a document if its been faithfully copied and transmitted, that what we have are close to the original manuscripts overall meta(quantity & quality) even though no 2 manuscripts are same.

They're simply saying its a well preserved textual artifact like the Iliad, not that its contents are historical or true. Just the title of some of the books from the scholars your quotes are from should have clued you in but nope, chat gpt, indoctrination and close mindedness nor let you see road. 🤣 Titles like Bruce's "New Testament : Its transmission, corruption and restoration" or Daniel Wallace's "Revisisting the corruption of the new testament" or Bart's "Misquoting Jesus: The story behind who changed the bible and why", should have clued you in.

Now for the nail in the coffin of the ignorant😁, at least you were the one that cited them and yes they are reliable scholars. Let me show i too can use a gpt, luckily im not ignorant to coflate textual integrity with historical accuracy and inerrancy. Here's what the same scholars have to say about the latter from the same books( see attached image).

P.S Is this the daze you want to daze me😄. Instead of dazing me educate urself abeg. Scholarship is not your bible study group where you do mental gymnastics to bend the data to fit a dogma, its always data over dogma.