Alalu wrote:Good grief! Talk about pointless. You make a lot of assumptions and all of them are wrong. And you contradicted yourself with the "banned from the Bible" comment. How can something be banned if it didn't preexist? How do you explain the Dead Sea Scrolls?
And who decided that one book was acceptable and another not, even when they were by the same authors? Completely arbitrary. Books were in one day, out the next.
You are not one of those people who thinks the world was created 6,000 years ago are you?
Everything I said is correct.
Before I crossed over and joined God's family, I used to think precisely as you do in that quote. However, since that time I have researched this subject (whereas before, I believed biased claims made in books and on websites by anti-Christian authors). I have found that the Councils that were convened in order to decide which books were valid and which were too questionable to be valid... took the whole thing VERY seriously. And they had very few disagreements among the Councils because the rigorous set of requirements used to render their decisions made it very clear which books passed and which books failed. Once a book was put to the test, it was never a "grey area" where 50% considered it valid and 50% considered it invalid. Every decision on the validation of the books of the bible was a landslide slam dunk.
So for example, don't let biased websites and articles convince you that some books of the bible were banned or accepted by the slimmest of margins. Once THAT misleading statement is accepted, the next logical deduction is that the bible itself is just a collection of books that barely passed through a clumsy voting process. I remember one book of the bible according to one of these anti-Christian websites, was rejected on a slim margin majority vote. The website cast doubt on the decision and on the bible as a result. Then, after researching it I found that the vote was (by memory) something like 120 to 1. And the one that voted to pass the book had Gnostic leanings in his beliefs.
As you read my statement, you might even say to yourself, "the websites gain nothing by lying and misleading me, so I think I should trust them." No, do your own research. Dig and find for yourself. And, the people that would lie and mislead to cloud your judgment DO gain something from it. They gain the satisfaction of winning the argument against Christ. And as I have determined over my many years, the argument against Christ - once boiled completely down - is borne from an extreme dislike of Christ and Christians, and because a person simply doesn't WANT Christ to be for real. Seriously.
Over a 2000 year period, the detractors who simply don't want Christ to be real, have built powerful arguments to muddy up the waters. All because they just don't want it to be true and they want to soothe their own guilt, and provide themselves and others a valid "excuse" for not believing, should the time come when they have to explain their disbelief.