Wiotte seems to have struck a nerve. His question was not answered.

------------------------

I get it now. You don't like the message, so you search for reasons to deny its authenticity.

Of course you know that the Gospel of John, the letters of Peter, the letters of Jesus' brothers, etc. are contemporaneous writings of eyewitnesses to the life and actions of Jesus of Nazareth, and at the very least the Gospel of Mark was based upon accounts told to him by the Apostle Peter.

But, you seek to delegitimize all that because the original documents were handled so much in being passed from church to church that they were were worn out, and copies had to be produced. So............the "original" documents are gone. We have copies, and copies of copies. No one denies this.

Realizing that you are just looking for reasons to justify your lack of faith, I wouldn't even bother to respond to your specious arguments if it weren't for the fact that I don't want other readers to be taken in by your fallacious position.

Textual scholarship (Westcott - Hort Greek scholars), testimony of the early church fathers about the authenticity of the New Testament books (by quoting them), and establishment of a Biblical canon by church councils, all served to have us arrive at the Bible we have today.

Don't bother to shout again that we don't have any "original" written texts. I've handled that.


Carl in Tampa

.