Actually there are no originals of any of the gospels in existance. The copies that do exist were made two or three generations after the death of Jesus of Nazareth.
First Ã¢â‚¬â€œ No one said we have original copies extant, you really should read the post before you respond to it, therefore your argument is moot, and a non sequitur.
Second Ã¢â‚¬â€œ We do not need the originals because we have exact quotes from the text, written down by the Church fathers and secular writers (who were quoting the writings in order to argue against them, ridicule them and/or satirize them). In fact, we could reconstruct the entire New Testament from those quotes, save eleven verses. Therefore your post is moot AND a non sequitur.
A committee of christians met some hundreds of years after the death of Jesus and decided which writings and including copies of gospels should be included in the bible.
Actually, there were numerous councils convened, the first being held in the third century. But ALL of the books of the New Testament were accepted as Gospel, and revered as scripture long before that time. The Counsels were mainly to refute the acceptance of heretical writings such as the Gnostic gospels (etceteraÃ¢â‚¬Â¦)
Even if we accept the copies as true copies they were all written some years or decades after the death of Jesus, by people with a vested interest in perpetuating their story. They claim to remember word for word all of the important statements/teachings made by Jesus even after this length of time.
First - Again, no one said we had original copies extant; therefore your argument is moot, and a non sequitur. Also, it is quite evident that you are attempting to argue from the historical relativistÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s bag of arguments. If you actually did your own studies and research into the subject, you may have been able to mount a cogent dialogue on the subject.
Second Ã¢â‚¬â€œ What exactly is this vested interest you are insinuating? Did they receive worldly riches for their vested interest? Did they receive worldly power for their vested interest? Did they receive worldly comforts for their vested interest?
Modern Christians now also tend to believe that these copies of writings made by people with questionable motives and 100% accurate.
What are the questionable motives you are Ã¢â‚¬Å“a prioriÃ¢â‚¬Â accusing them of? Do you have evidence of the questionable motives?
Now consider the number of inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the gospels (not to mention the rest of the bible) and it is very difficult to understand why anyone would believe a single word of it.
What are the inaccuracies? Please list themÃ¢â‚¬Â¦
What are the inconsistencies? Please list themÃ¢â‚¬Â¦
What is difficult here, is how someone can make baseless accusations from ignorance, and believe they have credibility after they have done so.
HereÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s a pretty good resource for you to start a far better inquiry into your misunderstandings: http://www.evolution...topic=1957&st=0
Also, you left one of the most important points of my post:
First Ã¢â‚¬â€œ that had absolutely nothing to do with the OP, the conversation, or Gilbos post. Therefore, it is nothing more than another Ã¢â‚¬Å“red herringÃ¢â‚¬Â intended to divert from the OP, conversation and GilboÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s post, and it is a non sequitur (and therefore an equivocation).
You basically trolled your own thread by equivocating on your own post (attempted rebuttal of my post). And, you continued to post some of the same inaccuracies and misconceptions promulgated by the other poster (or should I say Ã¢â‚¬Å“poseurÃ¢â‚¬Â). So instead of posting inaccuracies, one would think youÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d want to keep the OP on topicÃ¢â‚¬Â¦
Therefore the following is Ã¢â‚¬Å“TRUEÃ¢â‚¬Â about your post as well:
So basically, you're just equivocating, trolling, wasting time and spreading misinformation here.
If youÃ¢â‚¬â„¢re going to continue using that moniker, I would suggest you attempt to live up to the standard it sets.