cognito wrote:
for starters, the sheer number of verisons and edits that have taken place render it a farce of its original self.
For a book that ancient, it is quite impressively preserved. This is a really silly accusation.
Quote:
Second, it contraindicates itself on many passages,
Name one. Or several, since you think there are so many.
Quote:
third, its a book of morality from the roman times written in Aramaic,
The New Testament is from Roman times, but the rest of it is from pre-Roman times.
Other than portions of Ezra and Daniel, and a very few sentence-long quotes elsewhere, none of the Bible is written in Aramaic. It's written in Hebrew and Greek.
Neither of these things are disputed or difficult to find out. Why should I believe what you say about the Bible if you're too lazy to even skim a wikipedia article on it?
_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton