The message of Q is to do your own research, yet there is an abundance of Biblefags that get butthurt at the mention of doing research on the origins of Abrahamic religion and the Bible. Wat do?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (59)
sorted by:
Maybe you should start by proving your statements.
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IYCu1Rom/x/c/4Ob74t9Eg7V
Considering so many people who say things like this don't even know anything about Codex Vaticanus, Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Sinaiticus is truly ironic.
They read bibles written by the roman catholics, the same people who hid the Bible for 1500 years, and think they're getting the truth.
Sad, isn't it?
Yep.
Lucifer is latin only used one time in the bible it most likely means Is Ra And El three Gods El is our God short for Elohim.
SO what you're saying is that you're one of the butthurt ones?
Got it!
What I'm saying is you will get eviscerated due to lack of knowledge.
Well your knowledge is no better than mine - you just "believe" the knowledge that you represent. That's part of the problem. That is leftist thinking. Lots of Biblefags telling people what "the truth" is instead of preceding statements with "I believe that..."
On the contrary, I know much about the history of the different Bible versions because I've studied this subject extensively. It's the reason I'm no longer an agnostic, in fact.
From my experience, it's the people who make claims such as "KJV is so diluted I wouldn't exactly call it a source" who are the ones telling people what "the truth" is in spite of the fact they are poorly educated on the subject and can't even tell me what the Codex Vaticanus is without Googling it. And, of course, they use Google.
So when it comes down to it, when you make claims the KJV is diluted, you better bring some sauce.
And if you have a theory about something based on research, share it. It sounds like you're scared of Bible believers punching holes in your theory, though.