Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Thunderstick


I was saying you ought to study church history from original sources--the ante-Nicene and Nicene works. That is by far the largest source of original data.Skeptic scholarship assumes they can revise history to suit their objectives, But as I pointed out there history of the canon is fraught with unfounded speculation and lack of facts. Maybe they don't study history.



You assume too much. I was referring not to 'Skeptic scholarship' but to academic studies of the history and development of the bible.


Well you landed on academic error regarding the canon. A lot of revisionist history is done by skeptics so they can use it to claim they are backed by the most recent scholarship. The history of the church will show writers quoting from books of the Bible and Bible translations long before the first local council on the canon which shows your academic source as having flunked the history test.