Can we trust all we hear today on TV?

tvIt is a very sad day for our people, when we are able to hear all kinds of rubbish from people in the position of authority and supposed extensive life experience, they should be able to help and guide others but instead they tell lies and will do their utmost to deceive and pervert the Truth. Often I hear about pompous claim, on how latest discoveries have lead them to make outrageous claims that no real scholar would consider or want to be associated with.

For interesting subject on Liars and difference in their approach and brain activity go to this link listed below.

Liars’ brains ‘are not the same’

Example of some of these are listed below, So you can see, what I am talking about!

Academic research lie

A top doctor has admitted her part in hoodwinking a leading medical journal after inventing a medical condition called “cello scrotum”.

Elaine Murphy – now Baroness Murphy – dreamt up the painful complaint in the 1970s, sending a report to the British Medical Journal. For more information go to BBC and read it for yourself.

History Revisionism

There are number of revisionists who today would like to do their best to change our History books, whilst it is true that “History is written by the Victors” it is also true that those who may have lost the war have also had their accounts of history as it happened. I was astonished that Catholic Bishop Richard Williamson said recently: “I believe there were no gas chambers”. What is even more surprising is that even after being excommunicated by the Church he was recently re admitted by the Pope. I think this only serves to show that there are some powerful people within Vatican that hold this view and will do everything possible to protect their own people.

He (Bishop Williamson) goes on to say that number of Jewish people killed in Auschwitz were between 200,000 and 300,000 people and nowhere near 6 million that are recorded in our History books. One questions should be asked here “where does he get his information from?”  Anyone making such claim should be able to say, in this and this book or from these sources, or as an eyewitness I can say this etc.etc.

Is it any wonder that today we have so many blogers, so many people wanting to have their say, simply because they think that they have a right to say things and that we should pay close attention to their “teachings”  but without actually doing any “leg work” to research the material before they publish their conclusions.

Theological misinformation

One of the common issues that comes up on many atheistic blogs is that we can’t trust the Bible that there are many inconsistencies or that there is a great deal of variations between many manuscripts. What is always so fascinating is that so many of them don’t have a clue about Textual Criticism what it means and what is supposed to do. Yet with some outlandish statement they pretend to posses some hidden knowledge that somehow has eluded many scholars for so many years. Here are some of the things that may reassure Christians who may be facing this dilemma of trustworthiness of Scripture.

  • Volume of manuscripts available is so numerous that actual meaning and wording of the text is not difficult to understand.
  • Errors and inconsistencies that are often quoted by the radical scholars include words like “and”, “a”, “an” etc. sometimes bad spelling  with a single letter missing is also included as an error. When these minor errors are excluded what you will find is extremely consistent and trustworthy text. Remember that there are many other manuscripts that have been translated into other languages they also serve to confirm accuracy of the text, maybe we should also mention that early church fathers have often quoted the Bible, so much so that we could almost reconstruct entire Bible from those quotes. All of this information is available for the vigilant and hard working scholar to research for himself/herself.
  • Other Gospels (Gnostic gospels) have been used to try and discredit the accuracy of the teaching that we find in our new testaments, about Jesus. Their main point being that if the history was kinder to their teaching twe may have different Bible today. However what they fail to understand is that like in today’s world, we have Mormons, Jehovah witnesses and many other of-shoots of Christianity that would pervert and add to the word of God. This does not make them credible and we should not look at the Biblical teachings in the same light as they later distortions. Yes it is true that Catholic church did adopt and change some pagan holidays like Christmas on 25th of December, but we should remember that in the first Century and early 2nd Century they (Catholic Church) did not hold so much influence as some may want to credit them with. Secondly these things were debated and refuted troughs the History, one should remember the saying “He who forgets his History is likely to make same mistakes that his forefathers made“In other words, see what the Church fathers wrote about them and you will find that the early church indeed warned against such teachings as Gnosticism and misticisam. Some have remarked that the Gnosticism and many new so called Christian religions are like parasites who feed of the initial success of the first church. Others have claimed that there is nothing new in the “new challenges” that church is facing today, and should simply study our past.
  • Challenge to some of the claims made on new Gospels: Recent book that I had pleasure reading called “The Case for the Real Jesus” author Lee Strobel looks at some of these claims including “The Secret Gospel of Mark” and his interview with Dr Craig A Evans (PhD) page 48 onwards he looks at the “discovery” made by Morton Smith. This text was used to discredit accuracy of the new testament as the accounts of this book were radically different to the new testament accounts. Smith wroth 450 page book on this document, only to be questioned by people like Stephen Carlson, what is interesting amongst other things is that this “Original” document seam to have vanished without a trace. This convinced Carlson to write “The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith’s invention of the Secret Mark in 2005” Dr Evens himself believes that Morton Smith is the original author and hoaxer of this Gospel. Again “secret knowledge” was used as a justification for this new revelation, where Jesus talked with the resurrected and almost naked young man and then thought him “secrets of God”. Not only is this blasphemous but it’s also reveling when you find out that Smith was himself a homosexual.
  • Our Perception of Jesus: Many have also raised issue with number of radical scholars who seam to try and mold the image of Jesus to what their tendencies are. So if they are Liberal and democrat world view is present in their teaching they will then try and portray Jesus is same light as a democratic free thinker. In other words there is a great deal of bias and therefore great deal off additions and distortions that have nothing to do with Historical Jesus. Many have portrayed him as a great philosopher simply because their education is more acquainted with the Greek education system and very little understanding of Jewish language and culture. What is always so fascinating is the similarity that exists in the context of the scripture we find in the New Testament and writings of many Jewish 1st century contemporaries of Jesus.

Let me finish by encouraging those who make such a bold statements, to reassess their approach, to start taking the whole  picture into consideration not just fringe comments made by lunatics and vilige idiots. If one is to be true to himself they should search with the open mind, I find it not only stimulating but also rewarding when people challenge my faith in Bible and God. These things only tend to deepen my understanding and confirm that my faith in God is reasonable and intelligent conclusion. But it goes even more than that, to the point where I consider the message that Christ was preaching, which is that he came to take my place, when he died on the cross he did this so I don’t have to. I can now be reconciled with Christ, all I need to do is trust in his word and accept his sacrifice. And when I invited him to my life I can testify that changes that he brought only serve to confirm his love for us and his power to change us for the better.

Yours sincerely

Defend the Word


About defendtheword

To contact us please send e-mail to
This entry was posted in Apologetics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Can we trust all we hear today on TV?

  1. You write:
    “In other words there is a great deal of bias and therefore great deal off additions and distortions that have nothing to do with Historical Jesus.”

    I was a Christian for six years and was following the Jesus.

    Le-havdil (to differentiate),
    Then I found out that the the historical first century Jew Ribi Yehoshua from Natzrath (Nazareth) (the Messiah) didn’t create a new religion. The research of all world-recognized authorities (Charlesworth, James Parkes to name some) in this area leave no doubt that Ribi Yehoshua was a Pharisee. We know from Dead Sea Scrolls 4Q MMT that the core of the practise of the Pharisees was Torah including Halakhah. This implies that much of the content of “Matthew” is words that Ribi Yehoshua cannot have uttered; and that “Acts” also contain things which the followers (Netzarim) of Ribi Yehoshua cannot have said! The decision was easy – I chose to start practising Torah non-selectively just like the Pharisaic Ribi Yehoshua and his followers Netzarim.

    For in-depth information about the historical Pharisee Jew and Ribi unequaled anywhere, take the on-line course from the first follower of historical Ribi Yehoshua to be accepted in the same Pharisee (Orthodox) Jewish community as historical Ribi Yehoshua since 135 C.E., and foremost authority on historical Ribi Yehoshua and his original Netzarim Jewish followers, Paqid Yirmeyahu –a former Baptist preacher who has translated the NT from all of the earliest extant source mss. up through the 4th century C.E.

    Historical Ribi Yehoshua was a Pharisee Jew about whom
    gentiles and Christians, because of their ignorance of Judaism (1st-century and today), have innumerable misconceptions. Don’t be led by the blind.

    It is not an assumption that Ribi Yehoshua was a Ribi. He is called ‘Ribi Yeshua’ on the Talpiot Tomb to name one thing.

    See the website at the bottom ; “History Museum” (left menu); “Mashiakh”-section (top menu).

    Prof. of Statistics Andrey Feuerverger has demonstrated that, contrary to the mathematically-challenged critics of the Yaaqov ossuary, the chances that the ossuaries in the Talpiot Tomb aren’t those of the family of the 1st-century Pharisee Ribi Yehoshua are 1:1600 (Feuerverger, Prof. Andrey – The Final Word,
    Logic dictates that the burden of proof is on the person whom states that Ribi Yehoshua is not a Pharisee.

    Le-havdil, the historical J*esus is an oxymoron. The historical person was named le-havdil (to differentiate) Ribi Yehoshua. This is not the same person as the Christian Jesus.

    Choose today whom you want to follow: The historical Ribi Yehoshua, or le-havdil the Hellenist concept of Jesus.

    Source of some quotes: Paqid Yirmeyahu

    Finding the historical Jew, who was a Pharisee Ribi and
    following him brings you into Torah, which gives you a rich and meaningful life here on earth and great rewards in life after death (“heaven”)!

    From Anders Branderud
    Geir Toshav, Netzarim (netzarim)

  2. Thanks Anders

    Here are just a few things that you should know.

    1. Christian Jesus was definitely different from your invented Jesus, in the sense that he was not accepted by the Jewish establishment which was prophesized by the Old Testament which I suppose you do accept. This however does not mean that we should condemn Jewish people on the contrary, we should continue to accept that they are indeed chosen people and will be again part of Gods plan to lead rest of the humanity back to God. Until that time we should concentrate on Jesus. There have been many people by this name and you will known this that “Yehoshua” is a very, very common name, how do you know that you haven’t been given mixed up records????

    Remember that it was that which Jesus was saying to Jews about himself that angered Pharisees and Saducies to condemn him for blasphemy and ask Roman Governor Pontius Pilate to sentence him to death. Your information is highly questionable, could you answer this question? “Why is it that most of the historians do not give us your version of Historical events? Jewish supplementary material that included interpretation of Torah (early 2nd century) is also mentioning Jesus as a magician and alludes that he was probably son of a roman solder their claim is that this solder raped Mary??? How do you explain this claim by religious Pharisees or was this never mentioned to you?

    Your assessment on “oxymoron” (figure of speech that combines two normally contradictory terms) is interesting just not very believable, as for statistics can I just say as a statistician myself, they are often open for misinterpretation. if your sample that you choose to analyze is small then the likelihood of certain accuracy is drastically reduced.

    2. Beware of the sayings and new teachings that you hear. Bible itself predicts that there will be many who will claim to be Christ’s but you should test everything and here is the way that you will know that you are definitely encountering real Jesus you will either see him as your judge or will meet him during the rapture.

    3. You should know that Hellenistic Jesus was Jesus of Gnostics (Early second century) not the Jesus of New testament, in fact if you carefully read Matthews gospel and check book of Acts you will note that the language and topics have been carefully selected to reassure Jews that Jesus is the prophesizes Messiah. Apostle Paul himself a Pharisee spent many years trying to convince other Jews and synagogue leaders that long awaited messiah had arrived.

    Therefore your claim of influence of Greek philosophy is highly misplaced. I feel for you and would gladly spend time on the net to try and show you the clues and direct you to some really great books that have been put together by some first class academics, and not some bogus charlatans. If you would prefer something easier to read can I suggest Former atheist turned Christian and Journalist they are books by Lee Strobel: (He usually interviews top scholars and records their answers for every day readers) The Case for the Real Jesus, The Case for Faith.

    Then there are some great books by Dr Gary Habermas who is more technical but never the less amazingly readable and with books like The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ; Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (with Mike Licona); The Risen Jesus & Future Hope; Resurrected? : An Atheist and Theist Dialogue (with Antony Flew) and many other articles. You will also find link to his web page on my blog under links. Additional authors that I would highly recommend are JP Moreland, Tim Keller; William Lane Craig, Ravi Zacharias, and many more. There are number of links on my blog that may serve you well in you search for truth.

    You should be careful when accepting any teaching, make sure that you have checked first what did the opponents of that hypotheses have to say and then try and come to the best logical judgment. I usually encourage people to use simple system that most analyst would use they are 5 simple questions, who, why, where, when, and what. Using Historical background, writer’s motivations behind their claims (We all have prejudices) and not forgetting that some people will make up things simply to get attention and without any sense of responsibility towards the intended audience.

    Kind regards

    Defend the Word

Comments are closed.