Oral transmission in the Bible is reliable

Thanks Pro for your well thought out argumentsPro stated:< "Con argues "Many sects use the same parables from the Bible with different meanings attributed to those parables" but fails to point out that it's not because of oral transmission, but a misinterpretation of the texts" >No! That was not my point at all!My point was that it is just as easy to misinterpret Oral Transmission as it is to misinterpret written text which we know by the hundreds of Christian sects is extremely easy.The presentation alters from orator to orator, a difference in presentation (inflexion, emphasis on certain words or vowels) will change the meaning or interpretation of the Transmission (message).This is always a problem with teaching, getting a message to stay precisely the same would mean exactly the same presentation by every Orator or Teacher, which is absolutely impossible, thus Oral Tradition is altered by inflexion and emphasis errors, introduced by the Orator's vocalizing of the messages in a slightly different fashion.Vocalization changes cannot be helped, all humans have a different voice and thus different vocal inflections, which can change the emphasis on w"Everyone has a distinct voice, different from all others; almost like a fingerprint, one's voice is unique and can act as an identifier. The human voice is composed of a multitude of different components, making each voice different; namely, pitch, tone, and rate. The following article, the first of a three part series on the voice, will discuss the pitch component of the voice. It will explore what voice pitch is, how it is used and how it can be influential. The human voice has many components and is created through a myriad of muscle movements. Pitch is an integral part of the human voice."Source: http://www.bodylanguageuniversity.com...Summation of my main points:1: Pro has still not proved that the Bible was ever a product of Oral Transmission.Pro has no such evidence as no such evidence exists.2: As I have shown repeatedly, the conflicts in the Gospel accounts of even the life of Jesus Christ deny there ever being any accurate Oral Tradition.Many other Biblical Contradictions highlight the fact that Oral Tradition is somewhat missing and errant in the Bible accounts, even in the Old Testament as well as the New Testament.http://infidels.org...Though I will limit this to the New Testament, the Old Testament is seriously Flawed and too many contradictions exist to be bothered with, such as Moses appears never to have existed and is a composite being of many legends.But here is how there is no consistency concerning the birthright, or ancestry of Jesus Christ in the New Testament."The GENEALOGY OF JESUS? In two places in the New Testament the genealogy of Jesus son of Mary is mentioned. MAT 1:6-16 and LUK 3:23-31. Each gives the ancestors of Joseph the CLAIMED husband of Mary and Step father of Jesus. The first one starts from Abraham(verse 2) all the way down to Jesus. The second one from Jesus all the way back to Adam. The only common name to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH, How can this be true? and also How can Jesus have a genealogy when all Muslims and most Christians believe that Jesus had/has no father."Source: http://infidels.org... 3: Regardless of how good a person's memory is, Neurology has demonstrated that every time a memory is recalled it is altered in some way by the paths and associations in the method that the brain uses to store data. The Brain is a Relational Storage device, not a direct storage device, thus slight changes in relationships of data and associations will remap into the previously stored memories and thus alter them.So the Telephone Game applicable in the context that we have no control over the accuracy of our own recollections.They change without us being aware of it, so unlike the telephone game where messages/recollection is distorted deliberately for fun, our brains change the messages anyway, without us being aware of those changes.Our brains are continually supplementing our memory with new information that filters itself into the same areas of previous memories and adds its own distortion.The only way Oral Tradition could be maintained accurately was if those storing the information had no life experiences between the recording of the Oral message and passing it on and it was the first time they passed it on.Remember as my scientific sources in the previous round stated.http://www.northwestern.edu...It is stating that your own memory alters recollections sort of similar to a telephone game, which destroys Pro's video about telephone games being just fun, this scientific study demonstrates that the telephone game is inside our own brain and distorts our recall of events and details, no matter how good we consider our recall as being. The same goes for the memories of those in ancient times, distortion occurs regardless of how much they try not to distort their memories.2000 years later and these scholars of Pro's (btw Dan Wallace cited in Pro's Video is not a Historian, only a Theologian (porky panderer) and an Apologist (producer of porkies)) try to tell us that hour ability to memorize has not improved or deteriorated since the Bibles were written. Yeah, Right! Ha Ha! Maybe they had less to think about back then, that is all.Every Time An Individual Recalls An Event Or Message, The Event Or Message Is Altered.This is because of the way the human brain functions, never a deliberate alteration by the person recalling the information.So Pro is trying to tell us that these messages were passed on by people who during over 35 years, never had any life experiences and had never recalled their messages previously to anybody else.As this is the only way they could avoid them being altered by repetitive recall and associated experiences in their lives.That is a bit hard to believe that anybody could to for 30 or even 50 years (John) without having their memory distorted by recalling them.The contentions between Saul's Jesus who was a different person to the Jesus of the Gospels, as Paul/Saul did not have knowledge of the miracles Jesus performed, if he really performed any at all, so such miracles were likely added by the Gospel writers as Paul's accounts of Jesus were the earliest available of around 20 years after the death of Jesus.So Historically speaking, Saul's accounts should be more accurate, even though he too never met Jesus and wrote entirely from Hearsay. (Oral Tradition).There have been no text documents concerning Jesus found to be written before Saul's accounts, so the Disciple's Creed, mentioned in Saul's writings, is now considered a Fabrication, the only Creed found was put together over a century later by over zealous Christians, trying to make Saul appear correct.http://www.patheos.com...Which is typical of Christianity, apologists (porky producers) continually obfuscate and obscure history to make their religion appear truthful.Which paints Christianity badly, as this shows that Christianity never values Truth, and prefers to use Lies to uphold their religion to keep Followers/sycophants.Demonstrating clearly that Christianity puts Power (number of followers) and Money (paying tithes) above Truth, Honesty and even God.Why can't Christianity ever be an Honest Religion?I guess that is so obvious to anybody who looks at Christianity rationally and critically!Conclusion:Though I don't think Pro has clearly demonstrated that the Bible was produced through Oral Tradition.The inconsistencies I have highlighted show obvious flaws in the accounts of Jesus Christ, which is only a small part of the massive number of Flaws in the entire Bible, which are too numerous to mention.The existence of such discrepancies demonstrate clearly that if Oral Tradition is so reliable then it was not used to produce the Bible scriptures, or that if Oral Tradition was used to produce the Bible accounts of Jesus Christ, then Oral Tradition is Unreliable.