Publicly, Origen claimed scripture was unchanged except by heretics but privately he fumed about all the differences and changes

"The differences among the manuscripts have become great, either through the negligence of copyists or through the perverse audacity of others; they either neglect to check over what they transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please." Origen, Commentary on Matthew, 15.14.

So when confronted by a nonbeliever's accusation, Origen denies that Christians ever changed any texts, but when writing to his fellow Christians, he complains about the exact same thing himself! This was a VERY common charge amongst Christians in the first 300 years. And considering that Origen was condemned as a heretic himself, who knows what he considered true or false in regards to his mystery religion?

Recommended reading:
Bart Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus
Bart Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture (here he carefully details examples of the "official" Church scribes quietly changing the scriptures to make them less useful to heretical arguments and bring them more in line with their own dogma. Some manuscripts even have notes in the margins about this ...

The BuyBull simply cannot be trusted. No one NO ONE back then thought any of it was holy scripture and felt free to alter any portion to say whatever they wanted. Today, there are more differences between the manuscripts of the BuyBull than there are words in the entire New Testament.

Is that Origen talking to you?

No

Theres a reason why this guy only gets about 2 followers ever single year

If LGBT hate had a flag, it be this one a9d7cp.jpg (click to show)

13 stars huh

erm actaully many of the "contradictions" In the Bible are from different transltion of terms or even cultural traditions- for example women weren't considered as important back then and so in the commonly said "contradiction" in the geniology of Jesus Mary could not be included because she was a women so Mary does not have to fathers but rather it says something different

That's just another fake news story Christians use to bolster their case but it's a lie. A women's testimony was accepted in court and there is at least one case of a woman representing herself in divorce.

You'll want proof (but not any proof of a man copying common magiciat tricks of the era and healing blindness with mud made from dirt and his own spit)... According to Valerius Maximus (in Factorum et Dictorum Memorabilium 8.3.1), Amaesia was “accused … and pleaded her own case… and was acquitted at the first hearing.”

Valerius Maximus 8.3.2 notes that Afrania, the wife of Senator Licinius Buccio, “always pleaded for herself before the praetor … not because she lacked advocates, but because she abounded in insolence.”

A papyrus from Egypt: BGU 4.1105 (c. 10 BCE) records a petition by Tryphaine, daughter of Dioskourides, against her husband Asklepiades (in Alexandria) describes her complaint of abuse and mis‐treatment of her dowry.

Digest (22.5.18) states: “The fact that the Lex Julia … forbids a woman found guilty (of adultery) to give evidence shows that women have the right to give evidence at a trial.”

Another source points out that in the famous trial of Gaius Verres (70 BCE) multiple women were called as witnesses by Cicero.

The contradictions are well into the thousands and are NOT due to transitions (you probably meant translations) but due to different authors trying to accomplish different things. READ more than apologists works. Educate yourself beyond what a pastor or priest tells you. Don't be so gullible. Start with Nailed by David Fitzgerald and follow up with his three volume "Jesus: Mything in Action" and just try to refute every single one of his points, But I'll bet $100 right now you won't order or read all these books.