Changes

The growing list of examples of bias and errors on [[Wikipedia]].  Please add to this, and also contribute entries to [http://www.conservapedia.com Conservapedia].

The growing list of examples of bias and errors on [[Wikipedia]].  Please add to this, and also contribute entries to [http://www.conservapedia.com Conservapedia].

# Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D.  The dates are based on the birth of [[Jesus]], so why pretend otherwise?  Conservapedia is Christian-friendly and exposes the [[CE]] deception.

# Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D.  The dates are based on the birth of [[Jesus]], so why pretend otherwise?  Conservapedia gives the credit due to Christianity and exposes the [[CE]] deception.

# In the mid-20th century, one of the few "authorities" to assert that Jesus as a myth was a Soviet Encyclopedia.<ref>http://www.bede.org.uk/books,jmyth.htm</ref> Wikipedia currently writes in its article on [[Jesus]] the following: "A small number of scholars and authors question the historical existence of Jesus, with some arguing for a completely mythological Jesus."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus</ref>  Now it is certainly true that a small amount of scholars assert this matter but it is also true that it is a minuscule amount of scholars and none of them are historians, which Wikipedia fails to mention.  And what does Wikipedia offer in regards to a mythological Jesus that never existed?  It offers an article entitled "Jesus as myth."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jesus_as_myth&action=history</ref>  Wikipedia would be hard pressed to cite a reputable encyclopedia which prominently cites in its Jesus article a statement like its claim that "A small number of scholars and authors question the historical existence of Jesus, with some arguing for a completely mythological Jesus."  What reputable encyclopedia other than Wikipedia has such unscholarly claims that Jesus never existed?   

# In the mid-20th century, one of the few "authorities" to assert that Jesus as a myth was a Soviet Encyclopedia.<ref>http://www.bede.org.uk/books,jmyth.htm</ref> Wikipedia currently writes in its article on [[Jesus]] the following: "A small number of scholars and authors question the historical existence of Jesus, with some arguing for a completely mythological Jesus."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus</ref>  Now it is certainly true that a small amount of scholars assert this matter but it is also true that it is a minuscule amount of scholars and none of them are historians, which Wikipedia fails to mention.  And what does Wikipedia offer in regards to a mythological Jesus that never existed?  It offers an article entitled "Jesus as myth."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jesus_as_myth&action=history</ref>  Wikipedia would be hard pressed to cite a reputable encyclopedia which prominently cites in its Jesus article a statement like its claim that "A small number of scholars and authors question the historical existence of Jesus, with some arguing for a completely mythological Jesus."  What reputable encyclopedia other than Wikipedia has such unscholarly claims that Jesus never existed?   

# Wikipedia's entry for the Renaissance denies any credit to Christianity, its primary inspiration.

# Wikipedia's entry for the Renaissance denies any credit to Christianity, its primary inspiration.