Just courious, can anybody give examples of how the "word of god" has changed over the years.
Promise that forever we will never get better at growing up and learning to lie
The bible itself hasn't changed. People think the translations that bibles come in mean that the bible changes, but they are usually people like the war forum moderator.
Smile, Jesus loves you!!!!! <><
Manchild-ProPain, out now, Sphereofhiphop.com
There is no specific War Forum Moderator.
Niceguy4186:
If you want a fast breakdown on how the bible has changed:
- Jesus Christ, as believed by many Jews to be the king from the house of Benjamin, was born, and due to his station, his life was chronicled by many cabalists.
- During his life, not just his birth, ministry, death and resurrection, his exploits were recorded more or less in full. There is a large gap between his birth (or until about 2-3 years old IIRC) and his ministry, death and resurrection when he was about 35 or so.
- The original New Testament was over 80 books long... mainly because it encompassed the books of Thomas, the Gnostic Gospels, what we now know as the dead sea scrolls (which really filled in a lot of Jesus' life between being just Jesus and becoming the Messiah) and the book of Mary.
- Constantine (a pagan Roman Emperor) sought to bring stability to the empire by ending the sanctions against Christians, but there were problems...
The First Council of Nicea was convened, about 300 years after
the death of Jesus, in order to bring about a more peacable existance, Romans and Christians (mostly Romans) altered, re-arranged and edited biblical texts to beget not only a complete text (At the time, biblical scrolls were numerous, one book was the size of the consecrated scrolls you'll see in a Synagogue), but one that also assured that evangelists, priests and even individuals that were literate would be able to read not just the works of the apostles, but the taint of a Roman Caesar.
- As the original texts were in Hebrew, most Romans (and Arians) had no conception of how to read the text, and it was ordered Translated, and you had the Latin Vulgate edition, which took even greater liberties with the story, but after much furor from the Ashkenazi jews who could read both Hebrew and latin, the original version was retained and translated with as much fidelity as possible to the original Nicean Bible.
- The book was mostly left intact and unabraided until the Translation that became known as the King James edition of the bible, when the translation from Latin to Middle English ocurred. This was a move that was meant to do 2 things:
1: Spread the word of Christianity to the masses, because before this, Mass was held in Latin, and many of the low people did not understand that language.
2: Cement James as the King and give him more leverage against the Pope.
The latter is hardly relevant now... what with the Protestant church being created and all.
- Since then, different religious groups have slightly altered the texts to bring it more in line with their ideologies. I'm not talking the kinds of major revisions like the council of Nicea, more subtle minute changes, and it's been happening constantly.
- As for the "lost books," the Dead Sea Scrolls were all found quite by accident from 1947-1956 first by a goat herder's son chasing after one of his stray charges, the Gnostic gospels were found in the Sinai Region (of what was then Egypt) by ore miners IIRC. The Gospels of Mary and Thomas were found in an Egyptian Library excavation site.
The thing is, we're finding out about these leftovers only 2000 years after the fact, and we're seeing how the original texts compare with the current ones... there are GLARING discrepancies between the current Bible, and the originating texts (the altering of Mary into a harlot being one of them), and now theologians are trying to figure out what other alterations there have been to the Bible.
Now, reading all that, I'm NOT indicting believers of the Christian faith, I've said it before, I'll keep saying it... I am, however, saying that the Bible has been altered, edited, hacked and slashed like few other books in recorded history. It was originally the fidelous enscription of the life and times of Jesus, his ministry and their doings, his death and resurrection. It was from there transmuted into a Roman instrument of power over the Christian faithful. From then, it's been a war totem, a guide to jurisprudence, a divisive tome, a hotel drawer filler, and a book that has changed people's lives.
If you know all what I've said here, and more, and you still choose to believe, then that is true faith.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Mary M. Was never called a whore in the Bible. That is a story that foats outside the text. I asked a priest about her and he said the whole thing (issue) comes from one line in the Gospel of Thomas that states Jesus kissed her. It doesn't say how he kissed her or why, only that he did. In my priest friend's opinion Jesus likely kissed all his desciples at one time or another as that was a traditional greeting (as it still is in some cultures). As far as he's concerned she was a desciple of Christ, quite devoted, and while never an apostle of Christ, she held an important position in the group. He thinks that old world politics kept her out of the Bible simply because she was a woman with some authority. That is speculation, but also quite plausible. In Christ's time women held many positions within society, in medieval times, the suppression of women had begun, and by the time of King James, women would be firmly held in domestic roles. The Biblical truth may have upset the balance at the time. The other issue is the fact that the Gospel of Thomas had sections (important ones) that have obviously been edited (right on the original scroll) and therefore cannot be trusted.
Just some thoughts.
PAX
The Old Testament was written in Hebrew and Aramaic, and the New Testament in Greek... I'd say the context of the Bible changed the day they translated it to English. It's 100% impossible to do a direct translation from any of those three languages to English.
Hahahaha: If you read the Gospel of Mary, it sheds new light on that idea. Jesus only kept company with 2 women constantly, his mother and Mary of Magdala. I believe in the gospel of Thomas (I haven't read it, nor do I remember it being a complete book), it stated that she was his wife (not in so many words).
Also, I should have been a little more careful, it's been about 15 years since I read the Bible, so my facts might be off a touch. Mary wasn't out and out presented as a harlot, she was, however known to many many men.
Blisham: was the new testament orig. in Greek or Latin? I thought it was written in Hebrew (per the Jews chronicling Jesus' life) and then to Latin vulgate for dissemination to the broad masses?
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
I think a lot of it has to do more with interpretation rather than translation in all honesty.
Well from what I was told the translation from Hebrew to English is a difficult one. take as an example the translation of the name Jahova, Now if that were truly Gods name
how then was I written in Hebrew considering the Hebrew language has no vowels in it.
That and isn't it supposed to usher about the end of days if Gods true name be spoken? Then I guess Jahova isn't it huh?
There is no way to find out all that has been lost, stolen, hidden, and changed over the last 2000 years of the catholic churches existence thats why I believe that no one form of religion is any better then another form. Thats why I true and respect them all equally as we have no idea whats right or wrong so why take a chance?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Old Testament
How do we know the Bible has been kept in tact for over 2,000 years of copying? Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls our earliest Hebrew copy of the Old Testament was the Masoretic text dating around 800 A.D. The Dead Sea Scrolls date around the time of Jesus copied by the Qumran community, a Jewish sect living around the Dead Sea. We also have the Septuagint which is a Greek translation of the Old Testament dating in the second century B.C. When we compare these texts which have an 800-1000 years gap between them we are amazed that 95% of the texts are identical with only minor variations and a few discrepancies.
New Testament
In considering the New Testament we have tens of thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament in part or in whole dating from the second century A.D. to the late fifteenth century when the printing press was invented. These manuscripts have been found in Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece, and Italy, making collusion unlikely. The oldest manuscript, the John Rylands manuscript has been dated to 125 A.D. and was found in Egypt, some distance from where the New Testament was originally composed Asia Minor). Many early Christian papyri were discovered in 1935, which have been dated to 150 A.D., and include the four gospels. The Papyrus Bodmer II, discovered in 1956, has been dated to 200 A.D. and contains 14 chapters and portions of the last seven chapters of the gospel of John. The Chester Beatty biblical papyri, discovered in 1931, has been dated to 200-250 A.D. and contains the Gospels, Acts, Paul's Epistles, and Revelation. The number of manuscripts is extensive compared to other ancient historical writings, such as Caesar's "Gallic Wars" (10 Greek manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), the "Annals" of Tacitus (2 manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), Livy (20 manuscripts, the earliest 350 years after the original), and Plato (7 manuscripts).
We also have thousands of early Christian writings and lexionaries which cite verses from the New Testament. In fact, we can actually put the entire New Testament together just from early Christian writings. For example, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (dated 95 A.D.) cites verses from the Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. The letters of Ignatius (dated 115 A.D.) were written to several churches in Asia Minor and cites verses from Matthew, John, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. These letters indicate that the entire New Testament was written in the first century A.D. In addition, there is internal evidence for a first century date for the writing of the New Testament. The book of Acts ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial (Acts 28:30-31 (1)). It is likely that Luke wrote Acts during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that Acts and Luke were written within thirty years of ministry and death of Jesus. Another internal evidence is that there is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Although Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus' prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation (Matthew 24:1-2 (2),Mark 13:1-2 (3), Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32(4)) no New Testament book refers to this event as having happened. If they had been written after 70 A.D., it is likely that letters written after 70 A.D. would have mentioned fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy. As stated by Nelson Glueck, former president of the Jewish Theological Seminary in the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, and renowned Jewish archaeologist: "In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written between the forties and eighties of the first century A.D."
With all of the massive manuscript evidence you would think we would have massive discrepancies - just the opposite is true. New Testament manuscripts agree in 99.5% of the text (compared to only 95% for the Iliad). Most of the discrepancies are in spelling and word order. A few words have been changed or added. There are two passages that are disputed but no discrepancy is of any doctrinal significance. Most Bibles include the options as footnotes when there are discrepancies. How could there be such accuracy over 1,400 years of copying? Two reasons: The scribes that did the copying had meticulous methods for checking their copies for errors. 2) The Holy Spirit made sure we would have an accurate copy of God's word so we would not be deceived.
Not my words. From
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorg.html
Adam and eve were not the first humans, it was adam and lilith. But lilith didnt go for adam, and left the garden of eden, and discovered other people out side of the garden.
My issue with this specific religion, is why worship a diety known to have mass murdered so many people in the past?
Oh, and who was Kain's Wife?
And how was life continued then adam and eve had 2 sons, in 1 set of text, The later said to have 9 children.
Damn how much incest was going on?
/\ /\ /\ Well to answer them it kind of messes of Christianity a little bit doesn't it? Lilith
left and went to the land of NOD where Kain later found his wife. OUTSIDE the garden and outside of Gods chosen gene pool. So as El Fuego pointed out that if Adam and Eve were not the only people on Earth then why is that taught so heavily? Is it a flat out lie by the church or simply do to the mis interpretation of the original texts and if it is just an accident why then doesn't the church correct the error rather then perpetuate it?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Lilith is said to have been a demon that was kicked out upon discovery in the garden.
The text clearly states that Adam and Eve had 3 sons (you forgot Seth). They may have been the first humans, maybe not, there were definately others as Kain was afraid to leave the garden stating "they'll kill me" (they had to be somebody). Kain went on to have many decendants as it was his blind granson Lemmek that eventually did kill him.
The people outside the garden are documented in the Bible if you actually read it. The cried up and wore sackcloth.. We know this much at least.
PAX
/\ /\ /\ Which would clearly show that Adam and Eve weren't the only "FIRST" people back then.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
well, no.. We don't really know that. Adam could very well have been first, Lillith was not human, so she doesn't count. Therefore Eve still could have been the first female human, and Adam the first man. The only thing that is clear is that they were not the only humans by the time Kain was kicked out of the garden. Who knows how much time passed, or how the others came about, that is not documented.
PAX
Andazzo: I read what you posted, and I have two questions (understanding that you didn't write the text, if you can't answer it, it's okay, it's an article): If the subject matter about which you are quoting is based around manuscripts that were written in the first century A.D. and the actual bible we know now was coallated in the 4th Century A.D., then:
- How was the dating determined?
- If the dating was determined by biblical events, how do we discount the possiblility of fractured codices (or scrolls) of a time after the first bible was created being found, basically, how do we know that these codices that are being referred to are not copies of the first coallation?
Copies would explain almost 2000 years of fidelous agreement..
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
LOL
There is so many things wrong with the bible, Its like reading the comics.
Christianity was created as an off shoot of judism, right? So what happened to all the people and cultures Prior to it? Like greeks, and romans, and babalonians (sp?)
What of those polythestic groups?
And what about Dinos? They are missing?
El Fuego ( the unstable ) wrote:LOL
There is so many things wrong with the bible, Its like reading the comics.
Christianity was created as an off shoot of judism, right? So what happened to all the people and cultures Prior to it? Like greeks, and romans, and babalonians (sp?)
What of those polythestic groups?
And what about Dinos? They are missing?
There are so many things wrong with it eh? Like what? Have you read it or are you parroting what someone else told you? A comic book? Funny comic with it's lack of illustration..
Yes, Judism came first, in fact Christ was raised as a Jew and trained by rabbis. The people and cultures before Christianity gave way to it (the ones you mentioned). Greek culture was already on the move to monotheism and their philosophers were a major component in the rise of Christianity. Rome remained Pagan for about 300 years after Christ, and eventually converted. Babylon fell way, way before Christ came on scene. All of them are mentioned in the Bible.
Dinos? You mean the Character from the Fintstones, or dinosaurs. I expect you mean dinosaurs.. They are not mentioned in the Bible except to say that there were huge creatures at some time. The Bible is a chronicle of human events and deals very little with the animal kingdom in general. It's not an encyclopedia. The Bible does not deny their existance, just fails to mention them, there's a difference.
PAX
To assume that the bible in it's current form has nothing to do with the original teachings for Christ is ignorant.
To assume that the bible today is 100% de-facto what was taught by christ is again--ignorant.
Translations aren't perfect, so all you have is somewhere between a good idea and a damned good idea. As such, it become less a question of authenticity and more a question of faith...which is what religion is in the first place...
So, if you believe in the bible, great, but we are no more or less evil, ignorant, or stupid for not.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Hahahaha: I wouldn't get too worked up over LMR.
KOTL: I don't think anyone was inferring the opposite of your last sentence
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
GAM: are you new to this forum? Remeber, i'm "Satan made flesh"
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
KOTL: Is that the flavour of the month? I thought you were a home-grown Terrorist this month.. I guess, like anything, you have to consider the source of the comment.
I wonder if that makes me the pompous Canuckistani asswipe that rains on a lot of good parades? I can only guess at what 4 letter words I've been called.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Take your pick, i've bee called both, and they's niot forget the classic "ghey devil-worshipping homo"
Though, i think technically you cannot be considered canuckistani unless you're fluent in Croatinuit.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Interesting books......."The Templar Revelation" "Holy Blood Holy Grail" Something KOTL might like....Very dry reads but interesting.
"I know I was born and I know that I'll die, but in between is mine" E.V
might have t pick them up...
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
