Question:
christians how do you feel about these forgeries in the bible?
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
christians how do you feel about these forgeries in the bible?
Ten answers:
2009-09-23 10:00:21 UTC
Most answers you will get will ridicule you and basically, without saying the words, call you a liar. But, I, for one, agree with all that you have stated here.
dewcoons
2009-09-23 10:12:11 UTC
Hopefully you realize there is a difference between a copyist error and a forgery. I am not aware of any Christians who believe that every copy and translation of the Bible is 100% correct. But we do hold that the "autographs" (technical name for the original documents written by the authors) are correct.



There are many examples of errors in copying the text, or of attempts to "correct" the text. Take, for example, the Jefferson Bible which eliminates all the miracles and other supernatural elements.



That is why it is a good thing that we have over 5,200 papyrus copies of the New Testament from the early years of the church - the majority from before the invention of papyrus in the early 3rd century. Most of these predate the Nicean Council which is alleged to have altered the Bible. How they managed to find the thousands of manscripts made before their time and altered them to match their "forgeries" no one can explain.



There are another 2000 manuscripts of the original language from before the invention of the printing press, and thousands more in Latin and other languages translated long before these "errors" you mentioned appeared in the text.



With the thousands of manuscripts we have, it is not difficult to spot many of these errors. For example, many of the early manuscripts include the story of the woman in adultery in Luke rather than John.



Hopefully you realize that every "forgery" you listed is footnoted in the NIV and most newer translations of the Bible, and most were included in the translator's notes of the original King James Bible. So it is not as if you have discovered something new or unknown that the church has been hiding. It has been public knowledge at least since 1611 and the KJ Bible.



That a hand copied manuscript that runs the length of all seven Harry Potter novels, copied over a course of 2000 years by scholars of varying skill should have some copies with mistakes in it is not news.



What is news that even if you include every textual variant known, it stil leaves 99.3% of the text with variation. Well ahead of what "random chance" says should happen.



With the thousands of manuscripts we have, it is also possible to see and correct these errors, as has been done be most modern translations.
2009-09-23 09:54:25 UTC
Make it up along the way is the religious moto.
2016-03-03 05:34:06 UTC
Some religions are taking a queue from Coke and Marlboro and doing some promos of their own. Scaring people into believing is all they've got. It's disgusting. Supposedly witnessing is supposed to be the main tool these crazy people use to recruit new members to their cult. It isn't working so they show young impressionable kids this crap and try to scare them into joining this crazy religion
Cindy
2009-09-23 21:47:17 UTC
All scriptures did have translations, and we all know it was from different cultures, so who is to say which one was right.I for one will believe in God and Jesus, and no one can ever sway me:)
Gregory
2009-09-23 10:16:02 UTC
matthew 6:13

not true I have the original greek text and the greek words that say and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen are there



Matthew 17:21 is a duplicate of Mark 9:29.

not true. the both are saying the same thing but worded differently





John 7:53 to 8:11

this also is not true you have it wrong





Mark 9:29

not true i have the greek text the greek word for fasting is there



Mark 16:9-20:

this not true either

your trying to use a old copy of the bible that was pieced together by scientist who found parts of the bible which were not together.





Luke 3:22

not true either the words of the original greek say

Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.



John 5:3-4

not true either

the original grrek says this

John 5:3 In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water.

John 5:4 For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.





John 21

not true either using the bible that was pieced together that had a uncompleted version of the book of john that ended with chapter 20. No chapter 21 was not added in later.



1 Corinthians 14:34-35

not true either

the greek word for speak means to instruct in holy teachings, not just to talk. It says women are to submit to the leaders of the church which are pastors and deacons. 11:5 says she can pray and sepak when inspired by God. she can not how ever be a leader as a rabbi or preacher or deacon or bishop as it says in 1 timothy chapter 3.

there is not contradiction





Revelation 1:11

not true either the greek contains the words that say the first and the last



a person should use actual sources and not biased web sites
groknor_34
2009-09-23 10:00:34 UTC
This is why I read a modern translation. Many errors have been made in older attempts at translating the original documents into english. Much of this I simply put to growth in linguistic science. Some errors do originate from conflicts in various manuscripts. Thankfully, the bible I have points these out so i can read the various translations from each manuscript.



This isn't earth shattering falshood casting eternal doubt on Christ. It is simply the problem of translating a few very old documents in multiple languages into modern english.



Keep in mind also that not all sources on this kind of thing that you kindly cut and paste have motives that are good for you to attach yourself to.
2009-09-23 10:03:01 UTC
You are getting your information from religioustolerance.org??? Are you kidding me? Might I suggest auditing a theology or religious history class at a university and, I don't know, start thinking for yourself.



Look, there has been some brilliant Biblical scholarship over the last 2000 years and it is just sitting, ready for your inquiring mind to discover it. But you are going to an over the top anti-christian site which is ironically titled, "religious tolerance." Look at academic sources and read the Bible through your own eyes.



I have read many of your questions and I can tell that you are very intelligent, you are just very bias, and that bias seems to cloud your understanding of religion. Please, I beg of you, try to look at more scholarly souses, and opposed to popular culture drivel.





ADDITION: What do you mean that where you get the information doesn't matter? For example, It is true, scholars are pretty sure that Marks Gospel, that which is written by Mark, ends as verse 8. This has been known for a very long time. Your sourse says the rest is a forgery, but their is absolutly no historical or literary evidence to suppor that. Most likely Mark died in the middle of his composition, since he was in a prison in Rome, and a close follower finished it. Whats wrong with that? How is that a forgery?



Many of your other issues are most likely copying problems. Keep in mind the printing press wasn't invented till the 16th century. We can all rest assured that some mistakes were made in transcribing the manuscripts.



And finally, you always have translation issues. Because I can read and write ancient Greek, I will tell you many English translations are bad. Some are intentionally so, to promote a specific ideology, but more often than not, its simply because certin Greek words carry a specific connotation not supported in English. The most obvious example of this is "logos" being translated as "word." Logos means so much more in Greek, but their is not real way to translate it. You just need to read Plato.



This is the problem with your source, it assumes something sinister is going on. But there really is no reason to assume the worst, their are far more probable explainations that dont assume a mass conspiracy or religious cover up. Sadly, all my studies in history have really led me to find out that the reality is usually far more simple and dissapointing than mass coverups or mind controle cults.



Finally, why should you attend a thology class or religious history class? Sure, more often than not, they have a pro-religion feel. However, we want you to think for yourself. I would say that your problem is, you are asking yourself the wrong historical questions. You seem to be asking, "How can these Christians believe such stupid things." The problem with this is that you aren't seeking to understand it, you are only seeking to be convinced or not. You should be asking, "Why do these Christians believe such stupid things." This is a much better question because you take your own scepticism out of the equation. You can discover or understand why Christian theology is what it is without needing to accept its validity. History isn't about agreeing with something or not. You dont have to agree with the Romans to understand their culture and empire. All you need to do is ask questions which remove your own emotion from the equation and accept historical charactors for what they are. Who knows, you may find something you respect.
Just a guy
2009-09-23 09:54:59 UTC
well, you could go on and say that the fist one is a tripple forgery because one of them is not a first hand account. WOW.. I hope you did not spend much time on this. You could be doing something a lot better. this is pretty lame.
2009-09-23 09:57:01 UTC
You haven't scratched the surface.

It's all made up, whole cloth.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...