Reasons for Changing the Original Bible (Ecumenical)

Bible Discoveries ^ | 2009 | Dr T V Oomen

[restornu]

Some interesting views

[TheFourthMagi]

Christ is Christ.

No bizarre numerology needed.

[restornu]

Truth is hard isn’t it!:)

[Just mythoughts]

You really think the Heavenly Father has allowed and will allow HIS Word to be hidden from those who are destined to have it. Christ Himself said there are some for their own protection would NOT see or hear through this flesh age.

Paul said some were predestined before the foundation of this age, and there is no flesh being or ‘evil’ spirit that will keep the WORD from those predestined.

You give flesh man too much credit/power.

[TheDon]

The traditions of biblical inerrancy and biblical infallability have been modified by most traditional christians to account for the many thousands of documented variants in the NT alone.

Everyone is into NT textual criticism these days! Which is good in that we all benefit by a more correct version of the NT.

Evangelical Textual Criticism blog

[johnthebaptistmoore]

Because the Bible isn’t politically correct. The “Obama version” of the Bible would definitely be too painful for all non-leftists to read and very acceptable to the gay lifestyle, among a finite number of other changes to it, if Obama had his way.

[presently no screen name]

Interesting? Try fallacy! I couldn’t believe some of what I was reading. Deception is satan’s only tool and it’s played out in that article to a T.

[SoConPubbie]

Sorry, but I think I will stay with the version of the bible that the Holy Spirit has blessed by saving millions upon millions from their sins with the re-interpretation that the Mormons and others want to put on the bible.

[SoConPubbie]

Sorry, but that should have said Without the re-interpretation that Mormons and others would like to apply to the bible.

[knarf]

Dr T.V. Omen ????

You forgot the "made for" ...

[restornu]

So far I have not seen anyone discuss the points the author was making only going after the messenger!

Christians , if there is an original copy of the bible now in vatcian as i heard ..?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080212015631AAf0t5g

An important ramification of all this is as follows: By the middle of the second century, when canon conscientiousness was on the rise, the Christian community regarded the autographs, or at least the earliest copies of the New Testament documents, as important witnesses. They were concerned about the purity of the text with regard to select textual variants. Most likely, this implies that the copying of the manuscripts in the early decades of the Christian faith was not that of strictly linear descent (one copy of another copy of another copy). Rather, there would be times when at least a few scribes would want to check behind their exemplar and look at its exemplar. This would especially occur whenever a disputed reading cropped up. So, there seems to have been a bit of a check on the quality of the transmission of the text from very early on. Of course, those scribes far removed from the churches that received the autographs, and far removed from the disputes about their wording, would have created copies that were simply copies of other copies, without thought of making sure that the wording reflected the original. Yet even into the medieval ages, we know of occasional scribes who undertook to find the earliest and best copies they could locate and use them as their exemplar. The scribe Ephraim who penned codex 1739 and codex 1582 was one such scribe. How many more nameless scribes who came hundreds of years before him attended to their duties in the same way? In the least, historical probabilities would tell us that at least some of them did.

http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=6206

[Nosterrex]

There is no divine order, nor is there a divine number. Who comes up with these crazy ideas? How do you know that God was not working through the Greek rulers? There is a reason that tne NT was written in Greek, and the authors of the NT often used quotations from the LXX. If it was good enough for the apostles, it is good enough for me.

[donmeaker]

I rather thought that Constantopolos was the capital city of the Roman Empire in the 4th century. In the west the capital was Ravenna. Rome was a backwater.

[Nosterrex]

Thanks for the clarification. Satan is working behind the scenes trying to create doubt in the veracity of Scripture. whether it is Christian cults or liberal churches

[Habibi]

“Some interesting views “

Can’t make much out of it personally, but I’ve often wondered about the “apochryphal texts” that to a greater or lesser extent have fallen in and out of favor over the years.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/apo/index.htm

Not trying to make trouble by any means, but it would appear that the Bible that we currently have (and even it may or may not include some of these texts), seems to have “varied” over the years since it was first set down.

Was there a council of some sort, approximately 400 years after Christ’s death, that set into place which holy texts were acceptable in the compilation, and which were not? It would be interesting to study the rationalizations as to why some were included and some were not.

I’m not terribly interested in answers based on “It’s divine enlightment, so that’s just the way it is. Don’t ask!”. What I’m interested in is the historical basis as to why certain books were included, at what time, and what books were reintroduced into the collection at a later date.

I would think if some Bible is good, more Bible is better, but obviously there are many Christian religious sects that have disagreed from time to time.