What percentage of the Bible is unchanged from it's orginal state?

Question

I've heard about how different groups have changed the Bible during certian periods to "tell the story more to their liking"... and how a group picked out the books that would be included in the Bible and which ones wouldn't... and of course the various translations from language to language...

So... what percentage do you think has been changed or altered over 2,000 years?

The odds of it being completely unaffected over that period of time are slim to none... especially since some books weren't even included in our current Bible...

Follow up question...

For those that say it is unchanged... why are there like 100 different versions that all say, perhaps overall the same thing, but each seem to have their own differences... which one is divinely inspired?

and which one do you feel is the most accurate/inaccurate?

Answer 1

It's totally changed because it's not in the original language.

However if you wanna know how much the actual meaning has changed, who knows? Probably a lot, because you cannot translate anything exactly. Some words in other language has a certain significance that only exists in that language, or there may be no word to describe certain concepts in the language it is translated into. Not to mention cultural aspects...modern Christians don't really understand the culture of the people of the Bible. If they did they would be completely different. Also people change it to suit their own needs.

Did you know that there is a word in Ancient Greek that means both "hand" and "wrist?" So when the Bible says that they put nails through his (Jesus') "hands," how do we know they don't actually mean "wrists?" Scientific research has also shown that if the nails went through the hands, the weight of the body would have been too much to bear, and the hands will be torn.

Another thing I've noticed is that different Bibles say different things. I often get a completely different idea about the meaning in my head from reading the same verse in different Bibles! Do you know about Joseph's "coat of many colors?" Well, in some Bibles that I've read, it doesn't call it that. It calls it a "coat with sleeves" or a "coat with stripes." Look it up. How in the world do they mix these things up???

Also as far as the creation story is concerned, how do we know that the world was created in six days? The Qur'an says that it was created in six "yaum," which is an Arabic word that can mean either "day" or "a long period of time." I suspect that the original Bible story used a similar word, and that translators decided to go with the word "day" because it sounds more natural in their language. Think about it. If the translators of the Bible were trying to get an exact meaning across, it would not have sounded so eloquent.

God doesn't make mistakes. People do.

Answer 2

I believe that nothing of any importance has been changed in the Bible. It would be very hard to have done since older texts were not destroyed when a new translation came out. Can words or numbers get messed up? Sure, can a different "thought" creep in? Sure... but when the 2nd translation came after the 1st, the 1st still existed and could be reffered to. No one could change John 3:16 to something completely different without someone saying "No, thats not what the original says" same goes for now, we might not have a lot of the original texts left but we have very old text still and they are reffered to in translating.

It's like taking a news paper from 20 years ago and copying it, without destroying the old news paper. It will say the same thing and if it doesnt, then the translation will be rejected when compared to the old paper.

Answer 3

The Old Testament is very original; scholars have found no additions. The New Testament has been edited a little...a word change here...a word added there; nothing to change the true meaning of the original state. Bible scholars think that the worst interference in the New Testament was the last 9 chapters of the Gospel of Mark; all agree that it was injected long after the original was written. About books not included is an absurd statement. There were very many religious writings which couldn't be included because they definitely was not the original christian thought; most of the rejected books were written centuries after Jesus died. The books included were all within 100 years after Jesus.

Answer 4

It depends on which version of the Bible you are talking about. Some versions are nowhere NEAR the original Hebrew Scriptures. The most accurate Bible I have found is called "The Scriptures"--its a direct translation from the Hebrew & Greek. The 2nd closest would have to be the King James Version.

Answer 5

Some things are changed such as what concerns the divinity of Christ.

God's name has been removed, and starting in 1987 is completely out of almost all versions of the Bible.
In original writings, Gods name is in the Bible close to 8000 times.


The parable about the prostitute and 'he without sin throw the first stone' stuff is not in older manuscripts.

The part about snake handling is not in the older manuscripts.

There is more,----- but you can still have faith in the Bible, because we are still on top of the matter.
We still have older, more accurate Bibles available.
We have available most of the writings dating back as far as 100ad.
They are used to compare and authicate.

The inaccurate Bibles are another aspect for keeping people on the 'broad road' to destruction.

Answer 6

Very very little is unchanged. Which I find amazingly add seeing as how the book of Revalation says to not change it.

Intrestingly enough, the Council of Nicea came together sometime ago and put in what they thought should go into it.

Not only that, but it has been translated hundreds of times, by multiple people. If they wanted to change something in it, it wouldnt be that hard for them to do. If I had to give a percentage guess, I would say somewhere in the neighboorhood of 3% is unchanged.

Answer 7

If the version youre reading is in English, then 0% is in its original state.
If you didn't hear these stories from ancestors who heard them from THEIR ancestors, 0% is unchanged from its original state.

There have been numerous translations (and MIStranlations) over the centuries. The problem is, which do you trust? The original which may or may NOT be a mistaken translation, or the newer version? Or who knows if they wont decide an even NEWER tranlastion is better?

Listen to your own heart. If it tells you to do something you know is wrong, then seek professional help. Dont rely on a book which was verbally handed down for generations before beig written down, and written down by apeople who could not yet understand the 'mechanics of rainfall".

Answer 8

We don't truly know. . .and the real truth is not likely to be hidden somewhere deep in the Vatican vaults!

My educated guess, however, is that the percentage is "material" (>10%).

First of all. . .in terms of the Hebrew/Old Testament. . .this was an oral tradition before it was written (so human error, primarily due to regional or tribal/family differences). . .and, actually Ezra the Scribe, has been given credit in history for codifying the Torah scroll as we know it today. (I suspect the integrity of the Hebrew Testament is quite good. . .but still not perfect. . .as the Priests and Scribes had their agendas over the centuries.)

For the Christian/New Testament. . .the Gospels would have been altered the most (Mark the least as a "source" document). . .and Paul's Letters or Epistles for certain doctrinal reasons (agendas in favor in Christian Orthodoxy and to stamp out certain heresies).

See the book, "Misquoting Jesus" for it touches on your topic quite nicely for at least the Christian/New Testament.

Hope this helps!

Answer 9

The Hebrew word "almah" ('young woman') was used to describe the Virgin Mary (instead of "bethulah", which would be more suitable for a virgin) in the original Isiah. The pre-Christian translation (the Septuagint) used the Greek word "parthenos" ('virgin'). Matthew quoted this in his own chapter and this is the origin of The Virgin Birth. The New English Bible has restored "young woman" in Isiah, but not in Matthew (as that is what he actually wrote, although quoting a mistranslated word).

Thus the KJV has *at least one* (this one) bad translation in it.

Now if you wish to believe that any process that led up to KJV was God's will, then nothing will sway you. But it is different from the originals.

Answer 10

THe chance that it is relatively unaltered in message, 100%. As for the text itself, it is 100% altered, because I am sure you are not reading it in ancient Greek and Hebrew. The best sources (aka the ones not produced by the vatican, but by levitical tradition) agree 95% when considered down to the lettering of the words. If you go with alexandrian or vatican texts you can sometimes be as low as 45% accuracy between texts.