Since it is a sin to add to the Bible, and the New Testament was added to the Bible, wouldn't the New Testament be considered blasphemy? Or do you just pick and choose when you follow your own rules and when you don’t?
2006-08-28 16:42:26 · 22 answers · asked by acgsk 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Christians pick and choose whatever rules that benefit them, of course.
2006-08-28 16:46:20 · answer #1 · answered by i luv teh fishes 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Constaintine basically developed the Bible with the leaders from all the churches founded or developed by Peter, Paul and John.
Constaintine and his group could have compeletely kept the old testiment out, but chose to include it.
There was, first a controversey within the Jews of JEsus era, with one group (the Pharasies, the group that had JEsus put to death) believing the written Tanakh was the true, complete and only bible, the others believing that the verbal stories passed down from generations that had not yet been written out, were also a part of the Tanakh.
So, we had this sort of Sunni/Shi'te faction of JEws fighting over what officially constitutes a bible.
Constantines group picked and chose from the JEwish bible and the stories and writings of Peter, Paul, John, Matthew, Mark, Timothy, etc.
In, I believe 7 AD the frist Catholic Bull or Cannon or Doctrine was issued to all the Priests, telling them what books of the old and new testiment were "offically" to be used.
Things like Infancy 1 and Infancy 2 were NOT included. Certain versions of Romans were not included, only the one "Romans" letter by Paul was sactionned, not the others.
There were other non-Catholic bible groups in the British Islands around this same time.
Then when the PRotestant movments began with Luther, Wycliffe, Calvin and others, each did their own version of the Bible.
Finally King JAmes commissed a version, which was appended and trucated four years later into the version we use today.
Removed were books dealing with Fortune Tellers, etc.
The oldest artificats are probalby the Dead Sea Scrolls and some of these "books" are not in the bible at all!
The oldest bibles date to maybe 50 or 100 BC in Hebrew Scrolls the Tanakah
The one the Cathoics used was the official Greek translatioin made between 10 and 20 BC
Probably the oldest full bible today is maybe from 3 BC or 3 AD, plus there are fragments called Greek Codecs, one of which recently found gives the number for the Mark of the Beast as 616 NOT 666!
So it is hard to say if these old translaters are accurate or right or difinative or if they were written by Parasees who, like the did with Jesus and Judas, forced their way on the translaters or scribes.
The oldest Bibles commonly found are the Guettenbergs, made in 1600 from the Catholic Bible edition.
So, if we are to truly undestand the Bible we must get away from the Censorship and Will of Constantine and the Pharasees and look at ALL the books and stories attributed to Divine acts of writing.
We must reconstruct the book as those in the Constatine clique used as their pattern before deciding what should or should not be included.
2006-08-29 00:33:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am kind of curious were you are getting that it is a sin to add to the Bible. The book of Revelation says it is wrong to add to that particular book, but I think it would be extrapolation to apply that to the rest of the Bible.
The Bible we have today was agreed upon over time. There is no evidence for the Bible being canonized as an act of God. But the books that are in the Bible were those books that the early church believed to contain the correct theology and were the most useful for teaching doctrine, correcting those in sin, and training people to be equipped to do the works God called them to do. There were many other books written that did not end up in the canon. There were at lease two more letters that Paul wrote to the Corinthians that we don't have record of.
But Christians believe that the Bible was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and it is possible that God preserved the books that we have today. Wou'd it be a sin to add to the Bible? I don't know, but I think the Bible is complete in the form we have it.
2006-08-29 00:06:11 · answer #3 · answered by The1andOnlyMule 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Bible is the New AND Old Testament.
The Old Testament was the Torah.
most people who ask these questions usually have not taken the time to actually study the rules of a particular Religion, nor do they really seem to be seeking information or an answer. So what is the purpose beyond an ill concealed insult then?
2006-08-28 23:59:18 · answer #4 · answered by electricpole 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The books of the new testament were written by either men who walked personally with Jesus or those who knew them that did. The verse about adding to scripture relates to other books that the first church did not judge as authentic. Even before modern times, there were many false gospels trying to make their way into the churches.
Also...no need to be snotty in asking a question.
2006-08-28 23:50:10 · answer #5 · answered by Esther 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The entire Old and New Testaments are the word of God.
Get a life and learn some Bible facts , Pal.
You seem to be very ignorant of what you are talking about.
2006-08-28 23:49:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe you are referring to the admonisment in the final verses of Revelation where it say, if anyone adds to or takes from THIS BOOK OF PROPHECY they will be cursed.
There was no such thing as The "Bible" as we know it until much later after the Messiah. The only parts of the Law of Moses, or Torah, was the first 5 books of the Old Testament.
Bible just means "book" or Holy Bible, "Holy" book.
2006-08-28 23:49:02 · answer #7 · answered by DA R 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
All of the Bible, both Old and New Testaments, are the word of God. It was written by men inspired by the Holy Spirit. Since it was God who wrote it so through it we can understand His mind, it's not blasphemy, as God can't sin. It's blasphemy to add stuff that's not God inspired.
2006-08-28 23:48:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
actually the statement that you are not to take away or add to the book is taken completely out of context. This statement was made in the book of revelation specifically regarding the book of revelation because the bible was not compiled as an entire book at the time that the book of revelation was written and compiled as one book much later. I know a lot of religions like to quote this to try to say the catholics have added books and they are wrong but the catholics had their bible before the protestants even existed and it was king james that removed those books. But no it only applies to the book of revelation.
2006-08-28 23:49:03 · answer #9 · answered by snail 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
COnsidering that this was written in the last chapter of Revelation
(Revelation 22:17-19) and that was in the New Testament, that IS part of the Bible. So your argument does not wash.
2006-08-28 23:48:37 · answer #10 · answered by Searcher 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Study your Bilbe before you start trying to use it to disprove it
That statement is taken from the last book of the new testament.
It is called Revelation....22:18. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
2006-08-28 23:48:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋