Why do Christians still insist on the bible as infallible given it's past?

Question

Ok u see I dont get the whole christian mindset with respect to scripture. They act as though the bible is infallible, but dont they understand that the actual bible was make 1500 years after jesus died? Dont they know that at the concil of Nicea under the eye of the Emperor they put certain books in and edited them to appear to give a certain message that is desorted and not geniune? Im just trying to understand do they think this crime was inspired by God when they changed edited many things out (proven)? Im only writing this for the reason that newer, purer scriptures were found that prove Christianities beginning and pre-nicene were vastly different. Why reject the Thomas gospel proven that it is certainly the oldest source of the sayings which is proven by scholar work today? Also why do they reject the Sheperd of hermas, it was regarded scripture even is in some of the oldest bibles?What about the essene dead sea scrolls? The essene was the sect that Jesus came from only. peace

The thomas gospel is not from 3rd century A.D. There are two branch of scholars that study the thomas gospel. The thomas gospel from the Nag hamadi is written in coptic and dates to around the 3rd century. However the Greek version found in 1890' in fragments at Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, dates back to 200-130 A.D. The early camp of scholars dateswhen the actual gospel wouldve been created back to 60 A.D, because of it's simplier sayings with little interpolerations or additions, they are much shorter. The way it is writen and kept is how they kept sayings in those days, it in it's design is much like the DIACHE. All of this, even that it doesn't contain anything about ressurections or anything remotely gnostic in terms gives this composition a date of nothing less then 1st century, many say it is from 50 A.D given the evidence. The later date says sometime in the 1st century. So for ever who said that about the thomas gospel needs to do research.

The thomas gospel is not from 3rd century A.D. There are two branch of scholars that study the thomas gospel. The thomas gospel from the Nag hamadi is written in coptic and dates to around the 3rd century. However the Greek version found in 1890' in fragments at Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, dates back to 200-130 A.D. The early camp of scholars dateswhen the actual gospel wouldve been created back to 60 A.D, because of it's simplier sayings with little interpolerations or additions, they are much shorter. The way it is writen and kept is how they kept sayings in those days, it in it's design is much like the DIACHE. All of this, even that it doesn't contain anything about ressurections or anything remotely gnostic in terms gives this composition a date of nothing less then 1st century, many say it is from 50 A.D given the evidence. The later date says sometime in the 1st century. So in any case it is a purer source of the sayings considering the bible we have has been corrupted for centuries!

Storm btw, no the thomas gospel isnt that is foolish. Do you realize that there were many sects that existed in those days and each one had their own version of the scriptures? Thomas gospel has nothing to do with the code you mention, the thomas gospel is JUST sayings, no narrations. It has not been proven it was writen by extremist, it was a scripture for those who were of the Thomas sects, just like the Gospel of John was by a certain sect that existed in those days. Some need to learn the history.

The thomas gospel contaiNS MANY OF THE SAYINGS from all the gospels, but in a shorter form as while as other sayings. There is nothing to even suggest extremist? that doesn't even make since.

Dead sea scrolls date from 150---70 C.E. And so what, they are from the sect that Jesus if he existed wouldve came from. I don't get this argument, by all scholar account it SHOWS that Christianity is obviously not how it should be. And the thomas gospel shows a purer source of the sayings. I bet most haven't even read these to even know. And no one mentioned the Sheperd of Hermas, it was regarded as scripture and is in some of the oldest bibles.

Answer 1

The people who control what information gets out is afraid common people will aquire knowledge through these old books, there are lots more chapters and books left out of the bible. All the revision done on the bible, God wouldn't even say it is his Word.

Answer 2

Seeing as that there are 1000's of translations of the bible, a few phrase for phrase translations from the usual language, a few "interpretations" - what bible "pupils" THINK this or that passage rather method, and on account that we do not rather understand what colloquialisms there have been 5000 years in the past - No. The bible isn't excellent. It's actual that mistakes are minor. When the legitimate bible of the Holy See used to be up-to-date through the oldest whole scrolls observed within the caves of Qumran, the edits have been minimum. But nonetheless, the Jerusalem Bible - the usual variant - stays a murals. The Douay Rheims Bible is a phrase for phrase translation of the Greek. Translators left foggy paragraphs as they have been, with the perception that the Holy Spirit could support us in information. Both of those stay my favorites for research. Compare both to the Good News Bible. The variances are many. Eons in the past, any one copying a scroll had the chance of dying over their head for the tiniest mistakes. Do a seek in any seek engine for "bible errata" and feature your self a well chuckle. One of the very excellent bibles available in the market stays commonly unknown. The Peshitta is a translation from Syriac Aramaic. It's the nearest factor any people can get. For example the passage, ' it's less complicated for a camel to move via the attention of a needle.' Apparently the phrase for rope and camel is the same. The Syriacs talk a dialect of Aramaic. Which method they recognize historic Aramaic larger than others. So the Peshitta reads ' it's less complicated for a rope to move via a needle.' But this does not imply the bible must be pushed aside. It simply method you should not rely on one translation. Know what they're. Know wherein they got here from. Anything with "normal" within the identify is an "version" of the usual English Standard Bible - which grew to be the King James Version after the Puritans edited it. What says Bible, reminiscent of New American Bible is a brand new translation. What says Version is an version of an usual translation.

Answer 3

Hi there. The Bible is infallible. Men make errors in fact some of them put other Christians to death in the Inquisitions. Taught in error replacement theology of the Jews. Okayed slavery via Fransisco De Las Casas, deeming African slaves as brute beasts: women relegated to just being laypersons or nuns, even though the early church had at least one female Pope, and started forbidding people to marry, all in the Name of God in error.

The Pope is not the leader of all Christendom. The schism came with the Greek Orthodox Church over icons and later the Protestant Church and Martin Luther. Luther proclaimed that we are saved by grace not works or indulgences. People were buying indulgences to get loved ones out of purgatory. Those indulgences paid for St Peter's Basilica.

The gospel of Thomas have been proved to have been written by extremists and were not consistent with the rest of the Bible. That's why they are called the lost books, everybody needs to loose them.The Thomas gospels are the equivalent of the DaVinci codes, a book of fiction!

Answer 4

The Council of Nicea was 300 a.d. (300 years after Jesus death).

The Gospel of Thomas was from the 2nd or 3rd Century. (Nag Hammadi). and completely contradicted the older documents.

i.e.
The Dead Sea Scrolls can be traced back to 1st Century.

Just because something is translated doesn't mean it's changed.

Answer 5

Because we believe in The Holy Spirit of God and not in you. The Bible is the inerrant Word of God, no matter how many translations, writers, councils, etc... The Holy Bible is the I AM! Nothing you say or do is going to change that. Until you become a Christian you won't understand. You have to believe!

Answer 6

Their are many translations of the Bible, we don't believe that everything is infallible, just the Word of God and we don't believe we can understand it without the Holy Spirit (Spirit of Truth) to guide us.

I believe that the Holy Spirit helps me to know and understand the Truth, this Spirit teaches me what is the truth in scripture.

If you don't have the Spirit you will not understand the reality in anything. You will be deceived and mislead by satan and those in the world.

Christians are not ignorant just filled.

God Bless.

Answer 7

Sigh++++>>>>>

Answer 8

If christians were so strong in their beliefs then they would be happy to examine the texts you mentioned and try to determine what is the true word of god.

Answer 9

christians do two things to affirm that christianity is real.
1. they do not bother themselves with the idea that it is a myth and tell themselves that such thought is from satan.
2. They tell themselves that even though "reason" might point out otherwise, it is not through reason that god's existence is affirmed, but through knowing god in your "heart"

Answer 10

There are countless bibles. Abour which bible youare talking about?