Do you know than the bible, OT & NT, is corrupted?

Question

Then how do you guys trust a corrupted book?

In the Gospels alone Vaticanus has 589 readings quite peculiar to itself, affecting 858 words, aleph Mshas 1460 such readings, affecting 2640 words...Codex Vaticanus differs from the Received **** in the following particulars: It omits at least 2,877 words; it adds 536 words; it substitutes 935 words; it transposes 2,098 words; and it modifies 1,132; making a total of 7,578 verbal divergences.
But the Sinaitic Ms. is even worse, for its total divergences in the particulars stated above amount to nearly nine thousand.” True or False,
Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids Publications, 1973, p. 78'

"It is easier to find two consecutive verses in which B and aleph differ from each other than two consecutive verses in which they entirely agree "
Codex B and its Allies " In the Gospels alone, B and aleph differ over 3,000 times without considering minor errors such as spelling.” "

Herman C. Hoskier, Codex B and Its Allies, London: Bernard Quaritch, 1914, Vol 2, I.

Answer 1

big time----- and a lot of catholics admit

http://www.answering-christianity.com/abdullah_smith/paul_contradicted_himself.htm

Answer 2

What I do know is that Muslims keep parroting this line without producing the uncorrupted version of the OT and NT. Without the true version, how can such unsubstantiated allegations even be verified? And since your knowledge of textual criticism is next to zero, I suppose you are ignorant of how the word "corrupted" is used in its proper context. In computer language, when we say a file has been corrupted, we use it in a technical sense that its contents are different from the original, which may result in it being unusable or not accurate. But it still presuppose that the original uncorrupted version still exists or once existed, and one can determine the points of departure. That's how it is with the Bible. All the extant manuscripts when put together are 99% in agreement, and remainder being immaterial differences or things that don't show up in translation, nor affects any doctrine. There is at least the honestly and integrity when translators consistently stick to the manuscripts family they use in translating the Bible. They dare not tamper with the manuscripts.

The Koran however, has been tampered with, since one copy has been authorised and all other differing versions destroyed. The claim that the Koran is unadulterated is thus false by the facts of history. You claim there is only one true Koran simply because the others have been destroyed! But that there are variant readings of the Koran is beyond scholarly dispute. See http://debate.org.uk/topics/books/origins-koran.html and also Ibn Warraq's new book to be released titled, "Which Koran?"

Answer 3

Nope.

There never was, until the church created the Bible in the 400's, any such thing as an Old Testament or a New Testament. Individual books may have occasional translation errors, but in general they have been translated quite reliably.

It is the concept of completely describing God in a book that seems corrupt to me.

Answer 4

the words ' new testomony ' refers to a clean covenant. Christ is this New Covenant. The OT on my own is purely one million/2 the story informed except the NT is roofed. And as we study the NT, we start to income how old prophesies come to bypass interior the NT and revelation speaks of how forward for this earth. each thing ties in. it relatively is complete. subsequently, there is not any way the NT would be excluded if Christ is to be preached. think of in basic terms the OT. How do you pontificate Jesus the Messiah? The bible is a 'sacred' project, subsequently 'Holy Bible'. It includes the message of God to the human race ... Joh 17:17 Sanctify them via thy reality: thy be conscious is reality. 'thy be conscious is reality' ... Jesus prayed to God ... bears the testimony that Jesus being God, His words carry the reality and with it, means. for this reason, the argument that the Holy Bible is corrupt annoying situations the omnipotence of a divine God overlooking its making.

Answer 5

The Qur'an charges that both Jews and Christians abused the Book that God had revealed, but where did he charge that the Book itself had become flawed? It is important to understand this, because now we can progress to the application and it's relationship to Muslim arguments about the corruption of our present Bible.

The Qur'an was written during the lifetime of Muhammad, who lived from AD 570 to AD 632. At that time, no charges of Biblical corruption were made against either the Old or New Testaments. This would indicate that from Muhammad's perspective as the Muslim's prophet, the previous revelations were still accurate! This is important! The Bible available to the people of Muhammad's day was not considered to have been corrupted!

Muhammad had current copies of the Bible available.

1)He knew they were in use.
2)He approved of them as being from God (Allah).
3)He did not condemn them as tainted or polluted.

Our Bibles today are translated from texts that existed prior to Muhammad, hence were either the sources of the "Books" or perhaps the same "Books" Muhammad declared to be accurate!

That being the case, Muslims need to re-evaluate their position on the corruption of the Bible. They have no basis for claiming that the Biblical Text has been corrupted, when the one they claim as their prophet says that they are not corrupted!

Answer 6

1.The bible was written by man not God. MAN. And anything written by man will eventually find errors with.

2. The bible was written 300 years AFTER Christ died do u think someone who wrote something abt u 300 years after u died will get everything right?

3. It was written by early christians who were still at war with the others ( romans etc) and they wanted their god to better than the others so they made up alot of stuff to beat the other gods.
They have found alot of evidence that proves that do some reading outside the bible and u will see.

Just because the bible is corrupted though doesnt mean Jesus was not a real person ( i believe anyway) they have proof that jesus learned from hinduism and buddah and studied with monks and he was open minded abt spirituality and preached LOVEE and to treat others as u would want to be treated and not to fear God>>>Something that christians today dont seem to understand. I do believe in God i just dont believe in what those people wrote in the bible. "Seek and ye shall find" Jesus wanted us to search and find the truth which is that God is an all knowing understanding and an all loving God. Not hateful revengeful and jealous those feelings ofc came from those people who wrote the bible YES people people from the time period where they thought the earth was flat and not round!

Answer 7

You are advancing a lie. Plain and simple.

Let me discuss the history and accuracy of the Old Testament manuscripts first.

When the translators of the King James Bible wrote the Old Testament, the oldest available manuscript for them to use as a source text, was known as the Masoretic Text. This had been written in the 9th century A.D. It was this text that the translators based their work on the Old Testament.

In 1947, a shepherd boy discovered some pottery in caves in the area called Qumran, near the Dead Sea. In these jars, he discovered scrolls, which archaeologists and Bible scholars have researched ever since. Every book of the Old Testament (except Esther) was discovered. Most of these scrolls are dated to 150 B.C.

After comparing these Dead Sea Scrolls to the Masoretic Text, the scholars discovered an amazing degree of unanimity between the two, although they were written a thousand years apart. Further, the Septuagint (the Greek language translation of the Hebrew Bible) was also compared. With all of these references, there is plenty of evidence that no biblical doctrine has been tampered with.

Naturally, the next object of ridicule is the New Testament. However, there is no larger ancient body of manuscript evidence in the history of mankind, than the papyri and parchment manuscripts of the New Testament. With over five thousand actual Greek manuscripts, and numerous other manuscripts in four other languages, there are about twenty-four thousand available manuscript texts for the New Testament.

Even if we didn't have these documents, we could almost have a complete New Testament from extra-biblical sources, such as ancient lectionaries, church fathers' records/sermons/writings, etc.

No other body of ancient work comes close. No one really disputes Julius Caesar's The Gallic Wars (10 manuscripts remain, with the earliest one dating to 1,000 years after the original autograph). No one really disputes Pliny the Younger's Natural History (7 manuscripts; 750 years elapsed). Or Thucydides' History (8 manuscripts; 1,300 years elapsed). No one disputes Herodotus' History (8 manuscripts; 1,350 years elapsed). No one really disputes Plato (7 manuscripts; 1,300 years elapsed). No one really disputes Tacitus' Annals (20 manuscripts; 1,000 years elapsed.) Homer's Iliad, the most renowned book of ancient Greece, is the second best-preserved literary work of all antiquity, with 643 copies of manuscript support discovered to date.

In all of those copies, there are 764 disputed lines of text, as compared to 40 lines of disputed text in all the New Testament manuscripts.

And, we have ancient manuscripts of the New Testament that are written within a generation of Christ's resurrection (a John 18 fragment, for example), and people have the audacity to say it's been tampered with!

Answer 8

Youre trying to put your faith in a set of books when your faith first needs to be on God. If you had faith in God, then you would know his truth when he presents it to you. The problem is you are trying to use silly human excuses to deny God.

BTW, there are over 5000 manuscript copies we have found of the NT and they all match with less than a 1% textual variance. And the only variances are found in small things like spelling that make no difference in major Christian doctrine.

So if you would like to believe the world and have no chance at Heaven, listen to them and do not trust the Bible. If you believe God however and want to learn his truths, read the Scriptures, learn about Jesus, and DO WHAT HE SAYS.

Answer 9

Yes, I do, but still the greatest story ever told. Bibles were written by moral men, who make mistakes. Remember when the old and new testaments were written most people could not read or write, much of the books were dictated from people who couldn't write. New testament was revised numerous times, and again, mistakes in translation, probably. But still the message is clear and correct. Personally I don't read the Bible much, alot of useless info there. And I don't think God cares much about whether I read it or not.

Answer 10

Its a shame people like yourself have plenty to say about or against the word of God and the Savior Jesus, but have no real explanation or can clarify what the question is. The corruption comes from the father of lies Satan himself. Yes, he is a part of history in the bible and his corruption is fully explained there. I say you start with the corruption that began in the Garden....very interesting stuff!!! and revelation knowledge for those looking to understand the very heart of rebellion and to see the difference between the incorruptible and corrupted SEED.

Answer 11

So you and a few others "think" you know more than the millions and millions that came before you, that lived a life by the book, reading it daily inside and out. Are you actually that arrogant to believe you are that much wiser than millions prior to you?

Just because you don't understand something you label it as corrupt? Hate to have you on a jury.