English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If most people want the original version, should we add the books originally left out?

2007-03-15 17:13:55 · 11 answers · asked by Eleventy 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

11 answers

apparently there was big powwow way back when and books were tossed out then, it would be most interesting to see a "complete" orginal version

I dont think there is a final edition,it keeps getting altered

2007-03-15 17:17:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

There were no books originally left out. The Canon of Scripture was finalized once and for all time in 397 A.D. The 73 holy texts of that Canon are the Bible. Every Bible that existed for the next 1,200 years had all 73 inspired books. Only at the beginning of Protestantism were books removed. Luther decided to trash 10 books of God's Holy Word, 3 New Testament books and 7 Old Testament books. Fortunately his followers wouldn't hear of trashing the writings of the Apostles themselves, and a revolt was brewing. So Luther backed down and the New Testament was spared; but he still trashed 7 of the original Old Testament books of the Bible. Which is why Protestant Bibles have only 66 books instead of the 73 books of the complete Bible. If their founder had his way they would have only 63.
.

2007-03-16 00:25:32 · answer #2 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0 0

Hello, Eleventy:

About 150 years ago the Bible Society removed some "un-inspired" books from the Bible. They are called the apocrapha, and are still available in the Catholic Douay Bible, as well as the Jerusalem Bible. But their presence in the Holy Bible makes people think they are valid--not true!

Actually, when the Greek Septuagent was translated before Christ's birth, it included these books, but the Jewish scolars that included them noted they were either just history or fable.

In the third century Eusebius did exhaustive research of sermons of the early church fathers who were in contact with Christ's disciples. He noted the frequency of their usage and compiled them from most popular to least. Hebrews was not quoted much, and although its message is important, it is positioned toward the end of the New Testament. Eusebius translated 50 Greek Bibles for Constantine the Great.

A few decades later, Jerome Eusebius (named himself after his predecessor in Ceasarea), compiled the Latin Bible that the Catholics use today. Even though Greek and Hebrew were the major languages of Christ's time, Latin became Rome's official "church" language. Perhaps you know that they killed preachers and translators who tried to popularize other languages. Interestingly, Pope Benedict just issued an edict encouraging priests to return the Latin Mass.

So, Eleventy, I have read 10 different translations of the Bible, and they all tell the same story. Also, have read much junk in the "lost books of the Bible", but they are of a later date and not quoted by the first elders in the emerging Christian Church--this would include "Judas", and the Lost Book of Peter"--mere fabrications.

Something that may interest your inquisitive mind is a secret "key" that unlocks the only part of the Bible that tells you that it is "sealed until the end of the days" Check it out at "source":

Blessings, One-Way

2007-03-16 00:42:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

You will not get the none thinking religious to even admit the bible was tampered with from the beginning of time. What else would you expect from a person that really thinks a imaginary God had inspired the bible in the first place.

The religious can't bridge the gap in there understanding if man if free to kill, rape, and destroy nations why would there precious book be safe from man? Oh yea I thought Satan was in charge of this earth anyway? So how do you know that the version of your bible is not evil in and of itself? After all millions have died over this book called the bible. That sounds pretty evil me.

2007-03-16 00:22:59 · answer #4 · answered by T-Rex 5 · 1 1

The "canon" of the Bible, as listed in AD 180, was a smaller list than what was accepted nearly 200 years later. The councils in the 4th century actually added to what was previously accepted instead of leaving some things out.
Final edition - what does that mean?

2007-03-16 00:25:22 · answer #5 · answered by supertop 7 · 0 0

The final edition of the Catholic version was pulled together in the 400's (Revelation was almost left out). Protestants have since revised several times.

2007-03-16 00:26:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The 325 Council of Nicea was supposed to be the final edition, but the book is still being modified in each translation.

2007-03-16 00:22:10 · answer #7 · answered by U-98 6 · 0 0

I think a nice, complete annotated Bible would be a good idea.

I think it should include Hebrew and Greek and Latin passages on the opposite page

A few bibles do that and it's a nice idea.

I think a GOOD biblical translation should have foot notes to the KJV, NIV, Catholic, Tanakah, Greek and Latin and let everyone know the differences between the translations.

I think ALL the CODECs should be included when known.

2007-03-16 00:25:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The final edition hasn't been released, because they can't seem to stop editing it.

2007-03-16 00:17:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

There are so many texts left out that it would be a challenge.

2007-03-16 00:25:37 · answer #10 · answered by Huggles-the-wise 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers