Why do so many argue the bible without reading it ALL first?

Question

I have not read it all as to the fact the Church took chapters out to suite their way of life in that particular time period. Example: the chapter of Lilith? The bible was meant to bring us together, and teach the golden rules... at least that's what I hope and believe.

Answer 1

"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him."
Proverbs 18:13
The word "heareth" could also be taken to mean "readeth."

Answer 2

I guess it would depend on what you call the Bible (assuming I'm reading you question properly). If books were taken out, as you state, I have five VOLUMES (all thick, I might add) of apocryphal Biblical books. Considering what is in some of them, it is easy to see why these books were not considered. Happy reading (you'll be at it a while)!

The Church did not remove books from the Bible. It was a period of a couple centuries that the early Church (actually an amolgamation of several individual churches) which, more or less, decided what was Biblical. A final six books were voted on in a Church council in the Fourth Century. Two were kept (Hebrews and Revelation), four were rejected (the Didache, the Epistle of Barnabas, I Clement, and the Shepherd of Hermas).

During the Protestant Reformation, many Protestant groups removed several Old Testament works (called the "Apocrypha").

Edit: I will add one thing. Second Esdras (in the Apocrypha, but still not accepted by the Catholic Church) had about 100 verses cut. The King James Version doesn't include them, but they turned up later in earlier manuscripts and were included in the Revised Standard Version.

Answer 3

I like the first part of your question, that is a really good question. There are always problems with taking quotes out of context and the Bible is to be understood in its entirety.

The second part, about taking books out - if by Church you are referring to the Catholic Church, then you must understand that the Church actually decided what would go into the bible - there were several dozen books that did not make it in. The Church called this process making the canon - or rule - of the Bible - they looked at each book and tried to decide which were to be "normative" to the faith. Those the thought were in error, heretical or outside of normative belief did not make the cut. However, some of the books that were not included in the canon still contribute to Holy Tradition - like the Gospel of James - tells us much about the Virgin Mary. Hope this helps!

Answer 4

The New Testament Scriptures are the most reliable texts we have from antiquity.
Basic facts about New Testament Manuscript Tradition
1. Many more ancient Greek copies of the New Testamnet exist than Homer’s Illiad (5,000 vs. 650)
2. These New Testament copies are much closer in date to the originals than The Illiad copies
3. The New Testament copies are highly reliable: a 99.5% match between copies
The Second Most Attested Manuscript from Antiquity is The Illiad by Homer.
• Around 800 B.C. – Homer’s Illiad composed
• 200 A.D. – 300 A.D. (1,000 year gap) – The earliest copies we have of Homer’s Illiad (approximately 650 copies
Compare that to the Most Attested Manuscript from Antiquity—the Bible—specifically the New Testament Manuscript:
• Around 100 A.D. – New Testament Written
• Around 200 A.D. (100 year gap) – Fragments and major portions of individual New Testament Books appear
• 300 A.D. – 400 A.D. – Bound copis of the entire New Testament Books appear
”The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book—a form that is 99.5 percent pure.”

Answer 5

All scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in rightousness so that the man ( or woman) of God may be thouroughly equipped for every good work....I dont know if it was meant to "bring us together" as many prefer to go their own way & dont need to be corrected, or at lease thats how they think....

***2 Timothy 3:16-17 Holy Bible ( NIV)

Answer 6

I have many of the Lost books of the bible and Gnostic writings but I don't have that one. It looks familiar thought.
I even looked in the book of Mormons but didn't see it there.
So you have me stumped. Maybe something from the Jehovah Witness perhaps. There were many books destroyed because the Person who financed the composition of the books of the bible with scholars he hired to do so was named Constantine in 325 AD so I have read. If it did not suit their doctrine, then it was left out and burned.
The bible was to teach you about the history of mans relationship with God and God's relationship with man.
I hope someday we are all one and the true religion of Jesus Christ is the only religion. Love God, Love your neighbor as you would Love and do Love yourself. There need not be any other laws or doctrine. Jesus said it all in two commandments. He said I leave you peace if you can obey my words.
Rev. TomCat

Answer 7

Why do so many argue the Quran without reading it ALL first?
You are right about the removal of sections of the Bible from its original pristine form! There are many theories as to why this has been done! Don't let that hinder you in your spiritual growth.
There has been nothing taken from or added to the Quran, it is in its original and pristine form!
Pick from both Holy Books the items you need to enrich your life and allow the truth within your heart to guide you in this life.

Answer 8

Scala Paradisi -- the Stairway to Heaven -- describes a 4-runged ladder to Heaven, each rung being one of the four steps in method of Bible reading.

lectio (reading): "looking on Holy Scripture with all one's will and wit"

meditatio (meditation): "a studious insearching with the mind to know what was before concealed through desiring proper skill"

oratio (prayer): "a devout desiring of the heart to get what is good and avoid what is evil"

contemplatio (contemplation): "the lifting up of the heart to God tasting somewhat of the heavenly sweetness and savour"

Answer 9

I think it's funny too. I'm a non-christian who has read the bible ALL the way through several times and you wouldn't believe the number of people who will try to tell me I am wrong about things because the "bible says so" when they HAVEN'T even read it....Christians included!

It's maddening!

Answer 10

I find that most Christians are too busy "telling the Good News" to have any time to actually study the whole basis of this news. Of course that means that metaphorically their faith is built on a foundation of intellectual sand.

Their constant errors and out of context "news" is my debating meat and potatoes. And, even if their quote is true, one of the others of the many Bibles I've read will contradict their "News" with a verifiable "News" that negates theirs.

Answer 11

excellent question! you know, i'm begining to think more non christians have read the bible through and through then christians themselves. i am muslim, and i have read the bible. funny thing is, there's always a christian that wants to debate religion with me, and when we get to the core of it, they have not even read their entire book.

i don't understand how a people sooo religious would not want to study, and learn their own book, and then make an intelligent argument.