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

The original texts for the bible were written in Koine Greek by various authors after 45 AD and before 140 AD. These texts were gradually collected into a single volume over a period of several centuries. Why did it take so long to write down the words of God? Taking this long would only mean that people are trying to manipulate his words. Take Mark 16:9-20, Luke 22:19b-20,43-44, John 7:53-8:11, and 1 John 5:7b–8a for example. These are the newest additions (1990s) to the bible.

If the bible is really inspired by the words of God than why are there religious committees that decide which texts get to be placed in the bible? Why are there censors and debates for the words of God over the course of history? So how could anyone believe that the bible really contains the true words of God without filters?

2007-05-15 11:57:38 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Your saying the New Testament is not part of the Bible? Are you nuts? Or are you so deluded that you forgot how to put faith in God? How sick and deluded can you be?

2007-05-15 12:03:24 · update #1

10 answers

Because they're stupid?

2007-05-15 12:00:30 · answer #1 · answered by Miltant_Agnostic 2 · 1 3

You are wrong the “Bible” was not written between 45 and 140 AD. The New Testament books were written between 45 and 95 AD with the latest estimates being 100-125 AD. The Old Testament portion of the Bible was written some 1600 years prior to that. There are no original manuscripts available only copies. There is evidence to suggest that the originals were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek. These copies have been dated from before 66 AD. Other validating copies have been discovered as recently as 1947.

In the grand scheme of things the time between Christ’s death and the latest date for a “copy” is less than 100 years.

Cults have long twisted Scripture to suit them, but "scholars" in recent years have had a field day, with everyone from homosexuals to feminists to Marxists rewriting the NT to suit them and make Jesus one of their own.

In closing I would have to agree with the one above who stated, “You don’t know what you are talking about” And just a caveat for you Wikipedia has some good info and some not so good info. I use it for a quick reference if it conforms to what I already know otherwise I look elsewhere for conformation.

2007-05-15 19:50:00 · answer #2 · answered by John 1:1 4 · 0 0

Please, clarify this.

What you call as "newest" additions to the Bible? If you admit they were written so long ago, how can you claim new verse to an old book?

Take 1John 5:7-8 as an example, the claims of corruption are wrong. These two verses are found in both the Latin and Greek Vulgate from as far back as 90ad.

Do you consider that "recent change"?

The evidence is overwhelming for the authenticity of 1 John 5:7-8. Keep in mind that it was Origen who was the father of the false manuscripts who removed this verse as he did verses like Acts 8:37 and Luke 24:40. The Alexandrian school was no friend of the true manuscripts which were taken from Antioch and mutilated according to Gnostic beliefs.

Religious committees don't get to change the Bible, they neither add to it, nor take away from it, so this is another point you need to clarify.

2007-05-15 19:14:42 · answer #3 · answered by pwrslm23 2 · 0 0

You source is wrong - almost all the New Testament are letters which were written to various churches.

Regarding the preservation of God's Word. God tells us that by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages. Certainly a God which merely spoke and created all things in six day can do something as simple as keeping His Word pure. I remember there was all kinds of talk about the Old Testament being corrupt in the past, until they found some ancient manuscripts which shows the amazing care that was taken in preserving God's Word.

BTW the so-called additions are not additions, but the Word of God. The older manuscripts are corrupted Egyptian manuscript which have not been preserved in the church.

2007-05-15 19:12:47 · answer #4 · answered by Brian 5 · 2 0

Most of the newer versions were translated from the original Hebrew, Aramic, and Greek, and over the years I have compared many a passage from one version to another, and found no substantial differences in content or context. I am presently acquiring the 1599 Geneva Bible, and plan to compare it as well.

BTW: The last apostle passed on to his maker before 100 AD, and the Bible fell silent. There is no book written after 100 AD.

grace2u

2007-05-15 19:15:27 · answer #5 · answered by Theophilus 6 · 1 0

The selection was not arbitrary or politically motivated. They used older texts as a check to ensure works claimed as inspired were not contradicting.


The infidel Voltaire once boastingly said: "I am weary of hearing people repeat that twelve men established the Christian religion. I will prove that one man may suffice to overthrow it." Generations have passed since his death. Millions have joined in the war upon the Bible. But it is so far from being destroyed, that where there were a hundred in Voltaire's time, there are now ten thousand, yes, a hundred thousand copies of the book of God. In the words of an early Reformer concerning the Christian church, "The Bible is an anvil that has worn out many hammers." Saith the Lord: "No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn." Isaiah 54:17.

2007-05-15 19:05:14 · answer #6 · answered by The GMC 6 · 0 0

45 Ad AND BEFORE 140 Ad?

The Bible was started 3500 years ago.,,,in Hebrew, get your facts right.

2007-05-15 19:00:55 · answer #7 · answered by Royal Racer Hell=Grave © 7 · 0 0

Lots of secrets in there that have not been found as yet
[kjv] 1611, that book has about 400 years to it, and it shows lots of visions and prophecies still today.

2007-05-15 19:01:22 · answer #8 · answered by hope and faith 2 · 0 0

Reading the bible is like reading any other comic book. I've always been an Elmer Fudd fan myself.

2007-05-15 19:00:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

You really don't know what you are talking about.

2007-05-15 19:03:20 · answer #10 · answered by wefmeister 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers