Christians, if the Bible is God's then can anyone add and erase anything from it?

Question

"...He (Jesus)was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God." MK 16:19
One of the two great achievements of an eminent biblical scholar of the nineteenth century, Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf, was the historical discovery of the oldest known Bible manuscript 'Codex Sinaiticus' from St. Catherine's Monastery in Mt. Sinai.
Dr. Tischendorf discovered that in this 5th century document the gospel of Mark ended at 16:8. In other words, the last 12 verses (9 to 20) were "injected" sometime after the 5th century. Clement of Alexandria and Origen never quoted these verses. You have quoted verse number 19. Today, in many of the revised versions of the Bible, the said last twelve verses appear within parentheses. (For further information please read 'Secrets of Mount Sinai' by James Bentley, Orbis, London, 1985).

Peake's Commentary on the Bible records; "It is now generally agreed that 9-20 are not an original part of Mk. They are not found in the oldest MSS, and indeed were apparently not in the copies used by Mt. and Lk. A 10th-cent. Armenian MS ascribes the passage to Aristion, the presbyter mentioned by Papias (ap.Eus.HE III, xxxix, 15)."

How can the Bible STILL be God's Word?

Answer 1

Read Revelation. If you add or subtract anything from the Bible you'll be plagued. Just look at the world around us, plagues everywhere.

P.S. The Bible is indeed accurate. It is written by man, yes, BUT, it is inspired by God. Example....You write a book about my life but only put in it what I tell you to write. Otherwise, how else would you possaibly know what to put in it? There's so many prophecies in Scripture. Please read it for yourself and ask God to help you understand and know who He is through His Word not through the words of man. He will show up if you seek Him wholeheartedly. God bless you.

Answer 2

There are several existing manuscripts of Mark which predate the Codex Siniaiticus which include Mark verse 9-20. In fact, there are over 2,300 New Testament manuscripts which predate the Codex Siniaticus, so dating from the latter part of the first century nearly four hundred years before that.

The Codex Siniaiticus is one of the earliesr complete New Testaments found. Part of that is because the "codex" (what we would call a "book" today) was not invented until the mid to late second century (around 250-300 AD). Prior to that, the NT books were on scrolls. Due to the nature of a scroll, it was limited in size. It was not physically possible to make a usable scroll that would contain the entire NT. It was between 350 and 400 AD when the first NT was made in a single volume. The Codex Sinaiticus date from shortly after that time. So while it is one of the earliest comlete New Testaments codexes, it is not even close to the earliest existing copy of the gospel of Mark. The others are just not in complete NT codexes. They are in scrolls.

There are currently over 700 manuscripts of the gospels that predate the Codex Sinaiticus. None of those are missing verses 9-20. There is one other manuscript that is later then Codex Siniaticus which is also mssing those verses. It appears to be a word for word copy of Codex Sinaitius. It is found in all other manuscripts of Mark.

If you look at the Codus, you will note that the beginning of Mark 16:9 is the last verse, on the last line of the left hand page of the manuscript. It goes all the way to the bottom of the page, with no blank lines or spaces after or below where the verse ends. It completely fills the page. It also ends in the middle of the sentence, which would be a very strange way to end a book. You should at least finish the sentence.

A more likely explaination for the missing verses if that the Codex Sinaiticus is missing a page. The actual Codex itself is not. But it is a handwritten copy of another manuscript. It is very probably that the scholar making the copy either missed a page, or had that page missing in the manuscript he was copying.

With over 700 manuscripts before the Codex Sinaiticus that do have verses 9-20, and another 1,600 manuscripts from after the Codex that include the verses, and only 2 that are missing them, common sense would seen to indicate that the 2 manuscripts missing the verses were a mistake, rather then the 2,300 copies with the verse being the mistake.

Answer 3

Actually, the "Divine" injunction not to change even a stroke or a comma applies only to the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the Hebrew Bible. That injunction has been observed so stringently that pages from the "Dead Sea Scrolls" match today's Torah scrolls exactly, even down to the words beginning and ending a "page"

The injunction does not apply to the "New Testament".

The injuction to guard the integrity of the content of the Pentateuch may have to do with the possibility that it contains hidden "codes", as theorized in the book "The Bible Code", and any editing, whether with insertions or deletions, would alter the text in such a way that the messages would be lost.

In any case, whether or not there are inconsistencies in the "New Testament" is irrelevant as far as the Biblical injunction against editing is concerned. It applies only to the Hebrew scriptures.

Answer 4

You have a point. This brings to light the thought the topic of Textual criticism. It is generally accepted that the passage you pointed out is not part of the revealed Word of God. A good Bible will tell you this by bracketing it or footnotes or something like that.

God reveals Himself in His word, and we have to understand that though the original writers had the Providence of God and His guiding and protecting, the copyists and editors and translators DID NOT!!!
So, what we have as the Bible in front of us is not completely accurate to the original inspired documents.

To answer your first question: we cannot add or take away anything from the Word, but be discerning as to who has done that thing in the past.

Answer 5

The reason that they were the oldest, is because no one used them, they were rejected by the church. These were corrupted manuscripts, and were found in a garbage can at the Monastery. Tischendorf was told by a librarian they "were rubbish which was to be destroyed by burning it in the ovens of the monastery".

We are told in the Bible that God preserves His Word - since these manuscripts were not preserved then they can be rejected.

Answer 6

You can tell it is true, mainly because Jesus's words that He spoke corresponds with what He said in Mat.28, the words that are in red are very important wouldn't you agree. Also the words that are in black about Jesus being in heaven on the right hand with God, is true, it corresponds with Mat.22:44 and with the heart felt story of Stephens death in Acts 7:55

Answer 7

your not goin to get a correct answer becasue there is three types of Chritians...

1. Fundermentalists: they believe that the bible is free from erro becasue it is the direct word of God...it was divine dictated.

2. Conservatives: they believe that the bible was divine inspiration and not the direct word of God; the writter wrote the bible according to their understanding of revelations given to them, meanin there is a chance for errors.

3. Liberals: they believe the bible is just a book of guidelines which was writen by humans for humans...it is not the word of God, meaning it can contain human errors.

we also need to understand that during the redaction stage of the bible (the editing stage) things we correct by using the writters own knowledge...so this is another ways of sayin that people have added and erased things from it.

when lookin at the bible we also need to understand that 40 years after Jesus died, the bible was not yet forme...things in the bible we remember by passing it on by the word of mouth, and as we all know one cannot rely on sources passed on by word of mouth becasue people add and take aways from what has been sai. Then it went though the written stage, where all the things passed on aurally were recorded...lastly it's at the editing stage, which is when Christian writters edit the bible.

Answer 8

Well, of course, as god doesn't exist then this ragbag collection of tales cannot be her book.

Yes, it's been mistranslated, mutilated and changed for centuries. That good old 'King James Version' is aptly named, not only because it was commissioned by James but also because he meddled in its final format to conform with his beliefs.

Answer 9

Every time it gets translated changes are made!

Answer 10

no it would be wrong
ive never heard this before....dont see references