I am a novice in researching Christianity but I have formed some opinions. I have also accepted a belief in the existence of the old Hebrew God, Yaweh and his son Yeshua and the basic Bible story and time line.
However, the Bible which Christianity stands by, whatever version, is fundamentally a collection of books, letters, verses, psalms etc etc written by various people over a spread of time. The New Testament came into being I am told by Constantine forging Christianity as the official religion to pacify his Empire, intergrating other religious beliefs and customs.
Constantine effectively was the editor and publisher (?)
So, how can we trust that the presentation of the Bible is as God wanted? It's a bit like an author writing a book and selling th film rights where the film is pretty much a different story, at least a different message, but the general population take the film as being the true original story.
What texts were left out?
2007-09-11 05:52:19 · 20 answers · asked by mathias 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes, I believe the catholic church butchered the bible.
2007-09-11 05:58:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
"The New Testament came into being I am told by Constantine forging Christianity as the official religion to pacify his Empire, intergrating other religious beliefs and customs."
This is not accurate on two accounts
1) The canon of the New Testament (NT) was established *after* Constantine's death in 337 C.E. The oldest written record that we have of the complete NT canon is the 367 C.E. "Festal Letter" of Athanasius. Remember, at this time the bible, as a collection, did not yet exist. (source: Harpercollins Bible Dictionary) The actual establishment of this list as the canon of the New Testament occurred (with some reservations) at the Council of Carthage in 397 C.E. (source: Wikipedia)
2) The individual books of the NT can all be dated to a time prior to the birth of Constantine, which occurred about 280 C.E.
Conclusion: Constantine did not cause any of the NT books to be written, nor was he responsible for deciding which books were included into the NT. Therefore, Constantine was neither editor nor publisher.
"So, how can we trust that the presentation of the Bible is as God wanted?"
This is an entirely separate question, and in any case has nothing whatsoever to do with Constantine.
"It's a bit like an author writing a book and selling th film rights where the film is pretty much a different story, at least a different message, but the general population take the film as being the true original story."
No, actually, it's like someone (God) having several books ghost-written, and those books collected in an anthology, which is what the bible actually is. There are no "film rights" that were "sold" and, as far as archaeologists can determine, the texts have, for the most part, managed to remain unchanged. There *are* a (very) few *additions* (*NOT* changes) to the text that became more common in source manuscripts than not, but these are *very* few, and *strictly* additions. The text within these books has remained unchanged *by purpose* as far as biblical scholars can determine (there are some changes that have crept in over the centuries due to copy errors), and the few additions made (definitely with purpose) have had little, if any, effect on the *meaning* of the text. Indeed, nearly all of these additions are mere glosses. (There are a few significant exceptions, but again, these additions have *not* lead to any shift in doctrine).
"What texts were left out?"
That depends entirely on what you mean by "left out". One must do considerable research - after attaining competence in the translation of *ancient* Greek and Hebrew - to be able to begin answering this question with any degree of validity. You could ask with equal lack of knowledge "what texts were included that ought not to have been?" Personally, I believe that the choices made over the centuries (yes, it actually took them centuries to arrive at a final decision) by the Roman Catholic Church is actually quite accurate (with 1 possible exception of inclusion and 1 of exclusion). I have read most of the "extra" books accepted by the Eastern Orthodox and Ethiopian Orthodox Churches as inspired and found them fallacious. This, of course, disqualifies them as "inspired." The exception would be Esdras, which apparently is simply a Greek translation of Ezra and Nehemiah mildly abridged and combined. I accept this book particularly because Jesus quoted from it, but also because there are no errors that I (admittedly *not* an educated bible scholar) could discover. I *have* discovered errors in Maccabees 3 and 4 (and possibly in 2, but I am not certain of this), as well as in the Book of Enoch, and so I am certain that these books are not inspired. I have *not* yet read the Book of Jubilees, so cannot vouch for the validity of that book. I have also read several of the so-called "pseudepigrapha", including the gospels of Mary, Thomas, and several of the infant gospels of Jesus. Excepting Thomas, these are *clearly* not inspired works - one only has to read them to see how strongly they disagree with the gospels we know. Thomas is quite a bit more subtle, and it will likely take a great deal of study on your part before you arrive at the conclusion that it, too, is contrary to the biblical gospels.
Many NT "pseudepigrapha" are available, and a small monetary outlay on your part to purchase scholarly English translations, plus a significant outlay of time to read them all carefully, will likely lead you to the same conclusion.
Jim, http://www.life-after-harry-potter.com
2007-09-11 12:22:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think it was a case of leaving out the books he didn't like, if you have ever read any of the gnostic gospels, you will see that there is some contradiction to the main thrust of both testaments. We do not know the authenticity of these books and in early Christianity there was a lot of cults around that claimed that they were the "real Mckoy".
The whole of the old Testament points to Jesus and the cross was the climax of time it'self. As the old and new testament stand they are in total agreement and nothing else needs to be added in order to understand the Gospel Jesus came to give.
2007-09-11 06:18:56 · answer #3 · answered by Andy 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This is where you will find many different tales.
Constantine did NOT edit the Bible, as some claim. The books that were "left out" were left out because it was known that they were NOT inspired, based on certain criteria- known to be of Apostolic authorship, pure doctrine, with no contradictions, etc. Read about the early church councils.
The best Bible would be (in English) the King James, the New King James. Before that, go to the Greek and Septuagint.
2007-09-11 06:28:05 · answer #4 · answered by Jed 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Torah is the old testament, the Bible is the new testament, and the Quran is the final testament. All these three Books are from the same source. The former two suffered a lot of human interpolation and corruption. The final testament i.e The Quran remained intact since its revelation about 14 years ago. This is because Almighty Allah Himself has guaranteed to protect it from all sorts of interpolation and corruption. That is why it is still the living miracle because it has been byhearted in its entirey letter by letter by thousands of muslims which is impossible for any other book and this is the challenge of the Quran itself. Almighty Allah says in the Quran "Indeed we sent down the revelation and We will guard it" He did not guarantee to protect the Bible and the Torah from human interpolation. To know more about this miraculous Book, log on to Harunyahya.com.
2007-09-11 06:14:10 · answer #5 · answered by Umari 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It still amazes me that people ask questrions here that require answers that would require volumes to properly cover. The subject of textual critisizim alone would take a book or two just to get the basics outlined.... so to respond to the base question.... Yes... at least all of the "modern" versions are very much "edited" to fit the pov of the "sect"."denomination", cult, that is backing the publication
No inerrant text of "The Bible" exists today... in any language.
The Bible of The True Christian Faith is not intended for the non-believer who is not open to the leading of God through The Holy Spirit. The "Bible" does not prove The Christian Faith... nor does it prove God... But... God will prove The Bible to any who honestly seek and come to God in The Way He prescribes.
The True Christian's Faith is not based on The Bible... The Faith is based on the individuals personal knowledge of God and what God has done for them. Knowing God and What He has done allows one to base their Faith on Fact. So that the believer knows(has Faith) that what God promises will come, will come to pass. Because we( The Believers) Know The Fact of God... We have Faith in what he says.... and we have faith in His leadiing our personal study of The Bible... we do not take the word of any man as to what The Bible is saying... We only follow God's leading.
2007-09-11 06:14:02 · answer #6 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Bible is Holy Scripture, handed down to many different people over time. The Holy Spirit Inspired their writings and it is The Work of The Holy Spirit to enlighten those who read its pages!
I am no theologian, or Bible scholar, however I do know that over the past twenty three-years, since Jesus Burst into my life, I have found comfort, encouragement and strength in it.
I am impressed by some of the knowledge shown in the answers to your question - I certainly would not claim to have such knowledge!
It saddens me though, that such knowledgeable people can be so derisory about something so dear to the heart of millions of people all over the world.
It is a living relationship with Jesus that makes the difference when The Bible is read!
I cannot tell you what books were left out, what books were changed, etc.
What I can tell you is that Jesus IS Alive, Real and Potent!
When He Burst into my life, I was a camelion - I had no opinion of my own, no strength of character, no self-esteem, I would not stand up for myself at all in any way, shape, or form!
I am not perfect - would never dream of claiming to be! BUT I do know that He has turned me into an 'Overcomer', who rises above the challenges and trials that make up my life, with His Help and Strength! Part of how He has changed me has been through leading me to the pages of The Bible!
Twenty-three years ago I would never have dreamed of doing anything like this, I simply wouldn't have had the nerve - I would have been too worried about what people might think!
Even though they wouldn't know me and probably I'd never meet them, it would still give me sleepless nights!
People can rubbish The Bible as much as they like, it will not change the fact that it IS The Inspired Word of God - and It will stand until It has accomplished that which God Purposed It to acheive!
Sadly anything to do with Jesus can be used as blasphemy, ridiculed, and used in ways that are not allowed to cause offence to any other faith...
Yet His Name still Stands, still brings Joy, Hope and Encouragement to millions of people all over the world! People who like myself have found a Wonderful Friend and know that their lives are the richer for His Presence - even though their circumstances may not have changed one iota...
PART OF THAT JOY, HOPE AND ENCOURAGEMENT COMES THROUGH HIS BOOK - GOD'S HOLY WORD!
God Bless you!
2007-09-11 11:38:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it fairly is genuine, and this is been. the recent variations verses the King James version are diverse. The version, starts with a "G", purely before the King James is diverse. they had footnotes, which held which you probably did no longer could supply confession to a clergyman, and a few different rituals that have been pronounced to no longer be required, that the Catholic Church frowned upon, so they have been ignored of the King James. the recent variations have made many changes. alongside with interior the introduction tale, Adam and Eve, it pronounced, "be fruitful and top off the earth", which the "re" improve into taken out. isn't it significant to renowned that Adam and Eve weren't the 1st human introduction in the international? In all historical scriptures it pronounced the comparable, yet now this is been ignored. Why? Islam or Muslims had the acceptable theory. whilst their holy books are copied, they replica from one scroll to a diverse, employing the way of the scribes, via dipping their pen in ink, and crafting each and each letter. It takes months to in all danger years for clean scrolls to interchange the elderly ones, yet they are very careful in copying each and each letter to be top to the previous replica. You pronounced absolutely everyone seems to be basic to manage. it fairly is fairly genuine. human beings hear to the information and settle for regardless of is advised them as being actuality, while there are areas of information it fairly is comparable to being a Hollywood script. this is purposed to reason concern interior the hearts of guy, via fact nevertheless concern evil can administration. human beings forget that devil is the controller over the fabric international, that's why Jesus pronounced to no longer make acquaintances with this international, via fact in doing so which you're making your self an enemy of God.
2016-10-04 09:27:41 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your statement about the bible being contrived by several people hit the nail right on the head.
The stories were made up by people who THOUGHT they knew how things came about and put their own interpretation on them. What they did not know, they made up. If something was fairly outrageous well, only one answer, it was a miracle performed by a god of some sort. That would explain it.
The bible is a selection of stories which were totally fictitious, and completely untrue, only in the minds of the writer.
After several hundred years all evidence about the writers were destroyed and no-one could be called to be questioned, so everyone thought the bible must have been written by a god.
Stupid? Silly? Far-fetched? Of course! But it is called, not all those descriptive words, but they call it a bible and millions of people were and still are led astray by it.
Only the intelligent thinking people can see through all the hype.
2007-09-11 06:09:16 · answer #9 · answered by Montgomery B 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
The truth is where you find it. Using your movie analogy, this script is all over the place, but the story is still in there somewhere between the lines.
Plenty of gospels didn't make the cut. Check out the Gnostic Gospels by Ellen Pagels.
2007-09-11 06:02:42 · answer #10 · answered by buddhamonkeyboy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Big question and I think your right in many ways. The bible {old and new testement} is, in my opinion, a collection of stories handed down from one generation to another, finally to be written down as those in power wanted at that point in time. Like any story thats told many times it will change on each telling. Therefore no-one will ever really know the truth. The important thing here is that it was used to gain POWER and CONTROL of the masses.
2007-09-11 06:02:01 · answer #11 · answered by alex s 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋