if the bible wasn't written in English then how do we know that it wanted altered into someones perception ?

Question

could it be that we are reading someones mistaken translation of the bible ?

Answer 1

someones altered perception translated into another altered perception

Answer 2

Modern translations are not copies of copies with errors repeated and added each time. Rather, the modern translations come from a large collection of ancient texts, the earliest of which were written within the lifespan of those who knew the historical Jesus. As scholars discover more ancient texts (Dead Sea Scrolls for example) the reliability of the translation improves.

By the way, the Christian scripture were widely translated from the beginning, so in addition to Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew texts we also have early copies in Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopian and others.

There are more than 5,000 ancient Greek manuscripts and papyrus texts that are even earlier. Scripture is also found in early collections of readings called the lectionary, and Scripture was widely quoted by the early Church Fathers and theologians.

A modern English translation is an absolutely reliable rendition of the original texts.

Answer 3

In some instances, yes, however, it never changes the meaning of God's word. The message of the Gospel is still clear.

There are word translation errors, but not context errors.

The above is true with the exception of those that translate the versions of their native tongue and add or omit and/or change portions of the Bible. This is becoming more common and great care should be used when picking a Bible to study from. I feel it is usually best to stick with the older translations as the newer ones have been re-written to suit the desires of a particular group. Such as: There is one for "gays" there is one special for the more "liberated women", there are one that use "slang" language to appeal to certain crowds, and then their are groups like JW, who have their personal version, also Mormon who though they use the Bible have decided that they have an additional book from Jesus, in which they use. Jesus made it prettuy clear in Revelations that this was it. He said to not add or take away from the words. In other words, there would be no more inspired books to anyone to count as part of God's Word.

Answer 4

then I would have to ask the question in 1949 I think, in Qumram that translated almost verbatim to our Bible today, and also there is thousands of copies of MS that have been found, dont you think that if it was altered in any way the world would have brought that out. Also look how a Christian is suppose to live, if I was going to write a book and tell people that it was from God, i wouldnt take the pleasures of the flesh out of it, I would say live free and do what u want to do...

Answer 5

We are reading an accurate Bible. The Bible is not on trial due to this question--you are. Many questions on Yahoo are insincere and asked for the purpose of ridicule or sarcasm, and this is revealed by what the asker determines as Best Answer.
I am going to treat your question as sincere and you will reveal your character and intent by what you select as best answer.
Sir Fredric Kenyon, former director and principal librarian of the British Museum, and second to none in authority regarding ancient manuscripts, stated:

"No fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith rests on a disputed reading or translation....
It cannot be too strongly asserted that in substance the text of the Bible is certain; especially is this the case with the New Testament. The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, of early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writings of the church, is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one other of these ancient authorities. THIS CAN BE SAID OF NO OTHER BOOK IN THE WORLD."

Emphasis on last sentence of quote added by me.There are now more than 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. Add over 10,000 Latin Vulgate and at least 9,300 other early versions and we have more than 24,000 manuscript copies of the New Testament in existence.
No other document of antinquity even begins to approach such numbers and attestation. In comparison, the "Iliad" by Homer is second with only 643 manuscripts that still survive. The first complete preserved text of Homer dates from the 13th century. No one wants to question Homer, but the Bible is questioned on the basis of translation and historical acuracy?

In the case of the Old Testament we do not have the abundance of close Manuscript authority as we do in the New Testament. Until the recent discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls, the oldest complete extant Hebrew manuscript was around A.D. 900. This made a time gap of 1,300 years.(compared to 500 years to Homer's "Iliad") At first sight it would appear that the Old Testament is no more reliable than other ancient literature.
Then the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered. A number of Old Testament manuscripts have been found which scholars date to before the time of Christ.
Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscripts previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95% of the text. The 5% of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling. Even those Dead Sea fragments of Deuteronomy and Samuel which point to a different manuscript family from that which underlies our received Hebrew text do not indicate any differences indoctrine or teaching. They do not affect the message of revelation in the slightest. If you would like to purchase an English Translation of the Dead Sea scrolls, you can here: http://www.centuryone.com/0063-2.html
When the facts are known and compared, there is an abundance of reasons for believing that the manuscripts we possess are trustworthy. As Sir Frederic Kenyon put it "the Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear or hesitation that he holds the true Word of God, handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the centuries."

Answer 6

nothing translates perfectly. even if it was the best possible translation from ancient Hebrew or Aramaic to English. very simply our idea of the meaning of many words is much different from the meanings held 2000 years ago.

for example. in the 1950's Gay meant to be happy. it is in the themesong to the Flintstones Cartoon..

today it means to be a Homosexual... and that is only a few years difference. imagine 2000 years and a word like Murder.......(yes the meaning has changed)

Answer 7

Not just a mistaken translation, but things being taken out and things out in. We have no way of knowing. Example: Chronologically, the book of revelations was not written last. So when people quote the scripture about nothing being added, then they would have to throw out like 3 other books of the new testament!

This is the one HUGE point that convinced me as a child that there had to only be one TRUE religion. That everything else was chaos.

I am glad of where I am now!

Answer 8

Yes, if you believe god makes mistakes.

I think the hole point of the bible is to learn from the stories, fallow the commandments, be a good person, love god . . . . . yada yada yada. If you belive that god exists, and he had anything to do with the bible, than know that his word is what he wanted and if his word has changed a bit in translation then maybe its the over all jist that matters and maybe we should stop focusing on the technicalities.

Answer 9

Not only was the Bible written in other languages, but we have nothing near original copies of any of the books. The Bible was formed by committee -- translated from copies of copies of copies by committee -- and the earliest copies we have of the translations are hundreds of years after the fact -- and remember, from a time when people copied scrolls by hand.

However, we don't need to wonder -- we KNOW, if we believe in God -- that the Bible is mistranslated. Biblegod is a monster, not a loving being; and the Bible is full of hundreds of errors, conflicts, and failed prophecies. It is not the word of god on the face of it -- any more than any of the other supposedly divine, but error ridden texts that masquerade as supernatural and infallible documents.

The Bible is myth -- not something to worry about.

Kind thoughts,

Reyn
[e-mail]

Answer 10

Absolutely. It is a collection of personal accounts, meaning it's opinionated and biased. Not to mention the fact that Constantine picked and chose which segments he would include in the New Testament. It inspiriational, gives people hope, and tells people to live an honest life, and there's nothing wrong with that. However, don't be mistaken--by no means is it a collection of proven facts.

Answer 11

That's why I like consulting multiple translations and multiple analyses of surviving original-language manuscripts. Lots of different interpretations and opinions, then at least I get to make my own bad decisions and mistakes from among multiple choices.