EXAMPLE OF AN ALTERED SCRIPTURE

[BigJohn]

In the King James Bible at 2 Corinthians 13:12 reads:

"Greet one another with an holy kiss."

whereas the NIV translation altered the verse to read:

"Greet one another with a holy kiss."

The difference between the two verses is "an" has been properly changed to "a".


Some people get upset when a new translation renders some expressions differently then 'their' Bible renders them.

Lets talk about scriptures that have been 'corrected' and the reason for the change. Please also include scriptures that have been actually removed.

[ThatMan]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

..Lets talk about scriptures that have been 'corrected' and the reason for the change. Please also include scriptures that have been actually removed.

What about all the other books left out?

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by ThatMan

What about all the other books left out?

'Left out' implies they were once in the canon. That question should be devoted to another thread.

[ThatMan]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

'Left out' implies they were once in the canon. That question should be devoted to another thread.

They decided what books to chose and what to discard, it's well known that the Book of Revelation was very close to not make it in the "final" set of books that make today the Bible. They were more inclined to chose the book called: Apocalypse of Peter; and now, this book was completely forgotten, but at that time was quite popular.

For example, from my own research, I may be wrong, the Book of Revelation is the only one where the writer talks about a punishment for the ones who may modify it and so people assigned this belief to the entire Bible, but the Bible is made of so many books, written by so many different people who had different styles, the "Bible" has been altered even before the time of Christ, people assigned things to God that He never said or done, the law an eye for an eye was given with many years before Moses to actually receive it from God, it's well known that Hammurabi wrote that law, and according to the legend, he received this law and all the other from a being not from this world.

The supernatural things never stopped and so we have so many christian legends today, many other followers of Christ wrote books, God never said "create the bible with this books and stop", do you think His revelation stopped 2000 years ago? The Holy Spirit was given to the followers of Christ and so the revelations never stopped. I am just at the beginning stage into the christian literature, and I too had similar visions just like the ones written down by the followers of Christ who walked down the Earth hundreds of years ago.

You know what hurts the most when it comes to christianity? That the message of Christ was overshadowed by the church leaders and so instead to free people from the bondage of ignorance, they made them the slaves of the church. They decided and decide everything, when the so called Pope came into my country, at his first visit, he went to the biggest new church from my country, there he was welcomed by the most rich, popular and influencing people, now, when I look at Christ, He was always around the poor and the needy, showing them The Way. They made christians to have their own groups ( denominations ) and to hate each other, always pointing fingers at one another, all claiming that only by their way you can be saved. The christians in my country, not all, but many of them, have a very deep hate for the other christian denominations, you can't say a word that you are asked of what denomination you are and if you are not of them, then you are someone below them.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by ThatMan

They decided what books to chose and what to discard, it's well known that the Book of Revelation was very close to not make it in the "final" set of books that make today the Bible. They were more inclined to chose the book called: Apocalypse of Peter; and now, this book was completely forgotten, but at that time was quite popular.

Pope Clement (88-99) seemed to accept the Apocalypse of Peter but Irenaeus (130 - 202) did not. There was much dispute between the Eastern and Western Churches during this time period especially over the Book of Revelation. The diversity of thought at that time is uniquely expressed in Irenaeus's reason for accepting only the four gospels.

As for the Apocalypse of Peter, the Book does not appear to be in harmony with the other Books of the Bible.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by ThatMan

You know what hurts the most when it comes to christianity? That the message of Christ was overshadowed by the church leaders and so instead to free people from the bondage of ignorance, they made them the slaves of the church.

What you wrote holds a lot of truth.

If the people could have studied what they were suppose to know about Christianity and the history of their religion, the outcome may have been different.

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

What you wrote holds a lot of truth.

If the people could have studied what they were suppose to know about Christianity and the history of their religion, the outcome may have been different.

But they use the Bible don't they to study their religion?

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

'Left out' implies they were once in the canon. That question should be devoted to another thread.

Left out means they were not included, something removed means they were once included in the Canon....

[quote=BigJohn]'Left out' implies they were once in the canon. That question should be devoted to another thread.

Originally Posted by ThatMan
What about all the other books left out?

'Left out' implies they were once in the canon. That question should be devoted to another thread.

One definition of scripture implies written parts of the bible, but another implies sacred religious writings of any sort.

Those books and writings left out by the outcome of the Councils of Nicaea and the church in the years that followed, were considered sacred by many prior to then. The church's canonization of some writings and persecution and suppression of others altered those latter scriptures by changing them from sacred texts to heresies, and in doing so altered the central tendency and message of Jesus's recorded life and teachings as a whole. If the intent of this thread is to examine how scriptures have changed over the years and perhaps have strayed from the original teachings of Jesus, I think that aggressive and deliberate filtration (and hence alteration) of those teachings is one that cannot be neglected, and a mistake to filter them out again here.

But it is your thread and if only differences in the canonized translations are your forte', then either biblegateway.com (which allows you to go between via a drop down list) or biblehub.com which gives you several versions on the same page will allow you to compare canonized versions to your hearts content.
For example.
https://biblehub.com/matthew/23-13.htm

Personally, it seems like a lot of comparisons of different theories of how many angles can dance on the head of a pin. Nobody knows who is right, so I try to read between the lines and see if a coherent picture emerges. Having those other banned from the bible texts to consider helps a great deal in that regard.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by ketzer

'Left out' implies they were once in the canon. That question should be devoted to another thread.

'Left out' implies they were once in the canon. That question should be devoted to another thread.

If you leave out the eggs in a cake recipe, does it mean the eggs were originally in the cake mix?

Originally Posted by ketzer

One definition of scripture implies written parts of the bible, but another implies sacred religious writings of any sort.

Those books and writings left out by the outcome of the Councils of Nicaea and the church in the years that followed, were considered sacred by many prior to then. The church's canonization of some writings and persecution and suppression of others altered those latter scriptures by changing them from sacred texts to heresies, and in doing so altered the central tendency and message of Jesus's recorded life and teachings as a whole.

Look at Melito of Sardis' list of Old Testament books.... his list is smaller then the list today but he mentions the ones that are canonized today. Melito of Sardis died in 180 AD.
Origen's list was comparable. He died in 253 AD.
Athanasius's list was also comparable. Athanasius was much against Arius. This conflict was one of many issues that brought about the First Council of Nicaea in 325.

None of these lists indicate any serious persecution and suppression of other sacred texts.

Can you provide lists prior to the third century that have the books you mentioned?