Has the Bible been "Tampered" with by Man?

[jojored]

I am a 53 year old gay male and must admit that I have been checking out the debates mostly on "Homosexuality".

However in my study on the subject I must admit that at this old age I have come to realize that I may not have been relying on the "complete" works of the Bible.


I have always referred to the "King James" version...which I have found out to be actually the "NEW King James" version, that most people refer to today. I have discovered that the Original "King James" version of 1611 contained 81 books, 15 that were" purged" in 1885 by the Archbishop of Canterbury (these books are known at "The Apocryphal, or Deuterononical Books.") The purge was made by this man alone.

Also at the time of Constantine there may have been as many books as 600 books!... and it was from all but 80 of those books, known as the King James Translation of 1611, were purged from the work, with a further Reduction by the Protestant Reform bringing the number to 66 in the "Authorized" King James Bible.

These "Books" are not lost, just forbidden...." Why hasn't the "Church" released all of these document?

Even though I'm gay, people ask why "I put my faith in God and Jesus?" This is correct I sure can't put my trust in people of power...whether it's politics, business or religion...they are all sleeping in the same bed.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Agreed. Analysis of what original texts are available, I can see no condemnation of homosexuality in the Bible. This came as somewhat of a surprise, even though I am not Christian.

 

[GwynApNudd]

You have confused a number of different issues here. I'll try to help you sort them all out as we go along. But for now, I think the one whose explanation will most help settle your worries is the one concerning the canon of the Old Testament and the addition of the books known as the Apocrypha. I'll be using the word "canon" a lot. It referes to the books that are "officially" a part of the Bible.

It all began in Alexandria Egypt around 300 BCE. There was a growing Jewish community there, and many of the younger ones did not know Hebrew as well as they should have. So a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (what we now call the Old Testament) into Greek was commissioned. The story goes that seventy-two Hebrew scholars collaborated on the translation. So it was called "The Translation of the Seventy-two," which was shortened to "Seventy" or in Latin, "Septugint." Since it was a translation, and not a set of holy scrolls for the synagogue, the scholars saw no reason not to add some books and stories that were not in the canon. These additional books and stories are now called the Apocrypha.

When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, he was a better Greek scholar than a Hebrew scholar. So he translated the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuigint, including the additions. Jerome's "vulgate" translation became the canon for the Catholic Church. After the Protestant Reformation, many Protestant scholars, researching the Bible decided that the Apocrypha should not have been added to the canon.

Most Protestant churches simply dropped the Apocrypha out of canon, and it is not printed in their Bibles. The Catholic Church still considers it to be canon, and it is seemlessly incorporated into their Bibles. But a few Protestant churches consider the Apocrypha to be morally uplifting even though it it is not inspired. They print the Apocrypha in their Bibles, but in a separate section from the Old Testament. These churches call the booksof the Apocrypha "dutero-canonical," that is they form a second canon, apart from the first canon.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

You have confused a number of different issues here. I'll try to help you sort them all out as we go along. But for now, I think the one whose explanation will most help settle your worries is the one concerning the canon of the Old Testament and the addition of the books known as the Apocrypha. I'll be using the word "canon" a lot. It referes to the books that are "officially" a part of the Bible.

It all began in Alexandria Egypt around 300 BCE. There was a growing Jewish community there, and many of the younger ones did not know Hebrew as well as they should have. So a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (what we now call the Old Testament) into Greek was commissioned. The story goes that seventy-two Hebrew scholars collaborated on the translation. So it was called "The Translation of the Seventy-two," which was shortened to "Seventy" or in Latin, "Septugint." Since it was a translation, and not a set of holy scrolls for the synagogue, the scholars saw no reason not to add some books and stories that were not in the canon. These additional books and stories are now called the Apocrypha.

When Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, he was a better Greek scholar than a Hebrew scholar. So he translated the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuigint, including the additions. Jerome's "vulgate" translation became the canon for the Catholic Church. After the Protestant Reformation, many Protestant scholars, researching the Bible decided that the Apocrypha should not have been added to the canon.

Most Protestant churches simply dropped the Apocrypha out of canon, and it is not printed in their Bibles. The Catholic Church still considers it to be canon, and it is seemlessly incorporated into their Bibles. But a few Protestant churches consider the Apocrypha to be morally uplifting even though it it is not inspired. They print the Apocrypha in their Bibles, but in a separate section from the Old Testament. These churches call the booksof the Apocrypha "dutero-canonical," that is they form a second canon, apart from the first canon.

I guess this begs the question, How did they know, they were not inspired ? Its seems more of a political decision to me.

 

[GwynApNudd]

I guess this begs the question, How did they know, they were not inspired ? Its seems more of a political decision to me.

Yes, there are still a lot of questions in the OP that I have not yet touched on, and my brief explanation of the Apocrypha did not touch on the question "Who decided what books were in the canon in the first place.

My previous post was just the first of many posts intended to examine those questions.

 

[Mling]

Having taken a few classes on Biblical Hebrew, and there will be no doubt in the mind of any reasonable and honest person that the Bible has absolutely been tampered with. Words have been changed, added and left out, entire passages have gone missing and been replaced with translator's best estimate, translations were accidently screwed up (example--repeating a few words in such a way that the new passage could make sense but means something different than the original), translations were deliberately screwed up to gloss over awkward or controversial statements (I remember one from a class where we looked at the Bible from the pov of literary criticism, and noted that a poetic passage that refers to nature singing, yet having no voice, had been mistranslated to avoid the suggestion of contradiction).

In my third Hebrew class we translated 1st Samuel--that's an absolute mess. There are so many screw-ups in the Hebrew that it's all but incomprehensible. The Samuel that appears in modern Bibles is mish-mash of the Hebrew with the gaps filled in by the Septuegent, which was never intended to be "Scripture."

 

[Zaac]

I am a 53 year old gay male and must admit that I have been checking out the debates mostly on "Homosexuality".

However in my study on the subject I must admit that at this old age I have come to realize that I may not have been relying on the "complete" works of the Bible.


I have always referred to the "King James" version...which I have found out to be actually the "NEW King James" version, that most people refer to today. I have discovered that the Original "King James" version of 1611 contained 81 books, 15 that were" purged" in 1885 by the Archbishop of Canterbury (these books are known at "The Apocryphal, or Deuterononical Books.") The purge was made by this man alone.

Also at the time of Constantine there may have been as many books as 600 books!... and it was from all but 80 of those books, known as the King James Translation of 1611, were purged from the work, with a further Reduction by the Protestant Reform bringing the number to 66 in the "Authorized" King James Bible.

These "Books" are not lost, just forbidden...." Why hasn't the "Church" released all of these document?

Even though I'm gay, people ask why "I put my faith in God and Jesus?" This is correct I sure can't put my trust in people of power...whether it's politics, business or religion...they are all sleeping in the same bed.

jojored, what has oocurred to make you think that the 66 books should include other books?

And I ask the followingquestion of anyone who claims to be worshipping the God of the universe:

Is God not big enough to maintain His Word?

If God isn't capable of staving off the machinations of man enough to maintain the integrity of His inspired Word, then He's not much of a God.

He can hold the universe in His hands, but He can't keep pitiful, dirt-made men from corrupting His Word?

 

[jojored]

I appreciate the responces to my question, but I'm not sure I'm getting the answers.

My concern is that "Todays" Bible on which most mainstream "Christian" religions rely upon have had at least some "tampering" by man (maybe quite a bit)...and from what I have found is that this may have began as earily as 312 by the Emperor Constantine.

And as stated in my original question, these changes came about due to Political, Religious and Business Power.

Currently I have been doing my research at www.bibleufo.com. However, as well as this site is put together, it is still the work of "man"...and I'm causus of even an agenda there. I'm still doing further research and have ordered "The Lost Book of Enoch"; "The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls", "The Apocrypha, plus 3 others.

I think my concern is "mans" picking and choosing as to what we are beinging "told" what the Bible says. In another thread when someone pointed out that in 1

 

[jojored]

jojored, what has oocurred to make you think that the 66 books should include other books?

And I ask the followingquestion of anyone who claims to be worshipping the God of the universe:

Is God not big enough to maintain His Word?

If God isn't capable of staving off the machinations of man enough to maintain the integrity of His inspired Word, then He's not much of a God.

He can hold the universe in His hands, but He can't keep pitiful, dirt-made men from corrupting His Word?

My question back to you is "What is the Church" hiding?" According to my research there were almost 600 books at the time of Emperor Constantine who instituted the Edict of Milan...he was in an alliance and heavily supported by the "Church". He also supported that the "Church" and the "State" should be as close as possible.

Out of that alliance Constantine began what was to become a centuries long effort to eliminate any book in the original Bible that was consider unacceptable to the new doctrine of the church (www.bibleufo.com).

The 1611 King James Translation contained only 80 of those books and then in 1865 it was the Archbishop of Canterbury who removed the 14 books from the Bible (now known as the Apocryphal books), giving us the modern day New King James Version of only 66 books.

I believe that if Constantine, King James and the Archbishop of Canterbury were infallible, then so must then be the Pope and we should all convert to Catholicism.

P.S. I think again that my position can be pointed out in 1 Corinthians when Paul addresses the issue of "homosexuals"...the term homosexual was not coined until 1869 so this "term" had to be added by man.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Is God not big enough to maintain His Word?

If God isn't capable of staving off the machinations of man enough to maintain the integrity of His inspired Word, then He's not much of a God.

He can hold the universe in His hands, but He can't keep pitiful, dirt-made men from corrupting His Word?

By your argument, God could ensure ZERO suffering on this planet.

Free will is free will. While the word may be inspired - much has been lost in translation, misinterpretation, and outright political power playing.

 

[synger]

This thread moved to Christian Scriptures from Christian Philosophy and Ethics, because it's dealing primarily with questions of the canon.

 

[artybloke]

What do you mean has the Bible been tampered with? It's not as if it were actually written by God...

And the Bible is a set of ancient writings from a culture that was very different from our own. The documentary evidence is neccessarily confused because so much of it is on scraps of parchment/papyrus from a long time after it was actually written.

A lot of the mistranslations/misreadings are probably not deliberate, at least not in the sense of some deliberate conspiracy. But nobody comes to the translation of a text with an empty mind. If you find something in a text that is confusing, it's natural to make it agree with what you already know, because they couldn't imagine it could say something else.

 

[Nachtjager]

Of course it's been highly messed with through the ages, and as others have said, if you pick up a garden variety off-the-shelf Bible of any translation today, you're reading translations based on 1,900 years of flaws.

You're going to love the Book of Enoch - it's fantastic and really should be in moden Bibles, at least in my opinion. It speaks to me a lot more than most of the OT does.

You're on the right path, seek out early texts and study them. Don't believe what man says, believe what God tells you is real. There is a lot of Truth in our modern Bible, but there are problems as well - don't let the problems stop you from having a relationship with God or knowing Christ.

And in perhaps unrelated news, don't let anyone tell you that simply because you're gay, you're bound for hell. Gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins and I've seen a whole lot of fat preachers! Believe in Christ and seek the Truth - it takes digging, but it's rewarding and fascinating.

Take care and God bless!

 

[vinsight4u]

What about Romans 1:27?

 

[E.C.]

Of course the Bible has been messed with.

JWs changed a verse in John's Gospel to read "and the Word was a god" from "and the Word was God".

Protestants changed a few things here and there to suit their agenda and to justify anti-Catholicism.

In fact, Martin Luther took out James' Epistle because it said "faith without works is dead" among other things that contradict "faith alone" thought.

 

[artybloke]

Don't believe what man says, believe what God tells you is real.

And how do you do that precisely? Listen out for some disembodied voice to tell you what is right or wrong?

God can speak just as easily through another human being as any other way. After all, despite its flaws and its very human nature, God somehow still manages to speak through the Bible; as well as through the writings and examples of say, George Fox, Brother Lawrence, Ghandhi, Francis of Assisi and Dame Julian of Norwich.