A conspiracy to place the Bible beyond debate

In the last chapter of the book of revelations a passage warning anyone against tampering with anything written in the Bible is included. A couple of simple sentences telling of horrible fates that await those who dare dispute it's validity. It may be argued that the purpose of it's inclusion was to keep the original message free from dilution, however it provides a convenient method of continuing the spread of ignorance that an corrupted message has adopted. In my opinion, this is one of the primary reasons why many are so reluctant to even consider the possibility that the Bible is anything less than divine. Fear can be a powerful weapon in the wrong hands.

Like any written text - on any subject - negative use usually spawns from the way it is interpreted by the reader.

An illustration using the Bible :

"Spare the road and spoil the child."

We can take this one of two ways -

We are to be leinient in regards to our children by withholding punishment and lavish them with praise and affirmation.

OR

We are to discipline them harshly and spare no detail, for to do so would corrupt them.

Human history has shown us that the majority of people are so engrossed in their personal viewpoints, interpretation and experiences that they will not hesitate to "lay down the law" with others - despite their age.

Several of the most debatable passages in the Bible are perfect examples of Orwellian doublespeak. It's how we choose to interpret and act upon them that make them positive lessons in tolerance or excuses to continue on with destructive ideologies.

The fault lies within the reader - not the book.

Personally - I think the Bible is a wonderful test of mankind, it is a remarkable work of social engineering.

Originally posted by mytym

In my opinion, this [the warning in Revelation] is one of the primary reasons why many are so reluctant to even consider the possibility that the Bible is anything less than divine.

The canon of the Bible was always slightly nebulous. Revelation was not part of the 20-22 books that were universally accepted in the early church, yet even the Sees of the Church and the Church Fathers who explicitly favored a more conservative (narrow) canon never questioned the core writings as divinely inspired word.



[edit on 21-5-2006 by Paul of Nisbis]

MYTYM:

Being a christian myself, i disagree with your assessment. in revelation it says....

"22:18:
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of THIS BOOK, If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in THIS BOOK. 22:19
And if anyone takes words away from THIS BOOK OF PROPHECY, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in THIS BOOK.

whereas you say that revelation says if anyone misquotes anything from the whole bible...as you can see from the verses in revelation i just showed you...you have incorrectly quoted them.

so anyone who reads this text cannot possibly misinterpret it being to the whole bible since it specifically says THIS BOOK. so i dont know why you are saying it says the whole bible. now what would have made more sense to use for your argument would be to quote 2 timothy 3: 16 which says :"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness." this is one of the many reasons why christians believe that the bible is divinely inspired. but you misquoted the book of revelation and therefore i feel your assessment is flawed.


Kind Regards,
Digitalgrl









[edit on 10/01/2004 by DigitalGrl]

DigitalGirl:
You make a valid point with the relationship specifically to the book of revelations rather than the whole bible. However, it is my feeling that the version of the bible that many possess, these books are presented as chapters and collectively are included as one book. With this in mind, it is easy to take this passage as a reference to the entire Bible, which is the way I, and I'm sure many others, take it. Furthermore, I imagine that those choosing to include this passage were well aware of this, and had this intention in mind with it's inclusion. I'm sure there are many passages in many different books of the Bible that tell of similar warnings, but are largely unknown by those, including myself, who have only read some of the more popular books such as revelations. For this reason, I feel the warnings contained in these books contribute more greatly to the conspiracy aimed at deterring people from questioning the Bible's validity.

Don't get me wrong, I feel that there is much in the Bible that can be beneficial to the way we live our lives, but it is my belief, that warnings such as the one mentioned, build a framework a fear that inhibits us from subjecting the Bible to the same scrutiny that many other subjects and texts must face. It should not be immune from challenge. Let us discover it's truth, or lack thereof, without the threat of damnation influencing our conclusion.

mytym

i dont have a problem with your personal beliefs i just want to make it clear that that isnt where i am coming from with this

but my disagreement is with what you are using to present your conclusions.
it wasnt until after the 1st century that these books were presented as one book. so early christians wouldnt have understood the verse in revelation to be automatically refering to the rest of the bible. i guess i dont see very much room for misunderstanding today simply because it specifically states "this book" several times. and the reason why it has been written in this book is because it deals with the prophesy of christs second coming which not even the son knew when he was on earth and so for anyone to manipulate this book dealing with this obvious case sensitive material so to speak, it warns against doing so.

and as we all see many many people try to decode it and establish some sort of cult or religion surrounded around waiting for a comet, or pat robertson saying when the tribulation is starting etc...

your conclusions that people would have taken it this way or that it could imply all other books etc..seems to be merely speculative and anecdotal. everytime i have heard a christian (myself included) give evidence of where in the bible it says it is divinly inspired..everyone always quotes timothy because it specifically says "all scripture is God breathed [....]" so while i get what you are trying to say i just think you picked the wrong book and verse for your argument if that makes sense

Kind Regards,
Digitalgrl

Very similar warnings (like the one in Revelations) can be found in myriad works that were produced before the advent of the printing press.

All books had to be copied by hand, pain-stakingly, one stroke at a time and often times a careless copyist could make a mistake simply through being inattentive. There have been several cases where a copyist deliberately made changes to a manuscript he was copying. Keep in mind that there were no copywrite laws. Publishing was done very small scale and no author could guarantee that his/her work would remain in its original state once it left his/her hands.

Threats and curses were commonplace and were an author's only means of protection in a time when no two copies of a book were ever identical.

The warning is, therefore not Christian in nature nor is it confined to the Christian Bible. It can be found on thousands of surviving hand written works - most of them secular in nature.

I actually think the bible is (and should be) beyond debate. Each person interprets it the way they want to and to try to convince others to interpret it a certain way leads to animosity. Look at all the threads and arguments about the bible here on BTS. People end up getting really angry and mean.

Discussion? Absolutely! But debate?... I don't get that.

Benevolent Heretic:
Agreed. Debate was probably a poor choice of word. I was actually trying to imply that the Bible shouldn't be immune from questioning in order for each individual to come up with their own interpretations, not for the purpose of disputing the validity of someone else's interpretations.