Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Bible has been changed ( rewritten )

page: 2
47
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


If I gave you "purported" dates of revisions,would that be PROOF to you? No, because it wouldn't tell you WHAT was changed, that is, if you are logically approaching this, as you appear to be. I am not giving you an argument, for your post is argumentative, in and of itself, without even identifying your imagined enemy. What I see here, and hear here, on this board, looking at signatures and avatars, is "I am better than you, smarter than you". Whoever " you" is supposed to be. And when I look at your avatar, putting sunglasses and a mustache on Tutankhamen, right up front, you really reassert what I am alleging, the perversion of history with newly invented information to redescribe the past........
I can give you dates of meetings held to re-scribe the work, but it still wouldn't prove what you are asking for. And I think you well know that, which is why you ask for it...
And this is the other part to this, the bible to exclusion of any other knowledge or recorded history? Who do You work for, for it begs the questions of thousands of years of civilization and knowledge accrued that this isthe only thing which should be consulted for truth. Tenemoch
edit on 27-11-2011 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



+7 more 
posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Proof:
Kings James Version
American Standard Version
Easy-to-Read Version

Three books on my bookshelf. All three are different. All three claim to be the Bible. As such, this is proof that the Bible has been changed.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I have asked much the same before.
Please give me proof, or step to the side please.
Many will attempt to sidetrack the conversation.
I myself believe that the bible may have been written to unite the peoples or more likely to control.
From there it got terribly bastardized and now is just a tool for bad.
If there is something you cannot prove for yourself, start with common sense and reasoning.
Too much in that book just does not work for me.
Vengeance is MINE, sayeth me.
Otherwise, someone's gonna get away with a lot.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
The bible has been changed many times by kings and corrupt biblical authorities over the years to better control the populace. This is actually well documented.

Many of the ancient biblical Scriptures have either been destroyed, hidden by private collectors and religious institutions or something along the lines of. The average Joe isn't even allowed to view the original remaining source materials in its raw, uncut format. What does that tell you?

Can we even trust that many of the bibles authors were even correct in the first place? How do we know these people weren't frauds. This is the biggest fundamental flaw with the bible and its teachings.


What you have stated...I believe without a doubt....to be true. It is really so obvious. Why do people allow themselves to be so deceived?



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I totally agree. The Bible is irrefutably authentic and historically accurate set of documents.

However, there have been attempts to change the Bible.

The Watchtower Society have published a "translation" of the Bible that is called the "New World Transalation". In it, references to the divinity of Jesus have been obfuscated (among other things) so that they can claim that Jesus was not God, but just an angel.

Thomas Jefferson, one of America's founding fathers, wrote a "translation" of the Gospels in which almost all supernatural elements were removed and which painted Jesus as merely a philosopher and moralist.

Even the NIV translation of the Bible has some some additions and omissions in various places, most of which are fairly innocuous but puzzling as to why the translators allowed them to occur.

And then there are texts, referred to in the Bible as scriptural, but which we no longer have.

Also, the Masoretic Jews retranslated some verses (particularly Isiah 53) so that their Torah texts differ from the earlier Septuagint version. Specifically where Isiah refers to a suffering Messiah.

It is also thought that Mohammed believed that he was referred to in the Christian Bible due to a mistranslation of a verse about the where Jesus says that God will send the Holy Spirit (Paraclete or comforter in the Greek).

So it pays to be wary about the treasure that God has given, in the Bible.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


And sorry, I agree with everything else you say, but your vengeance will unleash only more vengeance, so I guess we should all just get used to pain and suffering, no problem, as long as the next guy has more than me, right?



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


You mad?

Seriously, where can you find a bible that has not been modified from its original state. Are you sure that King James copied everything word for word. The book is old, how could you prove that it has not been modified?



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
www.bl.uk...


The texts The Texts section allows you to view the digital versions of the two copies, and it also allows you to compare them, for they are slightly different.



Wait? They're different? But how can the word of God change? Oh, it was written and maintained by humans? Humans aren't always good you say? They have vested interests in controlling the minds and opinions of the masses? Thank you for the lesson in common sense, imaginary friend! You've been so helpful!

So even almost 600 years ago there was deviation from text to text. I would be willing to wager big money that the past 600 years have only added more deviation from the original texts. I'm sure 10 minutes of research on your part would confirm this.
edit on 27-11-2011 by TinkerHaus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TLomon
 


Absolutely, compare two or more versions, from King James to The New Bible and you will find numerous discrepancies. Which, again, does not mean, we should dismiss the thing as a whole. And the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, as well...



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by caladonea
 


The problem with believers is their ability to question the teachings and make unbiased comparisons with the counter arguments and then draw conclusions based on their own fact finding. They just swallow the Medicine as is and then instead of challenging the system in a constructive way they will challenge the opinions of those presenting a counter argument.

My whole philosophy is why should I trust the authorities who have killed in the name of god. If a convicted murderer created a religion that allowed him to justify his crimes would anyone in their right mind believe it?? Of course they wouldn't.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50
reply to post by randyvs
 


If I gave you "purported" dates of revisions,would that be PROOF to you? No, because it wouldn't tell you WHAT was changed, that is, if you are logically approaching this, as you appear to be. I am not giving you an argument, for your post is argumentative, in and of itself, without even identifying your imagined enemy. What I see here, and hear here, on this board, looking at signatures and avatars, is "I am better than you, smarter than you". Whoever " you" is supposed to be. And when I look at your avatar, putting sunglasses and a mustache on Tutankhamen, right up front, you really reassert what I am alleging, the perversion of history with newly invented information to redescribe the past........
I can give you dates of meetings held to re-scribe the work, but it still wouldn't prove what you are asking for. And I think you well know that, which is why you ask for it...
And this is the other part to this, the bible to exclusion of any other knowledge or recorded history? Who do You work for, for it begs the questions of thousands of years of civilization and knowledge accrued that this isthe only thing which should be consulted for truth. Tenemoch
edit on 27-11-2011 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)


Then please don't look at my avatar. It might prove evolution to be correct as it has truly evolved over time.

It has absolutely nothing to do with anything I believe so quit making opportunties for humor.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by TLomon
 


All three say the same thing using different words. I love it as proof of nothing.
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)


Using different wording to say the same thing means zilch people. So get a grip. Gods word is indestructible
and no one can prove the message of one verse is different from the original message. You are all playing games with words. That is your proof. ? Very feeble.
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


And that, sir, was exactly my point about revisionist history, and what you seem to be working towards, so, thanks for making my point while you have a laugh, seemingly, at my expense. Hope you enjoy yourself.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
OP -

I am watching this documentary at work today: topdocumentaryfilms.com...

Coincidentally, it is about exactly what you are asking. There is a LOT of evidence of revision, omission, and historical/archeological/geographical evidence that the Bible is WRONG on many counts.

I'm about 80 minutes into the 3.5 hour playlist. You want proof? Well there is TONS of it in this documentary (that you can research and verify on your own.)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I like Gnostic Jesus much better.

Ever read that? Of course you didn't.

Didn't answer my question about trusting murderers as religious authorities either. Believers never have an answer for that. Not one.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:37 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by randyvs
 


Ok, how about the Council of Nicaea? or Rather than seen as a threat to Christianity, pagan holidays and customs came to be viewed as a way to encourage and ease conversion to Christianity. or many inconsistencies in the new testament. or new testament add-ons.


Please read the Wikipedia details about what the Council of Nicea had as its aims and what it achived. The council had these 5 agendas:

1. The Arian question regarding the relationship between God the Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in divine purpose only or also one in being
2. The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation
3. The Meletian schism
4. The validity of baptism by heretics
5. The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius

There is no evidence, either in History or effect, that the Council of Nicea in any way established the Canon of the Books of the Bible, or made any amendments to those documents.

To mention the Concil of Nicea in regard to a suggestion that the Bible was changed is either due to ignorance or a deliberate "red herring".

edit on 27/11/2011 by chr0naut because: I like accuracy and clarity. This needed some clarification.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TLomon
 


Thoughts and meaning are always lost in translation.

All that you have proved is that someone translated the books.
edit on 11/27/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by tetra50
reply to post by randyvs
 


And that, sir, was exactly my point about revisionist history, and what you seem to be working towards, so, thanks for making my point while you have a laugh, seemingly, at my expense. Hope you enjoy yourself.


So your absurdities are my fault now ? Go away and cry if you must. Sorry trying to complicate the matter didn't work for me. Bye !
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)


+2 more 
posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


Just because you requested evidence doesn't mean I am required to give any.

How is it fair that I invest a ton of money into books and thousands of hours of reading just to give you all the answers without you even doing half the work??? Grow a pair, read some books then ill compare the evidence with you once you are informed on BOTH sides of the argument like I am. I refuse to give in to demands of people who lack the drive to seek the answers on their own. You want a handout?? Go beg for money like the homeless downtown do. I'm not your babysitter.

That's like requesting sex from a random person and expecting them to say yes. I'm not penetrating you with knowledge.
edit on 11/11/27 by metaldemon2000 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join