The Bible has been changed ( rewritten )

page: 3
47
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 


I would but I don't hoid Catholocism to be a church that follows the teachings of Christ in anyway,
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Clisen33
 


Perhaps you should look up the study of ancient manuscripts and how it is done.

Author - Written - Earliest Copy - Time Span - # Mss.
Caesar - 100-44 B.C. - 900 A.D. - 1,000 yrs - 10
Plato - 427-347 B.C. - 900 A.D. - 1,200 yrs - 7
Thucydides - 460-400 B.C. - 900 A.D. - 1,300 yrs - 8
Tacitus - 100 A.D. - 1100 A.D. - 1,000 yrs - 20
Suetonius - 75-160 A.D. - 950 A.D. - 800 yrs - 8
Homer (Iliad) - 900 B.C. - 400 B.C. - 500 yrs - 643
New Testament - 40-100 A.D. - 125 A.D. - 25-50 yrs - 24,000



And yet the B'rit Hadasha is the one with the most controversy.

There is a serious lack of logic in your conclusion



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Has the whole roman Piso thing being debunked?

Here: TRUE AUTHORSHIP OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
Here: The Roman Piso Homepage




ROMAN PISO FAMILY WROTE THE NEW TESTAMENT, INVENTED "JESUS" "We Jews and Church Leaders have known since the beginning of Christianity that it was synthesized by the Roman Piso family for the purpose of maintaining control over the masses and to placate slaves. And, this is why we Jews are the "Chosen People" and why we have endured so much for so many years; we are witnesses to the lie. Our ancestors wrote what they could about this in our texts."
edit on 27/11/2011 by Falcifer because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Falcifer
 


Invented Jesus ? ya OK definetly worth sarcasm.

edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


I dunno you've yet to give me a intellectual orgasm. So no I don't pay. Sorry.

Nah I'm not a troll but rather a bitter opinionated prick. Yeah ill admit it.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


I dunno you've yet to give me a intellectual orgasm. So no I don't pay. Sorry.

Nah I'm not a troll but rather a bitter opinionated prick. Yeah ill admit it.


Why stop being a lady now ? That kind of lingo won't suffice either.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Falcifer
Has the whole roman Piso thing being debunked?

Here: TRUE AUTHORSHIP OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
Here: The Roman Piso Homepage



Not only is that not logical, but it also defies plainly written secular history as well.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


The illuminati did not exist in 60 AD. And yet the bibles of the Syrian orthodox church and other small cut off communities is factually the same.


Situations arise which lock away any possibility of alteration. namely, social cleavages. Once one side changes something, the other side slaughters them.

This is why the Quran, Bible, Constitution, and tons of other documents have fundamentally remained unaltered. Even in translation, such care is taken that the little things that do change often have notes written out with context from the source.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


This is a troll thread.

No real desire to learn the truth, just baiting those of us who don't believe in mythology. I might read, but I'm not going to participate further as this is obviously going nowhere.

For those of you who believe in these lies - why don't you give us evidence that the Bible is true? If you have the evidence and it's readily available we can skip countless pages of unproductive bickering by you just sourcing your proof that the Bible, or even Christianity in whole is true.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Nothing will suffice for you. You are hard to please. Hope your not married.

Bet I can still provide evidence and you wouldn't be happy. The whole purpose of your thread is just to debunk. The title says it all and is misleading. You make it appear as though you have evidence of this and present it as your argument but when you actually read the OP it is discovered that it is actually quite opposite of what the title says suggests.

The bible has been changed (rewritten)
I thought that was what tour thread supported. The title is a trap.

It should be has the bible been changed or rewritten??
Even then your mindset is the bible has not been rewritten and anything you say I will cast down.

Very misleading.

For tricking me into opening your thread with your deception you sir had lost my respect from the very beginning.

This is exactly the kind of shyster tactics that I have come to expect from religious believers.

Shame on you.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkerHaus
 


Ok now I'm a troll because I ask for evidence. I can't help it if I'm amused by your attempts that ring untrue.
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkerHaus
 


Exactly. An attempt to lure people here to draw them into an argument that can't be won because the op won't allow them to.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Cry??? Over this?? That was good for a laugh, thank you. You exemplify, by your attitude, what the bible intends us to exemplify as believers in the Word. In the Sciffield edition, it is clearly written the gospel of Jeremiah was lost and burned during a war and conflict, and was thought to be recreated, but even Scoffield brought into question the politics of the time, and the accuracy of the rewriting. Another thing, it is very well known that there are major discrepancies in terms of translation from hebrew or Aramaic to English, as it exists today. Your own OP shows an inherent lack of understanding for this and many other subtleties regarding this question. If you just want to trade insults, so be it; then I suppose you would be more the troll than me,for when I began, and throughout my responses to you, i tried to respect you and whatever your beliefs may be. However, your responses make that impossible. If you wish to continue to use simplistic framing to obfuscate and spin truth to your own advantage, this is your choice.
Cry? Over such simplistically couched and obvious obfusctions of what should be treated with the utmost respect, when your own interpretation thereof shows exactly your orientation to it, and how you would really like it to be seen.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


No you are a troll because your thread title is deceiving.



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by fixer1967
I have an old book on my desk, is someone going to being using it as a bible in a few thousand years?



no, however they do with the bible, quite a difference yes



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by metaldemon2000
reply to post by TinkerHaus
 


Exactly. An attempt to lure people here to draw them into an argument that can't be won because the op won't allow them to.



Even in the vid if you watched it ? It is stated that it should be so easy to prove. Doesn't appear to be that easy friend. But somehow thats my fault. No biggy, in fact I love it that way.

The title simply illustrates the lie. So you are right in away. Very decieving.
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by chr0naut
 


I would but I don't hoid Catholocism to be a church that follows the teachings of Christ in anyway,
edit on 27-11-2011 by randyvs because: (no reason given)


I myself am not a Catholic. I am unashamedly a "born again" and Spirit filled believer.

However, I have had some Christians refer to my beliefs and conclusions about the Bible as themselves heretical. I believe this is either because they have not actually read the Bible that closely or because it requires a mindset of enquiry like the Cabbalists (not that I am in agreement with all of Cabbalism).

To put it simply, the Bible is a sci-fi epic spanning multiple universes, many times (and time frames), many dimensions and is multi-species (not just human centric). It embraces genetic manipulation, ascention to higher planes of existence, the inevitability of a hive-mind for the human species, alternate political structures (are you aware that Israel had no jails or police for hundreds of years and they never saw the need until their society was broken-up by invasion). All the above are supported by the text of the Bible, the first part of it written by people barely out of the stone age. It is truly breathtaking (note: "The Revelation" is not the end of the story, it is a new Genesis).



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by TinkerHaus
 


Though I thoroughly dislike and reject where the OP is coming from as evidenced in my replies, in which, by the way, I have provided him referenced admission within the bible itself of revision, I would also like to point out, I do not believe in an either/or situation. I think there is much truth to be found in many places. I'd just like to caution against the removing of all fine distinctions, and making everything black and white. In other words, because some has been revised does not mean the whole holds no truth, whatsoever. Just my humble opinion....



posted on Nov, 27 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
edit on 27-11-2011 by riggo1 because: bad link





new topics
top topics
 
47
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join