PDA

View Full Version : Christian Miscers, what do you think about the newly released Bible?



...Rousseau...
07-06-2009, 09:59 AM
Do you think this changes anything? Do you think it's even legit?

...Rousseau...
07-06-2009, 10:04 AM
this isn't a trap I assure you.

Ryan1985
07-06-2009, 10:06 AM
I think the bible is great....

http://msp393.photobucket.com/albums/pp14/spookier/mini-poop.jpg

Melkor
07-06-2009, 10:06 AM
Why would it change anything? I'm not sure why you seem concerned. What are you thinking it changes?

AaronJF
07-06-2009, 10:06 AM
I'm unaware

YARDGORILLA
07-06-2009, 10:08 AM
Changes are relative to your own beliefs.

Vagitarian
07-06-2009, 10:09 AM
I think the bible is great....

http://msp393.photobucket.com/albums/pp14/spookier/mini-poop.jpg

LMFAO


Changes are relative to your own beliefs.

Oh, how convenient.

...Rousseau...
07-06-2009, 10:11 AM
Why would it change anything? I'm not sure why you seem concerned. What are you thinking it changes?

This book has at least 7 old testament books that weren't there before, and some new testament books are missing, switched around, or added. It's also missing important verses about the resurrection allegedly. I just want your thoughts on it, because the misc atheists are all like "there!!! it's a contradiction!!!!"

Ryan1985
07-06-2009, 10:18 AM
This book has at least 7 old testament books that weren't there before, and some new testament books are missing, switched around, or added. It's also missing important verses about the resurrection allegedly. I just want your thoughts on it, because the misc atheists are all like "there!!! it's a contradiction!!!!"

.. Do you have a website that lists the removal/addition of verses so we can see exactly whats been removed? .. Seems very odd that they would remove the part about Jesus's ressurection; This scene is often used as a metaphore for rebirth, cleansing, and forgiveness.

Honestly, I think the more the bible gets changed and re-interprited the worse it looks for christians as a whole-- I mean, the bible should not be a living document, it is supposed to be the living will and testiment to gods word.

Im not christian, so I dont care so much; hopefully some people realize from this that there are old men in funny hats rewriting what they have grown up to believe in, and maybe it will open thier eyes and look for answers elsewhere (like a science book).

ONtop888
07-06-2009, 11:17 AM
Do you think this changes anything? Do you think it's even legit?

what new bible are you refering to?
I use the NAB and the NRSV

The ecumenical NRSV Bible Translation Committee consists of thirty men and women who are among the top scholars in America today. They come from Protestant denominations, the Roman Catholic church, and the Greek Orthodox Church. The committee also includes a Jewish scholar.
The RSV was the only major translation in English that included both the standard Protestant canon and the books that are traditionally used by Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christians (the so-called "Apocryphal" or "Deuterocanonical" books). Standing in this tradition, the NRSV is available in three ecumenical formats: a standard edition with or without the Apocrypha, a Roman Catholic Edition, which has the so-called "Apocryphal" or "Deuterocanonical" books in the Roman Catholic canonical order, and The Common Bible, which includes all books that belong to the Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox canons.
The NRSV stands out among the many translations available today as the Bible translation that is the most widely "authorized" by the churches. It received the endorsement of thirty-three Protestant churches. It received the imprimatur of the American and Canadian Conferences of Catholic bishops. And it received the blessing of a leader of the Greek Orthodox Church.

The NRSV stands out among the many translations because it is "as literal as possible" in adhering to the ancient texts and only "as free as necessary" to make the meaning clear in graceful, understandable English. It draws on newly available sources that increase our understanding of many previously obscure biblical passages. These sources include new-found manuscripts, the Dead Sea Scrolls, other texts, inscriptions, and archaeological finds from the ancient Near East, and new understandings of Greek and Hebrew grammar.

matt_2486
07-06-2009, 11:41 AM
The news is kind of misleading because they're calling it the oldest known Bible. It's from the 400's, but there are much older manuscripts that are not a complete Bible. So it's more accurate to compare the older and numerous manuscripts to each other then to take one book.There were already gnostic gospels written around the same time as this that contradict our gospels. The only reason this is getting attention is because its "complete".

...Rousseau...
07-06-2009, 12:02 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/07/06/ancient.bible.online/index.html?iref=mpstoryview