What proof is there that the bible was edited?

[BiblicalAtheist]

Maybe we could = speculation.

You don't get it do you? Movin along, you just want to spit, pull hair and fight with someone.

 

[TX_Made713]

No its not, people on here hold for dear life to this idea and when its spoken the anti-christians on here come out in force to support it, I simply want to know what proof or logical arguments can be made in support of this claim. And as far as I can see, there are none. There were none last year and there are still none this year. Just like the Jesus is Horus argument, its a lie that that has nothing behind it..

religion is like politics...you can argue the facts about whats right for hours and nothing will be solved...its all opinion based

 

[SL8Rok]

You don't get it do you? Movin along, you just want to spit, pull hair and fight with someone.

Thats not splitting hairs thats basic english. But like you said moving along.

 

[BiblicalAtheist]

Thats not splitting hairs thats basic english. But like you said moving along.

Again, over your head, SHOOOOM!

Toodles, I'm done with you.

 

[SL8Rok]

Again, over your head, SHOOOOM!

Toodles, I'm done with you.

Right....lol.

 

[And Step]

1. That only proves that certian bibles were edited and when you look into things like the underlying manuscripts for the different bibles (KJV - Textus receptus/majority texts, Modern Translations - Sinaiticus/Vaticanus), you'd see this argument falls apart at the bone.

So you admit that it was edited. And why do you describe greek text as the underlying manuscripts, when they are not the source? Do you even know Greek? Your just frontin.

Jews were the ones who translated the old testament from hebrew to greek, I think they knew better than you the difference between the two languages.

I am not questioning the Jews. I am questioning you. My brother can read and write in Hebrew fluently. I am on my way. What about you? Any body with a little understanding knows that it is almost impossible to make that transition because of the basis of the Hebrew language. It doesn't translate all that well because of the multi layered make up of the Hebrew Language. I showed you how they mistranslated the word virgin, which is the basis of an important part of the faith. The Jews who translated it had a hard time because they couldn't find words that were the equivalent in Greek. So they basically just accepted whatever for the sake of expediency. Even the Greek word God is inadequate to describe the attributes of the Creator.

It' is sad to see someone defending boldly, something he has no knowledge of it's history or origin. When my brother get's back, I'm going to have him drop some stuff on you. If you are truly a student as you claim and not an intellectual coward you will see what I am saying.

You are actually just like the Pharisees and Saducees who wanted to hold on to what Moses taught because they didn't want to leave their comfort zone by coming into the light that Jesus was offering, which was the fulfillment of what they had been hoping for.

Shame

 

[BiblicalAtheist]

Right....lol.

Yup, you're bluefalcon.

 

[And Step]

Somebody has been reading the Di Vinci code I take it.

No. I never read that book. There is a lot of knowledge out there from ancient historians way before the Davinci code. I have a vast library of religious studies.
The Essenes have been recorded since before Jesus existed. Many people have chronicled them before this Divincii code book. Heck the first time I heard of the Essense was in the Autobiography of Malcolm X.

 

[theillestrator]

That is a trivial matter for crumb-particle hustlers to fight over.

The current issue is, where is there evidence of intentional alterations being made for the purpose of misleading others into a snare?

if the bible is the guide to heaven for christians, you would think that any alteration would be important. but excuse me, only the intentional alterations will mislead others...the accidental alterations are perfectly fine.

 

[SL8Rok]

1. That only proves that certian bibles were edited and when you look into things like the underlying manuscripts for the different bibles (KJV - Textus receptus/majority texts, Modern Translations - Sinaiticus/Vaticanus), you'd see this argument falls apart at the bone.

So you admit that it was edited. And why do you describe greek text as the underlying manuscripts, when they are not the source? Do you even know Greek? Your just frontin.

I am not questioning the Jews. I am questioning you. My brother can read and write in Hebrew fluently. I am on my way. What about you? Any body with a little understanding knows that it is almost impossible to make that transition because of the basis of the Hebrew language. It doesn't translate all that well because of the multi layered make up of the Hebrew Language. I showed you how they mistranslated the word virgin, which is the basis of an important part of the faith. The Jews who translated it had a hard time because they couldn't find words that were the equivalent in Greek. So they basically just accepted whatever for the sake of expediency. Even the Greek word God is inadequate to describe the attributes of the Creator.

It' is sad to see someone defending boldly, something he has no knowledge of it's history or origin. When my brother get's back, I'm going to have him drop some stuff on you. If you are truly a student as you claim and not an intellectual coward you will see what I am saying.

You are actually just like the Pharisees and Saducees who wanted to hold on to what Moses taught because they didn't want to leave their comfort zone by coming into the light that Jesus was offering, which was the fulfillment of what they had been hoping for.

Shame

1. No I don't admit the bible was edited. Again read what I said. the Sinaiticus/Vaticanus (alexandrian texts) were indeed edited, original copies show where parts where lined out, erased etc. However that is the minority texts. The textus receptus (which does include hebrew manuscripts) which the KJV is based on WAS NOT edited as it was the majority texts. And as far as the NT goes it was written in Koine Greek so yes "they" are the source.

2. Its almost impossible yet the septuigent translators did it. Hmm. You showed me how they mistranslated the word virgin? No you didnt' that didn't show or prove anything. The septuigent uses the word virgin, but I guess you need to craft some sort of conspiracy because hey you know greek and hebrew better than they did right?

3. I know the history and origin of the bible however my knowledge stems from truth and fact while yours stems from ignorance and unfounded conspiracies. But yes get your brother maybe he can do a better job of presenting your case.

4. So since you think I'm a pharisee for not listing (actually taking your nonsense seriously), and you are the one presenting the arguments (if thats what you actually want to call them) are you trying to make youself out to be like Jesus? And no my friend I'm not a pharisee, I'm not clining on to anything I'm asking questions however the answers are laughable at best.

 

[Punisher__]

1. No I don't admit the bible was edited. Again read what I said. the Sinaiticus/Vaticanus (alexandrian texts) were indeed edited, original copies show where parts where lined out, erased etc. However that is the minority texts. The textus receptus (which does include hebrew manuscripts) which the KJV is based on WAS NOT edited as it was the majority texts. And as far as the NT goes it was written in Koine Greek so yes "they" are the source.

2. Its almost impossible yet the septuigent translators did it. Hmm. You showed me how they mistranslated the word virgin? No you didnt' that didn't show or prove anything. The septuigent uses the word virgin, but I guess you need to craft some sort of conspiracy because hey you know greek and hebrew better than they did right?

3. I know the history and origin of the bible however my knowledge stems from truth and fact while yours stems from ignorance and unfounded conspiracies. But yes get your brother maybe he can do a better job of presenting your case.

4. So since you think I'm a pharisee for not listing (actually taking your nonsense seriously), and you are the one presenting the arguments (if thats what you actually want to call them) are you trying to make youself out to be like Jesus? And no my friend I'm not a pharisee, I'm not clining on to anything I'm asking questions however the answers are laughable at best.

How have you been Blue Falcon?

Still getting sonned all over the place?

 

[Rock_Well]

Name one book that has been translated and has the exact same message.

i spoke too soon in my previous post. The message? Well that is critical.

Good thing that the case is, it IS the exact same message.

I think what's being argued here is that because it's not translated by the same person that wrote the previous one, (in the same manner, at the same time, at the same moment, with the same brain frequencies going through the person brain, at the same time of day, etc etc) that that means the message is changed. It doesn't.

If you one of those people with strange philosophical views then you might find yourself arguing that that means it's a different message though, just because of that.

 

[Punisher__]

And did we ever figure out whose alias And Step was?

 

[theillestrator]

i spoke too soon in my previous post. The message is critical.

Good thing that the case is, it IS the exact same message.

I think what's being argued here is that because it's not translated by the same person that wrote the previous one, (in the same manner, at the same time, at the same moment, with the same brain frequencies going through the person mind) that that means the message is changed. It doesn't.

If you one of those people with strange philosophical views then you might find yourself arguing that that means it's a different message though.

okay, this is all that i am saying. there is no way that the bible can keep the same exact message after being translated no matter who translated it. Languages just don't work that way. I don't care what two languages you pick. The overall message may stay the same, but every detail will not. either way, i'm done. there has been too much effort put in talking about the bible. peace.

 

[And Step]

1. No I don't admit the bible was edited. Again read what I said. the Sinaiticus/Vaticanus (alexandrian texts) were indeed edited, original copies show where parts where lined out, erased etc. However that is the minority texts. The textus receptus (which does include hebrew manuscripts) which the KJV is based on WAS NOT edited as it was the majority texts. And as far as the NT goes it was written in Koine Greek so yes "they" are the source.

2. Its almost impossible yet the septuigent translators did it. Hmm. You showed me how they mistranslated the word virgin? No you didnt' that didn't show or prove anything. The septuigent uses the word virgin, but I guess you need to craft some sort of conspiracy because hey you know greek and hebrew better than they did right?

3. I know the history and origin of the bible however my knowledge stems from truth and fact while yours stems from ignorance and unfounded conspiracies. But yes get your brother maybe he can do a better job of presenting your case.

4. So since you think I'm a pharisee for not listing (actually taking your nonsense seriously), and you are the one presenting the arguments (if thats what you actually want to call them) are you trying to make youself out to be like Jesus? And no my friend I'm not a pharisee, I'm not clining on to anything I'm asking questions however the answers are laughable at best.

Nigga, shut up.

You are a first rate fool, arguing and defending something you have no knowledge of. Your an intellectual coward who defends an English translation of a plagiarized poorly translated greek text of a Hebrew original. Your not a Christian, your a nigga who found some emotional catharsis in a belief system that your not at the root of and you don't understand. Your enslaved by dogma . A truly enlightened, spiritually mature person can make a connection beyond his tradition. The Creator is one. Jesus supposedly said he would have followers who would not be in his fold. A fold is a distinction or difference. Everyone one is not going to look like you, talk like you, or even express spirituality like you. But you will be able to detect it if your awake and not asleep at the wheel of religious dogma.

I'm done arguing with your ignorant ass, I'll let you drown in your obstinate stupidity.

 

[VIBE]

And did we ever figure out whose alias And Step was?

wth?

And Step isn't Blue Falcon, SL8Rok is.

 

[And Step]

wth?

And Step isn't Blue Falcon, SL8Rok is.

He misused the quote button. Thank you for clearing that up. I in no way want to be confused with that idiot.

 

[Punisher__]

wth?

And Step isn't Blue Falcon, SL8Rok is.

I know...

Look at my post again when I said "How have you been Blue Falcon?" The quoting was fucked up, but it was directed towards SL8Rok.

This is completely different.

 

[And Step]

And did we ever figure out whose alias And Step was?

I am Mike Jones.

 

[TX_Made713]

This place is classic...

whats up falcon? I see you lurkin...with your lurkin ass