₦airaland Forum

THE THREAT : External threats such as decay and opposition have not destroyed the Bible. Yet, some copyists and translators have attempted to alter the Bible’s message. At times, they have tried to make the Bible conform to their doctrines rather than conform their doctrines to the Bible. Consider some examples:

Place of worship : Between the fourth and second centuries B.C.E., the writers of the Samaritan Pentateuch inserted after Exodus 20:17 the words “in Aargaareezem. And there you shall build an altar.” The Samaritans thus hoped to make the Scriptures support their construction of a temple on “Aargaareezem,” or Mount Gerizim.

Trinity doctrine : Less than 300 years after the Bible was completed, a Trinitarian writer added to 1 John 5:7 the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” That statement did not appear in the original text. “From the sixth century onwards,” notes Bible scholar Bruce Metzger, those words were “found more and more frequently in manuscripts of the Old Latin and of the [Latin] Vulgate.”

Divine name : Citing a Jewish superstition as their authority, many Bible translators decided to remove the divine name from the Scriptures. They replaced that name with titles such as “God” or “Lord,” expressions applied in the Bible not only to the Creator but also to men, objects of false worship, and even the Devil.​—John 10:34, 35; 1 Corinthians 8:5, 6; 2 Corinthians 4:4. *

HOW THE BIBLE SURVIVED : First, although some Bible copyists were careless or even deceitful, many others were highly skilled and meticulous. Between the sixth and tenth centuries C.E., the Masoretes copied the Hebrew Scriptures and produced what is known as the Masoretic text. They reportedly counted the words and the letters to verify that no mistakes crept in. Where they suspected errors in the master text they were using, they noted these in the margin. The Masoretes refused to tamper with the Bible text. “Interfering with it purposely,” wrote Professor Moshe Goshen-Gottstein, “would have been for them the worst crime possible.”

Second, the sheer volume of manuscripts today actually helps Bible scholars to spot errors. For example, religious leaders taught for centuries that their Latin versions contained the authentic Bible text. Yet, at 1 John 5:7, they had inserted the spurious words referred to earlier in this article. The error even crept into the influential English King James Version! But when other manuscripts were discovered, what did they reveal? Bruce Metzger wrote: “The passage [at 1 John 5:7] is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin.” As a result, revised editions of the King James Version and other Bibles have removed the erroneous phrase.

Do older manuscripts prove that the Bible’s message has been preserved? When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947, scholars could at last compare the Hebrew Masoretic text to what appeared in Bible scrolls that had been written more than a thousand years earlier. A member of the editorial team of the Dead Sea Scrolls concluded that one scroll “provides irrefutable proof that the transmission of the biblical text through a period of more than one thousand years by the hands of Jewish copyists has been extremely faithful and careful.”

The Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, Ireland, features a collection of papyri that represents nearly every book of the Christian Greek Scriptures, including manuscripts dating from the second century C.E.​—only about 100 years after the Bible was completed. “Although the Papyri supply a wealth of new information on textual detail,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary observes, “they also demonstrate remarkable stability in the transmission history of the biblical text.”


THE RESULT : Rather than corrupting the Bible text, the age and multitude of Bible manuscripts have actually improved it. “No other ancient book has anything like such early and plentiful testimony to its text,” wrote Sir Frederic Kenyon about the Christian Greek Scriptures, “and no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantially sound.” And regarding the Hebrew Scriptures, scholar William Henry Green stated: “It may be safely said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.”


Source : www.jw.org
Link : https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-no4-2016-july/bible-changed-or-tampered/

Okay, thank God

DappaD:
THE THREAT : External threats such as decay and opposition have not destroyed the Bible. Yet, some copyists and translators have attempted to alter the Bible’s message. At times, they have tried to make the Bible conform to their doctrines rather than conform their doctrines to the Bible. Consider some examples:

Place of worship : Between the fourth and second centuries B.C.E., the writers of the Samaritan Pentateuch inserted after Exodus 20:17 the words “in Aargaareezem. And there you shall build an altar.” The Samaritans thus hoped to make the Scriptures support their construction of a temple on “Aargaareezem,” or Mount Gerizim.

Trinity doctrine : Less than 300 years after the Bible was completed, a Trinitarian writer added to 1 John 5:7 the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” That statement did not appear in the original text. “From the sixth century onwards,” notes Bible scholar Bruce Metzger, those words were “found more and more frequently in manuscripts of the Old Latin and of the [Latin] Vulgate.”

Divine name : Citing a Jewish superstition as their authority, many Bible translators decided to remove the divine name from the Scriptures. They replaced that name with titles such as “God” or “Lord,” expressions applied in the Bible not only to the Creator but also to men, objects of false worship, and even the Devil.​—John 10:34, 35; 1 Corinthians 8:5, 6; 2 Corinthians 4:4. *

HOW THE BIBLE SURVIVED : First, although some Bible copyists were careless or even deceitful, many others were highly skilled and meticulous. Between the sixth and tenth centuries C.E., the Masoretes copied the Hebrew Scriptures and produced what is known as the Masoretic text. They reportedly counted the words and the letters to verify that no mistakes crept in. Where they suspected errors in the master text they were using, they noted these in the margin. The Masoretes refused to tamper with the Bible text. “Interfering with it purposely,” wrote Professor Moshe Goshen-Gottstein, “would have been for them the worst crime possible.”

Second, the sheer volume of manuscripts today actually helps Bible scholars to spot errors. For example, religious leaders taught for centuries that their Latin versions contained the authentic Bible text. Yet, at 1 John 5:7, they had inserted the spurious words referred to earlier in this article. The error even crept into the influential English King James Version! But when other manuscripts were discovered, what did they reveal? Bruce Metzger wrote: “The passage [at 1 John 5:7] is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin.” As a result, revised editions of the King James Version and other Bibles have removed the erroneous phrase.

Do older manuscripts prove that the Bible’s message has been preserved? When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947, scholars could at last compare the Hebrew Masoretic text to what appeared in Bible scrolls that had been written more than a thousand years earlier. A member of the editorial team of the Dead Sea Scrolls concluded that one scroll “provides irrefutable proof that the transmission of the biblical text through a period of more than one thousand years by the hands of Jewish copyists has been extremely faithful and careful.”

The Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, Ireland, features a collection of papyri that represents nearly every book of the Christian Greek Scriptures, including manuscripts dating from the second century C.E.​—only about 100 years after the Bible was completed. “Although the Papyri supply a wealth of new information on textual detail,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary observes, “they also demonstrate remarkable stability in the transmission history of the biblical text.”


THE RESULT : Rather than corrupting the Bible text, the age and multitude of Bible manuscripts have actually improved it. “No other ancient book has anything like such early and plentiful testimony to its text,” wrote Sir Frederic Kenyon about the Christian Greek Scriptures, “and no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantially sound.” And regarding the Hebrew Scriptures, scholar William Henry Green stated: “It may be safely said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.”


Source : www.jw.org
Link : https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-no4-2016-july/bible-changed-or-tampered/

They didn't add a clear lie which says Father son and holy spirit are gods but they did just enough to tamper and infer, that's what is called subtlety so even those who knew or memorize the main text would get confused at such addition.

But even at that, the Father and the word and the Holy Spirit are one in agreement and in testimony that Jesus is the son of God

They tried to hide the truth, read bart erhman not sure if I got his name correctly

gohf:
They tried to hide the truth, read bart erhman not sure if I got his name correctly

Bart Erhmam is not a Christian...

sonmvayina:
Bart Erhmam is not a Christian...

wasn't referencing him for that, when we mention Josephus flavius it's not because he is a Christian but Bart said he used to be and went to theological school before becoming an "expert in ancient greek texts"

sonmvayina:
Bart Erhmam is not a Christian...

Who are you to describe a Christian?

gohf:
wasn't referencing him for that, when we mention Josephus flavius it's not because he is a Christian but Bart said he used to be and went to theological school before becoming an "expert in ancient greek texts"

He knows much to know it is bull crap..

Padipadi:
Who are you to describe a Christian?

He is not. He knows it is bull crap.

sonmvayina:
He knows much to know it is bull crap..

there version of Christianity may be "bull crap" but that doesn't mean Jesus Christ isn't the son of God, we don't have to be religious and filling a form that says we are Christians to actually be true believers in God and believe in the one he has sent to us. The devil has propagated so many lives that why I believe salvation wasn't dependent on any text but on God's spirit and he reveals Himself to His people and draws them to salvation and those who are God's people are those who do what is good and right, for He who is judge of all will not destroy the righteous with the wicked.

gohf:
there version of Christianity may be "bull crap" but that doesn't mean Jesus Christ isn't the son of God, we don't have to be religious and filling a form that says we are Christians to actually be true believers in God and believe in the one he has sent to us. The devil has propagated so many lives that why I believe salvation wasn't dependent on any text but on God's spirit and he reveals Himself to His people and draws them to salvation and those who are God's people are those who do what is good and right, for He who is judge of all will not destroy the righteous with the wicked.

Continue deluding yourself..
No be onyinbo bring Christianity for una..
Come to London and see how it is falling...
To them, it has served it's purpose...
God is not a Jewish man up in the sky...he is the universal divine consciousness fully embodied and personified....he can't impregnate any body ..he does not need a son..

sonmvayina:
Continue deluding yourself..
No be onyinbo bring Christianity for una..
Come to London and see how it is falling...
To them, it has served it's purpose...
God is not a Jewish man up in the sky...he is the universal divine consciousness fully embodied and personified....he can't impregnate any body ..he does not need a son..

would love to go to London but not to see how it is falling, many of these people never truly believed and used religion for their own motives so it is understandable.

Saying God can't do something when there's nothing impossible for God would mean for you to agree God can't be a man to do what you just mentioned, but can God's power get a young lady pregnant who hasn't met a man before. Yes He can.

Who was the one who created the female organs, and proclaimed the laws of conception in the first place. It is God by his word or don't you believe God is able to do what He says?

God indeed doesn't need a son, but we do don't we, it is because of us God sent his son.

And how can you claim to believe the scriptures when you don't even understand the term "son of God"

gohf:
would love to go to London but not to see how it is falling, many of these people never truly believed and used religion for their own motives so it is understandable.

Saying God can't do something when there's nothing impossible for God would mean for you to agree God can't be a man to do what you just mentioned, but can God's power get a young lady pregnant who hasn't met a man before. Yes He can.

Who was the one who created the female organs, and proclaimed the laws of conception in the first place. It is God by his word or don't you believe God is able to do what He says?

God indeed doesn't need a son, but we do don't we, it is because of us God sent his son.

And how can you claim to believe the scriptures when you don't even understand the term "son of God"

That would be magic..

God already said a man's sperm will fertilize a woman's egg, so that a life can begin. When a woman just became pregnant without a man's input that would be impossible....

sonmvayina:
That would be magic..

God already said a man's sperm will fertilize a woman's egg, so that a life can begin. When a woman just became pregnant without a man's input that would be impossible....

it would be impossible because?

You believe God is dumb and cannot speak anymore, or you think every living thing that came to be came to be through sex. So the staff of Moses turned to snake out of magic? Or bread manna from above was also magic? Should they not have farmed and harvested to eat?

Look when you lack basic understanding and knowledge of God, you will find it hard to accept what God said and what God does.

gohf:
it would be impossible because?

You believe God is dumb and cannot speak anymore, or you think every living thing that came to be came to be through sex. So the staff of Moses turned to snake out of magic? Or bread manna from above was also magic? Should they not have farmed and harvested to eat?

Look when you lack basic understanding and knowledge of God, you will find it hard to accept what God said and what God does.

It is impossible because God would be breaking his own law...

sonmvayina:
It is impossible because God would be breaking his own law...

if such was eternal then wouldn't sex also be in heaven?

gohf:
if such was eternal then wouldn't sex also be in heaven?

Where is heaven?

And who do I need to interview to find out what happens there ?

sonmvayina:
Where is heaven?

And who do I need to interview to find out what happens there ?

answering a question with a none connecting question

Do you even want to know the truth or just want to be right

gohf:
if such was eternal then wouldn't sex also be in heaven?

Is there sex in heaven?

sonmvayina:
Is there sex in heaven?

no

gohf:
They didn't add a clear lie which says Father son and holy spirit are gods but they did just enough to tamper and infer, that's what is called subtlety so even those who knew or memorize the main text would get confused at such addition.

But even at that, the Father and the word and the Holy Spirit are one in agreement and in testimony that Jesus is the son of God

Jesus is the son of God. He told us that at the appointed time he would come back and clean out all the "leaven" of "hypocrisy" and false teachings from the congregation.

There are quite a few portions of what is commonly accepted as "Bible canon" that don't really belong.

The Bible - The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd_Ikip8gqg

epfa:
Jesus is the son of God. He told us that at the appointed time he would come back and clean out all the "leaven" of "hypocrisy" and false teachings from the congregation.

There are quite a few portions of what is commonly accepted as "Bible canon" that don't really belong.

The Bible - The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd_Ikip8gqg

I watched the video and as much as I understood her reasoning for suggesting some parts of the old testament do not belong there, I believe there's a purpose they were written and it may not be solely because men manipulated it.

I could use her logic and suggest Genesis 2 doesn't belong as there's already Genesis 1 or that Genesis 1 doesn't belong as it feels disconnected from Genesis 2-3.

Now for Absalom's account of sleeping with his father's concubine it was recorded in second Samuel where she suggests that it would take time to sleep with David's concubines and then mention there were 10 of them but the scripture suggests David left a few of which she says that's not David's nature to leave anyone behind. Now that's an assumption on her part. She says it will take time to sleep with all 10 because the next chapter of 2 Samuel 16, in 17 Ahitophel urges Absalom to move quickly.

I believe the act of sleeping openly with his concubines isn't a days thing but in hours, a man could easily go rounds on one woman in one night speak less of when it's not the same woman.

2Sam.16.21 - Ahithophel told him, "Go and sleep with your father's concubines, for he has left them here to keep the house. Then all Israel will know that you have insulted him beyond hope of reconciliation, and they will give you their support."
2Sam.16.22 - So they set up a tent on the palace roof where everyone could see it, and Absalom went into the tent to sleep with his father's concubines.

Saying it's against the law, well Absalom trying to kill David is already against the law.

Then about Abraham's test and sacrifice. The whole purpose of that test was revelation. Now first she says God doesn't need to test Abraham's faith. Did God need to test Job, or teach Jesus obedience by the things he suffered?

I think she forgets that a man sacrificed his daughter to God. And though the sacrifice was to offer her to God, I don't believe she was killed. Every offering to God, could be redeemed that was the law of Moses. At the point God proclaimed Isaac whom He gave Abraham to die, God redeemed the boy's life with that of a Lamb which Abraham did not bring.

It isn't just about what is written but about what we understand and it was their understanding and teaching of these texts that was leaven and corrupted.

sonmvayina:
That would be magic..

God already said a man's sperm will fertilize a woman's egg, so that a life can begin. When a woman just became pregnant without a man's input that would be impossible....

Common in nature hence not impossible as you might have thought! 😂😂😂😂

I miss my brother DappaD.

Gabrielshow24:
Common in nature hence not impossible as you might have thought! 😂😂😂😂

Is it possible in human?

sonmvayina:
Is it possible in human?

Law of non-contradiction voids your initial statement.

Now as regards this one, it's very rare in humans.
No one disputes that!!!

That's what makes it a miracle🤤

Gabrielshow24:
Law of non-contradiction voids your initial statement.

Now as regards this one, it's very rare in humans.
No one disputes that!!!

That's what makes it a miracle🤤

So which will you choose...human sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin or repent and forsake your evil ways and forgive(2nd chronicles 7:14?

Gabrielshow24:
Law of non-contradiction voids your initial statement.

Now as regards this one, it's very rare in humans.
No one disputes that!!!

That's what makes it a miracle🤤

If you were a loving God which would you choose?
1: Ask people to sincerely repent of their sins and forsake their evil ways.....and you forgive them their sins and restore property to the land.(Jewish idea, see 2nd chronicles 7:14)
Or
2.impregnate another man's wife with a version of yourself by breaking all your laws and Demand that he be killed as a human sacrifice and ask people to believe the dead man. Before you forgive their sins.(Christian idea)

sonmvayina:
So which will you choose...human sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin or repent and forsake your evil ways and forgive(2nd chronicles 7:14?

It's like asking me to choose between long term advantage and short term advantage!

Most advanced chess players will choose long term advantage that can be converted!!!

While most medium and beginner level chess players chooses short term advantage.

Repent & forgive is dependent on human actions!

And will always give an entitlement mentality where people will try to make their way to heaven through works.

And if it's by works no man will make heaven, because in fact our actions have unintended consequence that affect others gravely and what you think is good might have cancerous consequences.

So at the end of the day, you will be forced to define a good and bad decision based on its consequences both general and specific!!!

And when every decision you have made is weighed you cannot tell whether everything will indeed sum up as good or bad!!!

Also the mystery of Forgiveness is silence!
Do you hear a confirmation or feedback whether you have been forgiven or not?

So who knows whether you are forgiven or not except by believing so?
Which alludes to the supernatural and unseen.

you are so used to physical things so you would prefer physical things you are comfortable with but infact the God you serve is spiritual and immaterial 😁.

I will choose a divine substitute that absorbs men to himself and takes away their sins!!!

sonmvayina:
If you were a loving God which would you choose?
1: Ask people to sincerely repent of their sins and forsake their evil ways.....and you forgive them their sins and restore property to the land.(Jewish idea, see 2nd chronicles 7:14)
Or
2.impregnate another man's wife with a version of yourself by breaking all your laws and Demand that he be killed as a human sacrifice and ask people to believe the dead man. Before you forgive their sins.(Christian idea)

Well this is false dichotomy.

But even if I were to allude I would say a permanent solution is what is required.

The first one is temporary and there will be no end to the killing of cows and bulls.

And most of them at the end of the day will turn into religions cronies - doing it for doing sake!!!

Hence from the beginning it's rather wise that if God were to give man free choice he must have had the mechanism that would have used to bring men back to himself!!!

The first mechanism which your temporal choice alludes to his soul exchange.

Hence a much more bigger and permanent soul exchange is needed to cleanse and redeem man to God!!!

Thus the use of Jesus.
Now how should Jesus come to this world?
Through the self same system of corruption, nope.
Since God is holy hence a rather different approach (holy) must be used to bring forth the son.

Don't hate God brother, even what you allude to shoots you in the leg!!!

Gabrielshow24:
Well this is false dichotomy.

But even if I were to allude I would say a permanent solution is what is required.

The first one is temporary and there will be no end to the killing of cows and bulls.

And most of them at the end of the day will turn into religions cronies - doing it for doing sake!!!

Hence from the beginning it's rather wise that if God were to give man free choice he must have had the mechanism that would have used to bring men back to himself!!!

The first mechanism which your temporal choice alludes to his soul exchange.

Hence a much more bigger and permanent soul exchange is needed to cleanse and redeem man to God!!!

Thus the use of Jesus.
Now how should Jesus come to this world?
Through the self same system of corruption, nope.
Since God is holy hence a rather different approach (holy) must be used to bring forth the son.

Don't hate God brother, even what you allude to shoots you in the leg!!!

Where did I mention the killing of cows?

See 2nd chronicles 7:14.

Confess and forsake your evil ways...I will forgive and restore your land.

As against
A human sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin.

Which would you endorse?

Gabrielshow24:
It's like asking me to choose between long term advantage and short term advantage!

Most advanced chess players will choose long term advantage that can be converted!!!

While most medium and beginner level chess players chooses short term advantage.

Repent & forgive is dependent on human actions!

And will always give an entitlement mentality where people will try to make their way to heaven through works.

And if it's by works no man will make heaven, because in fact our actions have unintended consequence that affect others gravely and what you think is good might have cancerous consequences.

So at the end of the day, you will be forced to define a good and bad decision based on its consequences both general and specific!!!

And when every decision you have made is weighed you cannot tell whether everything will indeed sum up as good or bad!!!

Also the mystery of Forgiveness is silence!
Do you hear a confirmation or feedback whether you have been forgiven or not?

So who knows whether you are forgiven or not except by believing so?
Which alludes to the supernatural and unseen.

you are so used to physical things so you would prefer physical things you are comfortable with but infact the God you serve is spiritual and immaterial 😁.

I will choose a divine substitute that absorbs men to himself and takes away their sins!!!

Is it not humans that committed the sin?
Are they not the ones to make the restitution?

Why ask to kill an innocent man as a sin sacrifice.
It does not even work with humans with their frailty. Why should a loving God adopt it?