It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by babloyi
I have heard many people say that the Bible is full of errors due to incorrect translations, additions at a later date, and deletions at a later date. What is the consensus on this? How much of it is true? If it IS true, then how would a Christian know what is true and what is false? How can they believe anything?
Originally posted by babloyi
I also read about a religious conference around 300BC(?) where the Christian leaders decided which books to keep as part of the bible and which part to discard. They also decided on the divinity of Jesus(?), and "borrowed" dozens of myths from different religions to encourage converts. How much of this is true?
Originally posted by babloyi
I also read that Paul distorted alot so as to convert more and to further his own agenda. Is this true?
Originally posted by babloyi
Are there Christians who practice some sort of "Original Christianity"? How can Christians be sure of what they read and believe if there has been so much error? Are there some parts of the Bible more suspect than others?
Thank you for your time.
Originally posted by LadyV
Well, for starters, in English versions of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament), the Hebrew word "m'khashepah" is often translated as "witch." The word actually means a female sorcerer who uses spoken curses to harm other people.
Originally posted by LadyV
Similarly, in the English translations of the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) the Greek word "pharmakia" is often translated as "witch." It actually means a person who poisons other humans through the administration of toxic potions.
Originally posted by babloyi
I have heard many people say that the Bible is full of errors due to incorrect translations, additions at a later date, and deletions at a later date. What is the consensus on this? How much of it is true?
If it IS true, then how would a Christian know what is true and what is false? How can they believe anything?
I also read about a religious conference around 300BC(?) where the Christian leaders decided which books to keep as part of the bible and which part to discard. They also decided on the divinity of Jesus(?), and "borrowed" dozens of myths from different religions to encourage converts. How much of this is true? I also read that Paul distorted alot so as to convert more and to further his own agenda. Is this true?
Are there Christians who practice some sort of "Original Christianity"? How can Christians be sure of what they read and believe if there has been so much error? Are there some parts of the Bible more suspect than others?
Thank you for your time.
Originally posted by otherwise
Originally posted by babloyi
I also read that Paul distorted alot so as to convert more and to further his own agenda. Is this true?
What would that be? His writings are perfectly in harmony with the gospels and the prophets.
There are no contradictions in the Bible. When something like that is brought up, it is usually by someone who has misinterpreted or misunderstood whatever passage they are reading. It is easy to do. I have done it myself many times. It simply takes study and prayer to sort things out.
The Bible is the written word of God. If there are mistakes or inconsistencies in the Bible, then we can say that God is not perfect. If God is no longer perfect, then how can we really be sure that anything said by Him is true? In short, the Bible is either whole and accurate or it is simply an amusing collection of stories.
But God is perfect, so His written word is also. It was written by man at the inspiration of God. The translation works the same way. The word 'Christianity' simply means Christ Like. As we study, pray and grow in faith and closeness to God, we change to become more likle Him. Thus, we are Christians. There is no Original Christianity, so there is not a church that practicies it. Some claim there is and others claim to practice somethings that the 'original' church practiced, but I don't buy into it.
Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Read your KJV 1611 version; other versions have flaws that range from inconvenient to catastophic.
If you stick to the 1611, there are no errors in the book, only errors in comprehension created by not having the Holy Spirit with you while reading.
Originally posted by shaunybaby
the four gospels, matthew, mark, luke and john, were written decades after jesus died. argue all you want because that is the truth. those four gospels that show jesus' life were written by people that lived after jesus died, and that also never met the messiah himself. paul the founder of christianity wrote luke, and this was the first of the four to be written. the next was 'matthew', this book was written after 'luke' for the reason that the person, who wrote matthew, didnot believe that the book 'luke' told the 'true' story of jesus in its entirity. in some parts of matthew, mark and john, which were all different versions of luke, sometimes copy word for word from luke and hold so many contradictions that we cannot get a clear idea of jesus' life from these four gospels.
[edit on 3-1-2005 by shaunybaby]
Originally posted by otherwise
You have probably heard people say that the story of Jesus is a copy from ancient myths. That is wrong! The fact is actually the opposite. The myths are actually derived from the Old Testament prophecies about Jesus! The virgin birth for instance, was prophecied hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus Christ.