|
jlf1961 -> RE: "The Religion of Peace" in action (10/20/2016 7:38:17 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bounty44
quote:
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
Well the same shit happened to the Bible. What the fuck is a King James version ? Who the fuck is the leader of a country, member of a royal welfare recipient family get the right to edit the word of god ?
T^T
the king james version is an English translation, not an "editing."
and to be clear, the work of the translation was commissioned and supported by the king, not DONE by him. it took dozens of scholars a handful of years to do it.
you can only say "the same shit happened to the bible" if you can show how meaningful information exists in the original Hebrew, greek and Aramaic, but then does not show up in the English versions.
You happened to have left out one, extremely important fact about the king James version of the bible, which by its very nature, is editing.
Four books were left out of the old testament.
Of course, when you consider that there is really no direct translation for many words of Aramaic, the language the gospels were written in to Greek, and the same is true for Hebrew to Greek, which were then translated to Latin on the order of Emperor Constantine who did have much to say about the words used in the translations, you then have some clear editing in the history of the bible.
That being said, it must also be noted that the first of the gospels was Mark and written sometime around 70 AD, about 35 years after the death of Jesus, and a number of years after the death of Mark. Mathew and Luke were written in the 80's and 90's, and based on oral records.
Furthermore, at last count, there were at least five known versions of Mark, all differing to some degree, and all copied from earlier transcripts, as for Mathew and Luke, there are four confirmed differing versions on scrolls dating back to approximately AD134.
Now there is some proof that the written versions differ from the oral records in a few rather interesting points.
First, in his own words, Jesus said to keep the law of Moses, and that he brought a higher law as well.
Now, this is an important point, for if Jesus was so set on the law of Moses, and he taught in the Synagogue then, by the gospels as we know them, he was violating the law of Moses.
The Gospels portray him as unmarried.
Therefore, for him to have taught in the Synagogue, not only was he in violation of the law, but subject to being stoned to death for heresy.
In one of the two sources for the written record of Mark, on his way to the tomb of Lazarus, he ordered Lazarus's sister to accompany him to the tomb. For her to obey him, he had to be either blood kin or her husband.
Even before this, his first miracle at the wedding has some major issues.
Mary his mother bade the servants at the wedding to do as he (Jesus) told them. For her to have any authority over those servants, she would have had to be the mother of the groom, since it was the groom's family which traditionally hosted the wedding feast.
Now, there are some that point to the fact that the gospels state that Jesus had a younger brother and it was his wedding, but that in and of itself creates a problem.
The youngest son or daughter could not marry until the oldest child had been wed.
Again the evidence points to either it was Jesus's own wedding OR he was already married.
Again there is evidence of editing by the scribes who wrote the gospels.
Add to that that the Christian community at the time did not have the tradition of writing the gospels down, more out of self preservation than anything else.
Granted every point is circumstantial, based on the religious law at the time of Jesus, however, every non biased biblical scholar will point out the very same things.
|
|
|
|
