The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.
24

It is important to understand that we do not have an "original copy" of any book of the Bible. What we have are copies of copies of copies... (manuscripts), from which "Textual Critics" seek to ascertain the original wording. It is the original wording that most Bible scholars hold to be perfect and inspired by God. Many modern Christians view "The Bible" ...


20

The NIV has some "missing" verses because it is based on different manuscripts than, say, the King James version. For some background, we don't have manuscripts of the original writings of the New Testament. We have copies of them, and as with text that is copied manually, there is room for copyist error, or for people to add or remove things - purposely ...


20

There are two differences here: "from evil" (KJV) versus "from the evil one" (NIV) "for thine is the kingdom..." in the KJV but not the NIV. The first difference reflects an alternative translation choice for the Greek word "πονηροῦ". This might be in the masculine or the neuter gender - the word forms are the same. But there is a difference in meaning: if ...


13

Why did Joseph Smith change those verses? For clarity. The December 1983 edition of the LDS-published Ensign magazine included the article Understanding Textual Changes in the Book of Mormon. The article addresses several types of changes including the specific ones asked about by the OP. In a few places, however, Joseph Smith did intentionally add to ...


12

There are none. Translation Choices aren't Biblical Version issues I categorically have to rule out translation choices as different "versions" because by definition, languages that change will change their wording to make things clear. Whether one translates the term "cell phone" into German as Mobil Telefon or Handy, for instance, is completely arbitrary,...


11

The authenticity of the Johannine comma, found in 1 John 5:7, has been a subject of debate from the early sixteenth century. Wikipedia says the general consensus today is that the passage is a Latin corruption that entered the Greek manuscript tradition in subsequent copies. By the way, the Johannine Comma is not to be confused with the modern punctuation ...


10

It's important to understand something about the origins of the Bible. The authors of the various books within it did not sit down to write "The Bible". They intended to write stuff that would be helpful to other people for various reasons: in the case of the Gospels, so people would know the true story of Jesus' life and teachings, and for the letters to ...


9

The revelation of scripture which describes God as existing as one being, with three distinct persons, does not hinge on any particular verse, but is gradually revealed from Genesis to Revelation.  If 1 John was removed from the Bible it would have no impact on the concept of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as three distinct persons of the only God. The ...


8

The truth should not hide from argument. Truth is like an anvil: you should be able to take the biggest hammer you have and bang on it all day and not break it.


7

This is an English translation of the Decretum Gelasianum de Libris Recipendis et Non Recipiendts. The Decretum Gelasianum was issued by Pope Gelasius [Pope of Rome 492-96]. One of the apocryphum mentioned is "the Gospel in the name of Barnabas". Now, the document floating around in the present day is probably a 16th century writing, just based on content ...


7

The Greek spells out each word: ἑξακόσιοι (six hundred) ἑξήκοντα (sixty) ἕξ (six). At the time the NT was written, place holders were unknown. It was simply not possible to write ἕξ ἕξ ἕξ (or to use the single letters for six which would be three stigmas) and it be understood as six hundred sixty-six. To write out 666 using the letter equivalents would ...


6

Both Christians as well as Muslims scholars, for genuinely valid reasons have already rejected the gospel of Barnabas as forgery. Here are a few of these reasons: According to this book, Barnabas was one of Jesus’ original twelve apostles which is not so. Barnabas as an apostle came after the original twelve, and was a fellow missionary with the apostle ...


6

The clearest statements I know of are its exclusion from the N.T. That alone suggests that it was either not present at the time the N.T. was codified or that, if it was present (doubtful as there are no references to it prior to the Renaissance), then it was not viewed as having a substantial claim as being Apostolic. At a minimun, however, the very fact ...


6

I agree with pretty much everything Jas3.1 said, but let me add a couple of comments: It is certainly true that the manuscripts we have are copies of copies and that some number of discrepancies have crept in through the process. But as I note in my answer to this question: Is it possible for The Bible to contain errors?, most of these discrepancies are ...


6

Since you didn't specify which perspective you're looking for (other than the view of skeptics, which is off-topic considering this site is meant to cover what Christian groups teach), I'm going to provide an answer from a Fundamentalist view - one that holds Scripture to be inspired, inerrant, and infallible. Before doing so, I need to point out, however, ...


6

From the King James: Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. Six hundred is obvious.. Threescore - A "Score" is twenty, so that's sixty And sis So, the correct answer, according to that version, is your first: 600+60+6 (six ...


6

Perhaps, some may agree with this (theophany). However, another way of looking at this passage in Hebrews is that the author is discussing an order or priestly appointment (precedent) without lineal descent. Just as Melchizedek had no known lineage (some Jewish commentators have written about traditions that Shem, Noah's son is Melchizedek, though this is ...


6

Scriptures below are quoted from the King James Bible, which is based on the Textus Receptus. The main arguments I am aware of can be grouped into the following categories. Many witnesses It is a principle first found in the law that you need at least two witnesses to establish the truth. (Deuteronomy 17:6; 19:15) 2 Corinthians 13:1 This is the third ...


6

I've seen three major categories of criticism for the NIV, but often people will combine two or three of them. 1. Text criticism: the NIV is based on critical texts The NIV is a translation of the Nestle-Aland critical text of the Greek New Testament. It also critically evaluates the BHS for the OT, and often takes the Greek Septuagint as being a more ...


5

Both "majority opinion" and "evangelical" (even with the guidelines you supplied) are slippery terms. They'll probably always be in a state of flux, so it's difficult to supply exactly what you've asked for. But don't panic. I think a relatively clear picture can still emerge. I've decided to give a sampling of three scholars who I think are firmly within ...


5

Wilbur Pickering effectively revived the scholarly debate on which text to use when he published The Identity of the New Testament Text in 1977. The third edition of his book on the subject can be viewed online here. His argument is almost entirely technical in nature. However in his conclusion, he states: God’s concern for the preservation of the ...


5

The above resources are indeed excellent surveys of the issues surrounding textual criticism of the bible. A couple of extra points are worth noting: (1) The question asks about the textual history of the Bible. The Greek manuscript families relate specifically to the New Testament. If the question includes the Old Testament that would need to be looked at ...


5

How many early New Testament manuscripts do we have? You ask about the first four centuries, until about 400 AD. I am inclined to initially answer through 300 AD, because I believe that period is more important for historical* reasons. This page on Wikipedia lists the 130 papyri of the New Testament that we know of, together with what content each has. For ...


5

First, I’d like to give a bit of background on the different OT manuscripts. The OT in English Bibles is almost always based off the Masoretic text and the Dead Sea Scrolls, but some use the Septuagint. The KJV uses the Masoretic. There are some discrepancies between the Septuagint and the Masoretic; nineteen times out of twenty, the Dead Sea Scrolls agree ...


5

Perhaps another way to answer the OP is to say that it is based on a false contrast. As an analogy, consider the following sentences: Jazz is the best kind of music and country is the best kind of music. Jazz is the best kind of music and the trumpet is the best instrument. In the first sentence there is a contradiction because the contradictory ...


4

The danger with this is that there may be teachings in there that don't correspond with other parts of the New Testament. If there are new doctrines introduced in text that is not found in all versions of the original manuscripts, then we have to be careful about completely basing our faith off of these doctrines. In regard to this specific passage, there'...


4

Sort of? Strictly speaking it comes from the medieval manuscripts which the reformation theologians inherited, but it is not quite that simple. The text is clearly missing from the most ancient manuscripts of Matthew, but it was present in the Renaissance. Someone in some scriptorium added that passage at a later date. On the other hand, we know that the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible