Religion (God)

Armando wrote:The Bible WAS written by men... It's totally biased and it has been modified countless times.

Just curious Armando. Where'd you get this confirmation? Or at least give me a reliable source?

DbQaidkrnz wrote:Just curious Armando. Where'd you get this confirmation? Or at least give me a reliable source?

hi im' korean too :) armando is right, i cannot give u a source but here's some info.

in our church, we read the king james...because well we like to get as original as possible im guessing. have u read NIV bibles (if u go to korean church u probably have read NIVs, most Korean churches i've been to do it lol)? i dont call them bibles. they are modified by modern men/women who like to twist and turn words so that they can relate to the people of the 21st century basically. e.g: my gf has a NIV bible for the Teen girl. first time i looked at it i told her "what in the world is this? you read this as if it was the bible? it's liek chicken soup for the teenage soul or somethign." latest news of the NIV was that they're making a bible that's 1/4 shorter than the original. how blasphemous.

First, the bible wasnt in english i'm sure. translations were probably difficult. the old testament was written in hebrew. the new test. was written in greek. so whoever got a hand of these to translate needed to know the old traditional tongue of hebrew and old traditional tongue of greek. and before the printing press what people had to do was handcopy unless God helped them zap out that brand new copy of the HOly book. most that handcopied were of course monks and higher ranking people of the church (mostly catholic). if the book was handcopied by john doe, it'd be fine, but being it translated into a vernacular language by a high ranked Cardinal is surely gonna have bias outcomes (especially if he does not know his hebrew and greek). theologists and historians also talk of missing parts of the bible, ones that were not "fit" or "important". who knows, maybe the missing parts have revelations that we need but dont' know about it yet.

Oh goody! You're korean too! :) This part is off topic kinda but there are strange (*cough*corrupted*cough*) korean churches established in korea that does modify the Bible and manipulate the meanings. But as for me, the NIVs are in fact accurate. NIVs are worded differently so all people can understand and making it shorter? Again, it could be the rewording of the bible to make all readers of all ages understand. Consider this. Suppose the Bible was first written in English or Greek and people who only knew hieroglyphics wanted to read the Bible and it was translated into hieroglyphics. This Bible for these people would now be longer than the originals (unless it's all crammed in). And the missing parts? Do these parts correlate to the ones in the bible? How can these parts be called a "missing part" if it contradicts the wordings of other parts itself? For example, the Qu'ran (Koran) supposedly "uses" these missing parts in the Bible (such as the Book of Thomas) and yet, it contradicts the Bible.

And the theologians and historians you're talking? How sure are they of the Bible's accuracy when many of the theologians and historians studying all religions and different holy books have agreed that the Bible has been the most accurate "Book" ever written?

i don't know about you, but the bible cannot be the most accurate book ever written. i totally doubt any scientist or historian has ever said that. maybe a theologist. because there is absolutely no positive evidence or proof of anything that has taken place in the bible. they are supposedly geographically correct, yet there are only theories on where the "great flood" took place during the time of Noah. They dont have proof of where Moses gathered the plates with the commandments. This is all in the old testament, and i highly doubt the old testament is teh most accurate book. the new testament could surely be however. Yet u still have to understand, translating can misshape sentences , even if it's not intended. translating the bible into different languages is ok, taht's how we got the english versions. if we keep phasing our bible, everyone can rewrite it themselves. tell me if there is something blashpemous in that. cuz i see there is. let's have 50 cent's version of the bible. let's have Rolling Stone's version of the bible. etc. why don't people try to read the most original copy they can get?
sure it's hard to understand, but it feels more reverent reading the words "thou" "thee". that's just my opinion tho.

Revelation 22:18: For i testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophesy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

although i'm contradicting my own beliefs cuz i think this verse and verse 19 pertain only to the book of Revelation, i still think it is wrong to modify the bible from its closest original version. it's already gone through too many twists.

If I were you, I'd ask a theologian or a historian who studied all religions. They can explain it more in depth than I can. And the Bible making a mistake through all those various translation? Go to the Oxford Library (yes the one in England) or any national archive and look for the oldest bible you can find and see if it's any different, other than the wordings of course.

DbQaidkrnz wrote:If I were you, I'd ask a theologian or a historian who studied all religions. They can explain it more in depth than I can. And the Bible making a mistake through all those various translation? Go to the Oxford Library (yes the one in England) or any national archive and look for the oldest bible you can find and see if it's any different, other than the wordings of course.

unless you tell me you ahve done it yourself and seen it, i don't think i have to do it. :)

what's weird is...im not sure if this is true or not..my friend tells me taht the smithsonian's most accurate record they have is of Jesus' existence. wonder how? the bible is so biased towards Jesus. because the ones who wrote the new testaments were followers of Jesus themselves. of course they won't add in something that Jesus had done wrong (although of course he was considered perfect). but this topic is too continuous. i think i will resign from this argument...it's wayyyyyy too deep for me and it's too mind bogling.

I learned it (notice: not asked) from various theologians from my church and other church as well. And smithsonians? How would anyone know for sure of their accuracy if people are doubting the accuracy of the Bible?

Armando wrote:My question(s) are:

If God does exist, and God is all powerful and what not, why doesn't he make it so everyone believes in him? Why would God not make everyone believe he exists and pray for him and praise him?

Because he isn't self centered?