Originally Posted by Orange
Many Christians feel that they are no longer held under the law of the Old Testament because Jesus provided a new covenant. Though Jesus said repeatedly he did not come to undo the laws Moses gave, many Christians argue that his resummation of the commandments as love release them from the old laws.
As a scholar of theology I personally feel this is just laziness and ignorance of scirpture on behalf of Christians. But its so prevalent and popular in tradition that you are hard pressed to find ANY Christian which keeps dietary laws.
The Bible is NOT revised every year by some official council of Christendom. A little history: In the first few centuries following Christ there was a multitude of Christian scripture floating about. The roman empire was in dire need of an institution in which to secure the throne and unite the empire. So Constantine held a council in 329 ad with the leaders of Christians factions and they essentially voted on what would be the christology and scriptures of the new state religion. Many councils came to pass since in which books of the Bible were taken out or interpolated, the attributes of significant biblical personages were voted on, etc. There are alot of other issues such as errors from block printing, mistranslations, etc.
There was no official canonized of version of the Bible until long after Mohammad died. And by the time of the reformation there were more disputes between factions of Christian belief causing mroe revisions of Bibles. At this time there are about 1,900 different Bible translations. Their variances between one another aren't too large, (With exception to ancient texts such as the Nag Hamadi or the Dead Sea Scrolls) most are a result of language translation and refinement. Take for example the difference between the King James Version and the Catholic Study Bible KJV. One is written in old poetic language where the other strives to be in modern english with foot notes to explain the differences.
Anytime you attempt to put a scripture in another language huge issues result. Take for example how many English speakers scream about the Qur'an passage concerning discipline of one's argumentative wife. Though in the original arabic the word implies hitting with a tooth brush (which would clearly not be a beating in any true sense of the word) the word doesn't translate and is just left with an explanation of hitting. Because its so open ended alot of English speakers are under the assumption that Muslims are told by Mohommad to beat their wives! And of course, they point to domestic violence in the east as an underscoring of their mistranslation. They are ignorant of the original text, just as many modern Christians are ignorant of what the Bible says concerning law in koine Greek.