Bible Fake?

Since when has the bible been changed. Also from a christian point of vieuw, do christians even care that there bible has been changed?!:hmm:

AlHoda said:

Since when has the bible been changed.

Click to expand...

Since the man (who has free will) started to

- believe in a part of the work as fine for his desires , and do reject the rest as against his desires...

- follow the vain desires of people who went wrong in times gone by,- who misled many, and strayed from the even way.

- write the Book with their his own hand to traffic with it for miserable price.

- believe that a forged scripture ,as long as,from his point of view, would improve faith in God is acceptable.


Regards

AlHoda said:

Since when has the bible been changed. Also from a christian point of vieuw, do christians even care that there bible has been changed?!:hmm:

Click to expand...

We do care, sister. Well, at least I do.

Greetings, AlHoda

What makes you think that the Bible is a fake? In what way do you think has it been changed?

We have had several interesting threads on the Bible and Bible authenticity. You might try to look there.
Grace Seeker is a great one to answer questions on Bible history. (Hope you don't mind me saying, Grace Seeker )

Try these threads for previous discussions:

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/134281958-bible-what.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/134272530-how-much-do-you-rely-bible.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/134268952-who-wrote-bible.html
The topic is also almost certainly covered in the 'Questions about Christians. Requesting answers from Christians' thread ... but that is so long now, it might take you a while to find the right places.

Have fun!

Glo, I don't mind you saying so, but he's right. The Bible has been changed, many times as a matter of fact. But I don't believe it's ever been faked. There is a difference.

The Bible is not a single book. Never has been. Rather, it is a collection of many different books, composed over an extended period of time, by the hand of many different (inspired, I believe) human authors. As such, the collection known today as the Bible is not what it originally was, nor would I want it to be, for then it would not contain the full revelation of God.

I'm not so much worried about those who question if the Bible has ever changed -- of course it has. I'm much more concerned about the question as to why we consider the canon of scripture closed and no longer open to change. After all, doesn't God continue to reveal himself to us, even to this day. Why then has the Church declared that there no more to be added to the Bible? And just quoting Revelation 22:18-19 is not good enough, for that line refers only to the book of Revelation, not the whole of scripture.

What people fail to realize for bible is a combination of many books written over a long time with mistranslations, additions, doctrines, and revisions that destroyed the Truth. Many things could have been changed from the original til today. It was written by over 40 authors (Peter, King, Mark, Job, John, Luke, Mathew, unknown authors........).

Unfortunately, the bible is a collection of books, stories, personal letters, songs, and poetry. New Testament was written by Paul combined with the apostles. :hmm:

Christanity is Paulism. Do Christians follow Jesus? DO they keep the commandments and the Law? DO they pray to Allah (God)? What do they do that Jesus did?

AlHoda said:

Since when has the bible been changed. Also from a christian point of vieuw, do christians even care that there bible has been changed?!:hmm:

Click to expand...

Ukhti,

As Muslims we need have no concern about the Christian Bible. This is a moot point. Our concern is to show that the Qur'an is the truth and that Islam is the way to serve Allaah(swt).

To show that the bible is in error or that it is not what was actually written serves no purpose in proving Islam is correct. In fact I suspect if a Christian were to have the Bible to be proven false, he would most likely become an atheist. This approach to Da'wah seldom works and can very well alienate people who were on the edge of understanding Islam. It also can backfire in a debate as a good debater will use this as an opportunity to push a novice debater into trying to prove a negative.

Learn first to show that Islam is the truth and there will never be a need to show any other belief is wrong.

I accepted Islam because the Bible did contain enough truth to lead me onto the path that eventually brought me to Islam. If in my younger years when I was a very devout Christian and somebody proved to me the Bible was false I very well might have become an atheist, but since that was never done to me, I became a seeker and sought to fulfill my life, instead of thinking I had already reached my limits. I came to Islam, because it was the truth, not because my previous beliefs were false.

Grace Seeker said:

I'm not so much worried about those who question if the Bible has ever changed -- of course it has. I'm much more concerned about the question as to why we consider the canon of scripture closed and no longer open to change. After all, doesn't God continue to reveal himself to us, even to this day. Why then has the Church declared that there no more to be added to the Bible? And just quoting Revelation 22:18-19 is not good enough, for that line refers only to the book of Revelation, not the whole of scripture.

Click to expand...

Interesting thoughts, Grace Seeker. I would love to hear your own views on this - publicly or privately, whichever seems best.

I agree that God reveals himself to us today - to 'big' influential people as well as to 'little' people who may never change the course of history.
Presumably God's revelations would always sit clearly within the teaching of the Bible as we know it?
I am asking, because it could be argued (indeed it has been argued in this very forum) that the NT teachings, even Jesus' own teachings, seemed sometimes clearly at odds with the teaching of the OT ... and yet Christians continue to believe it to be the Word of God.

I am reminded of the three elements of the Episcopal Church - Scripture, Tradition and Reason - which always allows for the expression of a new understanding of the old through the introduction of the new.
What do you think?

Sorry, Glo, I don't really have any deep thoughts in this area. Ask some Catholic apologist. They love to claim that the Bible is the product of the Church, not the Church the product of the Bible. (And of course they are correct in so far as that statement goes.) So, in making that statement, they've had to deal with the question as to why is the Canon open to this point in time and not beyond. But, my synapses aren't prepared to tackle that, at least not today.

Grace Seeker said:

Sorry, Glo, I don't really have any deep thoughts in this area. Ask some Catholic apologist. They love to claim that the Bible is the product of the Church, not the Church the product of the Bible. (And of course they are correct in so far as that statement goes._ So, in making that statement, they've had to deal with the question as to why is the Canon open to this point in time and not beyond. But, my synapses aren't prepared to tackle that, at least not today.

Click to expand...

As a Catholic allow me. Once the Cannon of scripture was declared closed it was done so under the authority of the Church. Since the Church when acting in union with the Pontiff speaks on issues of faith or morals those decisions are than considered binding and infallible. Catholic Theology believes that it is the holy Ghost who protects the Church in such decisions.

Seeker1066 said:

As a Catholic allow me. Once the Cannon of scripture was declared closed it was done so under the authority of the Church. Since the Church when acting in union with the Pontiff speaks on issues of faith or morals those decisions are than considered binding and infallible. Catholic Theology believes that it is the holy Ghost who protects the Church in such decisions.

Click to expand...

Thank you Seeker (now there are two Seekers in this thread ... how confusing! )
Could there ever be a situation where the Pope declared that anything was right to be added to the Bible?
Or is he bound by the decision which the Church made in the past?

Grace Seeker said:

glo said:

Greetings, AlHoda

What makes you think that the Bible is a fake? In what way do you think has it been changed?

Click to expand...

Glo, I don't mind you saying so, but he's right. The Bible has been changed, many times as a matter of fact. But I don't believe it's ever been faked. There is a difference.

Click to expand...

To be honest, the reason for asking the question was to understand more about AlHoda's knowledge and understanding of how the Bible has been changed.

My guess is her perception of the way in which the Bible has been changed is different from ours ...

Grace Seeker said:

Sorry, Glo, I don't really have any deep thoughts in this area.

Click to expand...

Now you are disappointing me, Grace!

Not to stray too far off course here. But, here in the USA there are some(Not Many) Christian groups that believe the KJV came directly from heaven, sent down printed and bound in today's form. They actually believe Jesus(as) and his disciples spoke Elizabethan English.

A classic example is Ann Richards of Texas. When she was elected Governor of Texas she was Asked what book she wanted to take the oath of office on. Her Answer shocked even some of the reporters. Her answer was :"The KJV of course, if it was good enough for Jesus(as) it is good enough for me."( Might Not be exact quote, best I remember hearing her say)

Woodrow said:

Not to stray too far off course here. But, here in the USA there are some(Not Many) Christian groups that believe the KJV came directly from heaven, sent down printed and bound in today's form. They actually believe Jesus(as) and his disciples spoke Elizabethan English.

A classic example is Ann Richards of Texas. When she was elected Governor of Texas she was Asked what book she wanted to take the oath of office on. Her Answer shocked even some of the reporters. Her answer was :"The KJV of course, if it was good enough for Jesus(as) it is good enough for me."( Might Not be exact quote, best I remember hearing her say)

Click to expand...

By 'some', do you mean one?

Supreme said:

By 'some', do you mean one?

Click to expand...

No there are a few "Bible" based churches in Texas that actually preach that. Two of which I used to attend. I also know of at least one church in Shreveport, Louisiana that preaches the same.

I won't put their names in a post as I doubt if that is the practice of many Christians. But check your PMs

Supreme said:

By 'some', do you mean one?

Click to expand...

No. I've known a "few" of this persuasion in other parts of the country as well. They don't necessarily believe that Jesus and his disciples spoke English, but they do seriously believe that the KJV was a completely and wholly inspired translation with no errors in it. And that includes the insertion of the doxological ending to the Lord's Prayer in Matthew's Gospel, even though it can't be found in any Greek manuscript prior to the 11th century.

And here's a wierd one I just heard of today:

Marc Grizzard, the pastor of achurch in North Carolina, wants to "light a fire" under the faithful --by having a good old-fashioned book burning. On top of his list ofbooks to burn: the Bible. According to Grizzard, every version except the King James translation is "satanic" and a "perversion" of God'sword. His church is the Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, N.C.(AP)

Click to expand...

Even stranger stuff can be found here. Sorry, this stuff is so far out there that I won't even quote from it, lest someone think I actually believe or endorse it.

Grace Seeker said:

And here's a wierd one I just heard of today:




Even stranger stuff can be found here. Sorry, this stuff is so far out there that I won't even quote from it, lest someone think I actually believe or endorse it.

Click to expand...

Peace Gene,

Good point I think it is good for all of us to know that when we see/hear something we believe is repesentative of any religion, it may just be the views of a fringe group sharing nothing except the name,

For us Muslims it is best we stick to proving Islam is the truth and understand that the best arguments we use to disprove another religion may not be applicable to the particular denomination/sect we are addressing. It wouldn't help to prove the KJV is wrong to a Catholic, as most Catholics would agree and say the only true Bible is the Latin Vulgate or the Douay-Rheims

Woodrow said:

Peace Gene,

Good point I think it is good for all of us to know that when we see/hear something we believe is repesentative of any religion, it may just be the views of a fringe group sharing nothing except the name,

For us Muslims it is best we stick to proving Islam is the truth and understand that the best arguments we use to disprove another religion may not be applicable to the particular denomination/sect we are addressing. It wouldn't help to prove the KJV is wrong to a Catholic, as most Catholics would agree and say the only true Bible is the Latin Vulgate or the Douay-Rheims

Click to expand...

And as you (out of your own experience) correctly said earlier, if someone were to convince me that the Bible was so totally in error as to be simply tossed as rubbish, I would not suddenly become a Muslim but more likely some alturistic atheist. And maybe not even an alturistic one, but perhaps a hedonist if you had knocked out the most significant of my present beliefs and hence also my core values as well.