(April 19, 2012 at 10:03 pm)Drich Wrote:(April 19, 2012 at 6:41 pm)RaphielDrake Wrote:(April 19, 2012 at 2:21 am)Drich Wrote: I did not wake up one morning and decided to come here and start arguements as some have suggested. I have been working on the exegessis of the bible for the last 10 or more years. I am here because I am in a position to give what some of you are looking for.
You didn't reference the additions each "prophet" and "disciple" made. If they made additions whats to stop them making changes? Infact wouldn't it be extremely probable that over 2000 years a great deal many changes would be made to the extent it'd distort the original message beyond recognition?
Remember I'm not asking what you believe, I'm asking you what is probable. What is more likely, a text remained largely the same after much tampering by many different people, religions and civilizations over two millenia or that as a result it changed to become very different from its original?
you are aware we have portions of Scripture that are more than 2000 years old correct? We also have original Greek manuscripts from the second century as well. http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scrip...ripts.html
aside from grammatical and spelling errors God has preserved His word.
I see and considering that the Hebrew Bible, The Torah, was directly translated from the original Greek Bible how do you have the front to be Christian and claim you have the original message at your disposal? Surely it would be the Jews seen as they follow a more undiluted text.
Also, how does this add to the plausibility of the original text itself? Is there any evidence to back up any of what it says?
"That is not dead which can eternal lie and with strange aeons even death may die."
- Abdul Alhazred.
- Abdul Alhazred.
