Christians, would you buy this NT?

[Nope]

You're probably aware that the NT is a bit goofed-up.
- there are the genuine letters from Paul and the phony letters from Paul
- the verse in Mark about snake handling doesn't belong
- the verse in Corinthians about women keeping silent doesn't belong
- 2 Corinthians is actually 4 or 5 letters and one of them isn't from Paul
- ... I'm sure that is only scratching the surface of the problems scholars have found.

What if you could buy a NT that was as authentic as possible based on our modern research?
- Pseudo-Paul letters would be eliminated as forgeries
- 2 Corinthians would become 2.1 Corinthians, 2.2 Corinthians, 2.3 Corinthians, etc.
- 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John would be eliminated as forgeries
- Sections of the gospels that were probably added later would be eliminated

What do you think? Does something like this already exist? If you're going to be a Christian, you might as well use a Bible that is as accurate as possible IMO.

I think bibles should be required to include a chapter as to how the different books came to be included in the cannon. Lots of Christians seem to believe that their bible appeared in its full form with verse and chapter numbers. You would think that the bible itself would provide something as important as which books belong in its cannon.

[Godscreated]

You're probably aware that the NT is a bit goofed-up.
- there are the genuine letters from Paul and the phony letters from Paul
- the verse in Mark about snake handling doesn't belong
- the verse in Corinthians about women keeping silent doesn't belong
- 2 Corinthians is actually 4 or 5 letters and one of them isn't from Paul
- ... I'm sure that is only scratching the surface of the problems scholars have found.

What if you could buy a NT that was as authentic as possible based on our modern research?
- Pseudo-Paul letters would be eliminated as forgeries
- 2 Corinthians would become 2.1 Corinthians, 2.2 Corinthians, 2.3 Corinthians, etc.
- 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John would be eliminated as forgeries
- Sections of the gospels that were probably added later would be eliminated

What do you think? Does something like this already exist? If you're going to be a Christian, you might as well use a Bible that is as accurate as possible IMO.

Many will disagree with what you have stated, many extremely good Biblical authorities. You take one side and post it without any representation of the opposite. If it were proven then as you stated then there would be no counter argument and there definitely is.

GC

[Norman Humann]

Many will disagree with what you have stated, many extremely good Biblical authorities. You take one side and post it without any representation of the opposite. If it were proven then as you stated then there would be no counter argument and there definitely is.

GC

I don't suppose you're going to present that counter argument? Just going to say "you're wrong" and leave it at that?

[robvalue]

Imagine two christians argueing about which books should be in the bible!

"You're wrong."
"No, you're wrong."
"No, you're wrong."
"No, you're wrong."
*slice* *splat*
"See, you were wrong. It's going in."

[Norman Humann]

You know, the other one wasn't a True Christian™.

[watchamadoodle]

Many will disagree with what you have stated, many extremely good Biblical authorities. You take one side and post it without any representation of the opposite. If it were proven then as you stated then there would be no counter argument and there definitely is.

Let me give you an example of an obvious mistake in the gospel of Matthew (18:15-22 RSV) that I would correct in the watchamadoodle Bible:

Reproving Another Who Sins

15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

Forgiveness

21 Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?” 22 Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.[a]

So in 18:15-20 we hear practical rules for dealing with wayward church members. Basically you are to have a meeting with fellow church members and treat the naughty member like a leper. Hmm... Does that sound like Jesus to you? Jesus was criticized for associating with social outcasts, so does it make sense that he would instruct his followers to cast people out?
Then in 18:21-22 when Jesus is asked how many times to forgive he say 7 time 70 (i.e. no limit).
Apparently 18:15-20 is a rule for the early church that was mistakenly inserted into the Gospel of Matthew by a scribe. It should be removed IMO.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Many will disagree with what you have stated, many extremely good Biblical authorities. You take one side and post it without any representation of the opposite. If it were proven then as you stated then there would be no counter argument and there definitely is.

Let me give you an example of an obvious mistake in the gospel of Matthew (18:15-22 RSV) that I would correct in the watchamadoodle Bible:

Reproving Another Who Sins

15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

Forgiveness

21 Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?” 22 Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.[a]

So in 18:15-20 we hear practical rules for dealing with wayward church members. Basically you are to have a meeting with fellow church members and treat the naughty member like a leper. Hmm... Does that sound like Jesus to you? Jesus was criticized for associating with social outcasts, so does it make sense that he would instruct his followers to cast people out?
Then in 18:21-22 when Jesus is asked how many times to forgive he say 7 time 70 (i.e. no limit).
Apparently 18:15-20 is a rule for the early church that was mistakenly inserted into the Gospel of Matthew by a scribe. It should be removed IMO.

Matthew 18:15-20 is in accordance with Paul's doctrine about expelling the evil person from the church in 1 Corinthians 5:9-13.

[watchamadoodle]

Matthew 18:15-20 is in accordance with Paul's doctrine about expelling the evil person from the church in 1 Corinthians 5:9-13.

Here is what Geza Vermes says in "The Authentic Gospel of Jesus" p 364

The whole complex of sayings has a peculiar ring when set against the bulk of Jesus' teaching in the Gospels. To begin with, to compare a sinning brother to a tax collector is totally alien to the mentality of Jesus, who had a soft spot for publicans.
...
But above all, the reference to the church, twice in Matthew 18:17 and once previously in Matthew 16:18, clearly indicates that we are faced here with early Christianity and not with Jesus.

The gospels pretend to record the authentic biography and teaching of Jesus, so they should not put words from the early church into the mouth of Jesus IMO. That is why I would call those forgeries. Probably somebody felt the unlimited (70x7) forgiveness was not a practical way to run a church and "corrected" Jesus' teaching.

[professor]

Watcha, even a corrupted one, such as you propose is better than nothing.
And better than any other book the System trumpets forth.
But not to fret, others are on the same path you propose.
Time will run out before they get traction.

[Godscreated]

---

Many will disagree with what you have stated, many extremely good Biblical authorities. You take one side and post it without any representation of the opposite. If it were proven then as you stated then there would be no counter argument and there definitely is.

---

Let me give you an example of an obvious mistake in the gospel of Matthew (18:15-22 RSV) that I would correct in the watchamadoodle Bible:

Reproving Another Who Sins

15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses.

These verses are to establish that the one has sinned against the other, to actually leave no doubt about who's guilty.

17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

This verse is to let the others know he (the guilty one) is unrepentant and if after meeting with the church he is still unrepentant, he is to be cast out as if he were a gentile or tax collector. This does not refer to the church hating him, the Jews wouldn't associate with gentiles and tax collectors.

Forgiveness

21 Then Peter came up and said to him, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?” 22 Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.[a]

Unlimited forgiveness.

So in 18:15-20 we hear practical rules for dealing with wayward church members. Basically you are to have a meeting with fellow church members and treat the naughty member like a leper. Hmm... Does that sound like Jesus to you? Jesus was criticized for associating with social outcasts, so does it make sense that he would instruct his followers to cast people out?

Yes, you're right, it's a way to deal with a unrepentant person, notice that the original verse said nothing about the guilty person being a church member and does not indicate he is. So maybe he is or he isn't.
Jesus instruction wasn't to hate the guilty but to not associate with him as the Jews wouldn't consider associating with a gentile or tax collector who by the way were Jews.
Jesus associating with the social out cast was to give them the good news, not to live his life in close association with them if they did not repent. Earlier in Matthew's gospel, Matt. 10:14 Jesus told His disciples, if a town refuses to listen to you, knock the dust off your feet and leave them to their own unrepentant ways. So, what Jesus says in these verses is in line to an earlier instruction He gave to the disciples.

Then in 18:21-22 when Jesus is asked how many times to forgive he say 7 time 70 (i.e. no limit).
Apparently 18:15-20 is a rule for the early church that was mistakenly inserted into the Gospel of Matthew by a scribe. It should be removed IMO.

Again you're correct, Jesus said unlimited forgiveness. What you have missed in these verses is his, Jesus didn't say for the guilty man not to receive forgiveness. He said that the guilty man for his refusal to repent was to be punished, Jesus expected the one offended and even the church to forgive him. Jesus wanted to keep bad examples out of the church community, He knew all the dangers of allowing one to stay within the community. No punishment would be the same as accepting what the guilty one did, sending a bad message and bad feelings through the church.

GC