Posted on 09/01/2009 7:23:57 PM PDT by Ron C.
My point is, the Oxford group didn’t pick and choose certain parts of what Shakespeare wrote and decided what was “canon.” They took the entirety of his works. Now let’s suppose that the ancient scriptures actually are devinely inspired. How can the King James Bible (or any other written so long after the times of the New Testement, let alone the Old Testement/Torrah/ancient mesopotamian stories) claim to be the word of god when they decided to omit so many gospels and such? Doesn’t that seem a bit odd? To me, it’d be like a book of US history that omited the Civil War or Vietnam.
There are ZERO gospels written by any apostle that are omitted.
I repeat. The King James did nothing more than translate Greek texts that already were in existence far before these scholars sat down to do their translating job.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.