[sine_nomine]

Typical moron journalism.

Thousands of minor copying errors do exist, which we would expect with people manually copying the text over many years. No doctrine comes into question because the agreement is about 99% and the copying errors are easily spotted.

The tradition of copying the Old Testament in Hebrew includes counting every letter to make sure it is letter perfect.

The Bible is the most precise ancient book with the earliest manuscripts of all.

[canuck_conservative]

From what I've heard, there was NO contemporary account of Christ's words - the earliest New Testament Gospel was written about 100 years after his death (presumably passed down orally until then - and we all know the problem about passing stories ...)


Yes? No?

[fishtank]

Just don't pick up the Living 'bible' or "The Message" "bible".

Neither of those are true Bibles. They are unreliable and inacurrate.

[GiovannaNicoletta]

Isn't it just the strangest thing that we're being told that the Holy Scriptures, which God said was inspired by Him and written by holy men of God as they were guided by the Holy Spirit, are fill of mistakes and lies and we're now finding out that the true Scriptures bear an amazing resemblence to leftist, Godless, ideology?

[taxcontrol]

It all depends on your perception of doctrine vs dogma. Take the example above. If you are are a fundamentalist, you are likely to take Paul's teachings as doctrine, not dogma. A change in the original copying say change from "quiet" to "silent" would impact your interpretation.

Not that I'm siding with either argument, just showing how a small change can alter one's perception.

[kstewskis]

Even though the Church had settled on which texts to use, it had trouble making true copies of them. Almost nobody could read and write very well. Even village scribes could barely comprehend what they were writing.

Typical moron journalism.

I laughed out loud when I read this, and said "this came from a "journalist?"

I agree!

[altura]

So what else is new?

In my Bible class everyone has a different Bible. Someone even has that big, black floppy one with the red letters...you know the one Jesus (and Clinton) carried around.

But, they kinda all say the same thing.

[Skooz]

The Bible is the most precise ancient book with the earliest manuscripts of all.

Exactly.

[The_Reader_David]

Actually the really moronic part is that most of the errors in modern translations result from the protestant rationalist enthusiasm for a hypothetical ur-text, and the consequent questioning of the Scriptures as received by the Church and prayed by Her for centuries whenever a new manuscript is unearthed (whether a piece of rank heresy like the 'Gospel of Judas', or an old fragmenantary parchment of one of the canonical books).

The LXX and the Byzantine Majority Text are the Scriptures of the Church, period, and there is no dispute as to their content or the original Greek text.

[bannie]

I believe that King James mulled it around in his own fashion.

(Waits for the flames...)

[Donald Meaker]

On the other hand, the fact that the "Holy Spirit" doesn not guide people making copies or translations of the scripture is fair to middling proof that that G-d does not exist.

Like, can't He pick up a phone and call?