Have you ever played the children’s game of telephone? A chain of people quickly whisper a message from one person to the next. By the time the message reaches the last person, it has often transformed into something almost unrecognizable from the original.
The game is fun when the message doesn’t matter, but what if a person’s eternal destiny relied on the message? Could the message of the Bible have been distorted through a copying process that produced the same effect as a game of telephone? New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman thinks so, and his diagnosis is grim:
Not only do we not have the originals, we don’t have the first copies of the originals, we don’t even have the copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. What we have are copies made later—much later. In most instances they are copies made many centuries later. And these copies all differ from one another in many thousands of places . . . possibly it is easiest to put it in comparative terms: there are more differences among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament (Misquoting Jesus, 10).
Ehrman iscorrect that we no longer possess the original manuscripts of the Bible. For example, we do not have the original scroll on which Paul wrote his letter to the Galatians. In fact, we don’t have any of the original copies of any of the books and letters in the Bible. This may seem worrisome; but keep in mind that we do not possess the original manuscripts for any work that was composed in the ancient world. We do not possess Plato’s original Republic. We do not possess the original Jewish histories of Josephus, the Roman histories of Tacitus, or the Greek histories of Thucydides. Those books were written on leaves or animal skins that were lost or destroyed or that simply decayed over time.
Fortunately, modern scholars can reconstruct a document’s original manuscript by comparing all of its surviving copies. This method of reconstructing an original text by examining its copies is called textual criticism. How does it work?
Aunt Mildred’s recipe
Imagine your Aunt Mildred showed you the recipe for her delicious chocolate chip cookies while you were visiting her cabin up in the mountains. Since the cabin has no electricity (and hence no scanner or computer), you make a handwritten copy of the recipe. Perhaps a few weeks later you bake Mildred’s cookies for a dinner party, and now your guests are begging you for the recipe. You oblige them by quickly copying the recipe, which you had affixed to the refrigerator.
Now imagine fifty years have passed, and someone wants to find out what the exact ingredients were in Aunt Mildred’s original secret recipe. Unfortunately, Aunt Mildred died several decades earlier, and her cabin where the original recipe was kept was destroyed by fire.
Even so, the original recipe isn’t really lost; there are lots of copies of it with Mildred’s family members. These copies include ones you gave away and copies Mildred sent to her other nieces and nephews. Of course, some of the recipes differ slightly. Maybe Uncle Bob was lactose-intolerant and left the milk out of his recipe. Maybe cousin Susie spelled vanilla with one “l.” But if you have enough copies of the original recipe, it’s easy enough to sift through the minor differences in each copy and reconstruct the original.
What works for Mildred’s recipe also works for books written in the ancient world. As long as we have enough copies, we can compare them and reconstruct the original manuscripts. For example, we do not have any of Plato’s original writings, but we do have more than 250 ancient manuscripts that help us reconstruct what Plato wrote.
For other ancient works we only have a handful of manuscripts, or even a single copy that was produced centuries or even millennia after the original. But this does not deter scholars from studying these writings and, at the very least, it does not deter them from knowing what the original texts said.
Copy for God in the highest
What makes the New Testament unique from all other ancient works is the sheer number of copies we have and the reverence people paid to these copies.
We have more than 5,500 copies of New Testament manuscripts written in the Greek language and 15,000 manuscripts written in languages such as Latin, Coptic, and Syriac. Fifty of the Greek manuscripts can be dated to within 250 years of the original copies. The first complete copy of the New Testament, called Codex Sinaiticus (because it was discovered in a monastery at the foot of Mount Sinai), can be dated to within three hundred years of the original documents.
Compare this to Homer’s Iliad, which was written in the eight century B.C. While a few fragments can be dated to within five hundred years of Homer, the oldest complete copy of the Iliad was written in the tenth century, or 1,800 years later! Biblical scholar F. F. Bruce puts it bluntly: “There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament” (The Books and the Parchments, 78).
The reason we have so many copies of the New Testament is that as new Church communities sprang up in Europe and Asia, they would desire a copy of the scriptures. Remember that during this time Christianity was illegal in the Roman Empire. Christians called scribes who copied the New Testament were willing to endure monotonous hours of writing by hand and the risk of a painful death if they were discovered, just so others could have a copy of the new scriptures. As modern Christians we should feel spoiled each time we encounter a free Bible in a hotel room or on the Internet.
While many of these copies of Scripture have been lost, others survived due in large part to the idea that scribal copying was a way to glorify God. In the sixth century the monk Cassiodorus, a contemporary of St. Benedict, said, “What happy application, what praiseworthy industry, to preach unto men by means of the hand, to untie the tongue by means of the fingers, to bring quiet salvation to mortals, and to fight the Devil’s insidious wiles with pen and ink!” You may have thought nothing of taking liberties while copying Aunt Mildred’s recipe, but these scribes saw it as their sacred duty before God to make sure their copies of the New Testament were as accurate as possible.
The Fathers’ trustworthiness
Along with the faithfulness of scribes, we also have the testimony of Church Fathers who glorified God by teaching and commenting on the Bible. Even though the biblical manuscripts the Fathers consulted no longer exist, they have survived as quotations in the Fathers’ commentaries on Scripture.
Ehrman admits the writings of the Church Fathers are a rich resource for textual critics: “So extensive are these citations that if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New Testament” (Metzger and Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 126).
The huge combined number of ancient manuscripts and quotations in the writings of Church Fathers helps disprove a common misconception about the Bible. Some popular writers, such as Dan Brown in his novel The Da Vinci Code, assert that the Church hid the “truth” about Jesus by destroying all the early copies of the Gospels and replacing them with ones that reflected their man-made doctrines. The problem with this theory is that no one person or group was ever in a position to gather up all of the manuscripts and change them. The fact that we’ve discovered only fifty manuscripts from the first few centuries is strong evidence that there were hundreds more in circulation at that time that have been lost.
Furthermore, Christians who had heard the traditional readings their entire life would have vigorously challenged change to the biblical text. St. Augustine told St. Jerome that the people of Tripoli rioted in the streets because Jerome’s new translation of the book of Jonah was unfamiliar. Imagine what these people would have done if a completely new story about Christ were presented to them!
Scribal appreciation day
“Okay, maybe the Bible wasn’t changed as part of some elaborate conspiracy,” says the critic. “But it was changed unintentionally as scribes introduced errors into the texts as they copied them.” Given the circumstances in which the ancient scribes labored, it’s understandable how errors could have crept into the copying process, despite a scribe’s diligence.
For example, the ancient scribes would sit not at a desk but with their writing material—usually dried leaves or animal skins—in their laps. Scribes often complained about how work that involved only “three fingers” put their entire bodies in pain due to being hunched over their labors for hours at a time.
There were also hazards that accompanied whatever copying method a scribe might use. If the text was read aloud to him, a scribe might miss something that was said due to a distraction in the room (like someone coughing). Or he might write down the wrong word if two words sounded the same. On the other hand, if he was copying by reading, he would look away to dip his quill in ink before returning to the page, and his eyes might return to the wrong word, either missing text or duplicating it.
Even today, in air-conditioned, well-lit office buildings, we make mistakes when we copy documents. Now, imagine the challenges a scribe faced as he worked in secret under the flickering light of an oil lantern, without reading glasses or climate control. Sometimes scribes’ inkwells would freeze solid (along with their fingers!). If the scribe made a mistake on a scroll, he would have to start over if he could not correct the mistake in the margin of his writing material. It’s no wonder that scribes sometimes finished their manuscripts with the line, “The end of the book. Thanks be to God!”
Variants: much ado about nothing
When we understand how difficult scribal work was, it’s easy to see how variants crept into New Testament manuscripts. It’s true, as Ehrman says, that “there are more differences among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.” Scholars believe there are about 200,000 to 400,000 differences between all the extant New Testament manuscripts and, like snowflakes, no two manuscripts are exactly alike (Misquoting Jesus, 89). That sounds like an imposing obstacle to reconstructing an accurate New Testament—until we realize there are so many variants in the manuscripts because there are so many manuscripts.
For example, if each of the 20,000 manuscripts we possess has twenty variants, that adds up to an imposing 400,000 variants. But if this huge number of variants is distributed across a huge number of manuscripts, we are left with thousands of manuscripts each of which contains only a few dozen variants.
In contrast to the New Testament, consider the first six books of the annals of the Roman historian Tacitus, collectively one of our primary sources of information about ancient Rome. We have only one copy of the text, and it was written 1,000 years after the original. There are no variants because there are no other copies from which the text can vary! But this is actually a bad thing, because we have no way to check if this manuscript represents what Tacitus originally wrote.
A New Testament with many variants distributed across many manuscripts is actually more reliable than a New Testament with few variants distributed across a few manuscripts—especially since the variants between the manuscripts are almost always trivial. For example, a misspelled name or word can be easily corrected by anyone who knows there’s only one “n” in John. Other times the context makes the correct reading clear, as in 1 Thessalonians 2:7, where Paul says, “But we were gentle among you, like a nurse taking care of her children.” Earlier manuscripts misspell nepioi, the Greek word for “gentle,” and render it hippoi, which changes the passage to read, “But we were horses among you.” This is no doubt a scribal error, and any competent critic would not be confused as to what the original text said—provided he had not been raised by kindly horses.
A textual variant could also arise from the order of the words in a passage. What reads “Christ Jesus” in one manuscript might read “Jesus Christ” in another. This is counted as a variant, but it doesn’t change the original text’s meaning in the slightest. In languages like ancient Greek, the location of the words within a sentence doesn’t matter as much as it does in English. The phrase “Jesus loves Peter” and the phrase “Peter loves Jesus” have two different meanings in English. But in Greek the meaning of a sentence can remain the same even if the word order is switched. That’s because the indicator of which word is the subject and which word is the direct object is typically found in the spelling of the word, not in the word’s location within the sentence. This is just one of the ways that ancient manuscripts can differ but still possess the exact same meaning.
When meaning matters
When these minor variants are corrected, we see that there are not 400,000 variants of the New Testament that change what the text means. The United Bible Societies fourth edition of the Greek New Testament is the premier version used in modern translations, and it lists about 1,200 disputed passages that are relevant to translating the text. However, most Bible translations note only 200 to 300 of the most important of these variants, usually in a footnote at the bottom of the page or in brackets within the text itself. You’ve probably come across these and dismissed them as academic minutiae.
For example, in some manuscripts Jesus says in Matthew 11:23 that Capernaum will be brought down to Hades, while in other manuscripts he says Capernaum will be driven down to Hades. In some manuscripts Paul says in 1 Corinthians 1:4, “I thank God always for you,” while in others he says, “I thank my God always for you.” While it’s true these are variants, it’s more accurate to call them differences without a distinction. The vast majority of these variants don’t change the meaning of the sacred text and should not cause us to doubt what the original authors intended to communicate.
Even in cases where a difference could alter meaning, we can see which tradition behind the variants is stronger and, as a result, determine which variant is more closely related to the original text. For example, when Luke 3:22 describes what the Father says at Jesus’ baptism, the text can be rendered, “You are my beloved son; with you I am well pleased”; or it can be rendered, “You are my beloved son; today I have begotten you.” The latter rendering would seem to support the view that the Son of God was begotten on Earth and that the Father did not eternally beget him. However, there is only one Latin manuscript from the sixth century that contains the second rendering, while every other manuscript—including the early Greek ones—has the traditional rendering. This gives us good reason to accept the traditional rendering of Luke 3:22.
Most of the several hundred variants that remain in the biblical texts involve similarly minor issues. As New Testament critic Craig Blomberg says in his 2014 book on the reliability of the Bible:
Only about a tenth of 1 percent [of the variants] are interesting enough to make their way into footnotes in most English translations. It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that no orthodox doctrine or ethical practice of Christianity depends solely on any disputed wording [emphasis in the original]. There are always undisputed passages one can consult that teach the same truths. Tellingly, in the appendix to the paperback edition of Misquoting Jesus, Ehrman himself concedes that “essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.” It is too bad that this admission appears in an appendix and comes only after repeated criticism! (Can We Still Believe in the Bible?, 27-28).
The final verdict
The New Testament far surpasses all other ancient literature in both the quantity and quality of manuscript evidence. People who say we can’t trust the Bible because it was written a long time ago would also have to believe that we can’t trust ancient works that describe Socrates, Julius Caesar, Caesar Augustus, or any other figure in ancient history. If these critics are willing to trust the texts we have about these people, despite the fact that the originals were written thousands of years ago and lost, they should be willing to place that same trust in the better-attested records of the Bible.
How much of the Bible was changed? ›
Over 30,000 changes were made, of which more than 5,000 represent differences between the Greek text used for the Revised Version and that used as the basis of the King James Version. Most of the other changes were made in the interest of consistency or modernization.Which version of the Bible is the original? ›
King James Version (KJV), also called Authorized Version or King James Bible, English translation of the Bible, published in 1611 under the auspices of King James I of England.Who decided which books to include in the Bible? ›
Eventually, the question was taken up by Church councils. At the Council of Hippo, held in north Africa in AD 393, a group of church leaders recognized a list of books that they believed to be scripture. Later, the Council of Carthage affirmed that decision in AD 397.What's the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament? ›
Together the Old Testament and the New Testament make up the Holy Bible. The Old Testament contains the sacred scriptures of the Jewish faith, while Christianity draws on both Old and New Testaments, interpreting the New Testament as the fulfilment of the prophecies of the Old.How accurate is the Bible? ›
Modern archaeology has helped us realize that the Bible is historically accurate even in the smallest of details. There have been thousands of archaeological discoveries in the past century that support every book of the Bible.Has the church changed the Bible? ›
Catholic bibles, however, have not varied since the original canon was approved at the Council of Hippo in 397 AD. The Catholic Church re-affirmed this canon at the Council of Trent in 1546 (in defense against Luther's cries to reorganize the Bible) and it has not varied since.Who destroyed the original Bible? ›
In A.D. 301-304, the Roman Emperor Diocletian burned thousands of copies of the Bible, commanded that all Bibles be destroyed and decreed that any home with a Bible in it should be burned. In fact, he even built a monument over what he thought was the last surviving Bible.Is the King James Bible the original? ›
|King James Version|
|Online as||King James Version at Wikisource|
That single author was believed to be Moses, the Hebrew prophet who led the Israelites out of captivity in Egypt and guided them across the Red Sea toward the Promised Land.Who removed books from the Bible? ›
One of them state that, under the evil claws of the Pope and his bishops, in 1684, the Bible was altered significantly. The Catholic Church removed fourteen books which collided with its doctrine, and hid them from public view.
Who came up with the stories in the Bible? ›
Scholars now believe that the stories that would become the Bible were disseminated by word of mouth across the centuries, in the form of oral tales and poetry – perhaps as a means of forging a collective identity among the tribes of Israel. Eventually, these stories were collated and written down.Why was the Book of Enoch left out of the Bible? ›
The Book of Enoch was considered as scripture in the Epistle of Barnabas (4:3) and by many of the early Church Fathers, such as Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus and Tertullian, who wrote c. 200 that the Book of Enoch had been rejected by the Jews because it contained prophecies pertaining to Christ.Why do we not follow the laws of the Old Testament? ›
Because the great salvation of Old Testament that these outward laws represent has been surpassed by the greater salvation of Jesus Christ. Why do we keep the laws regarding holiness, sexual immorality, adultery, idol worship, theft and covetousness?Did God change between the Old and New Testament? ›
So rather than seeing the God of the Old Testament vs New Testament as separate, the truth is that God has not changed (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17).Who divided the Bible into Old and New Testament? ›
Archbishop Stephen Langton and Cardinal Hugo de Sancto Caro developed different schemas for systematic division of the Bible in the early 13th century. It is the system of Archbishop Langton on which the modern chapter divisions are based.How many contradictions are in the Bible? ›
And in 1860, William Henry Burr produced a list of 144 self-contradictions in the Bible.Is the Bible historically proven? ›
The early stories are held to have a historical basis that was reconstructed centuries later, and the stories possess at most only a few tiny fragments of genuine historical memory, which by their definition are only those points which are supported by archaeological discoveries.Why can we trust the Bible? ›
One of the main reasons we have so much knowledge about the reliability of the Bible is that the texts have been put to so much critical study. Rather than backing down on such an endeavor, it has been Christians who have been at the forefront of textual criticism, testing to see if these things were true.When was the Bible forbidden? ›
At the Second Council of Tarragona (Conventus Tarraconensis) in 1234, the Spanish bishops, according to a decree of King James I of Aragon, declared that it was forbidden to anyone, to own a translation of the Bible.What books did the Catholic church add to the Bible? ›
Did you know that the Catholic Bible contains seven books that are not included in the Protestant Bible? These special books of the Bible—Sirach, Wisdom, Tobit, 1 Maccabees, Judith, additions to Daniel, and Esther—contain harrowing stories of family, resurrection, and prayer.
What Bible did Jesus read? ›
He would have been familiar with a popular Greek translation of Hebrew Scripture commonly known as the Septuagint, which had already been around for a long time, as well as other Greek and even some Aramaic translations.Which president rewrote the Bible? ›
Thomas Jefferson was known as an inventor and tinkerer. But this time he was tinkering with something held sacred by hundreds of millions of people: the Bible. Using his clippings, the aging third president created a New Testament of his own—one that most Christians would hardly recognize.Is the original Bible lost? ›
The original manuscripts of the New Testament books are not known to have survived. The autographs are believed to have been lost or destroyed a long time ago. What survives are copies of the original.Who went against God in the Bible? ›
Satan and his angels rebelled against God in heaven, and proudly presumed to try their strength with his.What did King James removed from the Bible? ›
Since that time most modern editions of the Bible and reprintings of the King James Bible omit the Apocrypha section.Who put together the King James Bible? ›
One individual—Richard Bancroft, the archbishop of Canterbury—was notable for having the role of overseer of the project, something akin to a modern editor of a collection of short stories. The actual translating (writing) of the KJV was done by a committee of 47 scholars and clergymen over the course of many years.What Bible came before King James Bible? ›
The Geneva Bible is one of the most historically significant translations of the Bible into English, preceding the King James Version by 51 years. It was the primary Bible of 16th-century English Protestantism and was used by William Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, John Donne, and others.What language did Jesus speak? ›
Most religious scholars and historians agree with Pope Francis that the historical Jesus principally spoke a Galilean dialect of Aramaic. Through trade, invasions and conquest, the Aramaic language had spread far afield by the 7th century B.C., and would become the lingua franca in much of the Middle East.Who created the God? ›
We ask, "If all things have a creator, then who created God?" Actually, only created things have a creator, so it's improper to lump God with his creation. God has revealed himself to us in the Bible as having always existed.Did God or Jesus write the Bible? ›
The Bible's origin is both human and divine—not just from God and not just from humans. The Bible's narratives, poems, histories, letters, prophecies, and other writings come from a profound collaboration between humanity and God.
Is the first book of Adam and Eve real? ›
The "Pseudepigrapha" is a collection of historical biblical works that are considered to be fiction. Because of that stigma, this book was not included in the compilation of the Holy Bible. This book is a written history of what happened in the days of Adam and Eve after they were cast out of the garden.What are the 3 lost books of the Bible? ›
- The Book of Enoch.
- The Protevangelion.
- The Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ.
- The Infancy Gospel of Thomas.
- The Epistles of Jesus Christ and Abgarus King of Edessa.
- The Gospel of Nicodemus (Acts of Pilate)
- The Apostles' Creed (throughout history)
Roman Catholic Christians who believe in purgatory interpret passages such as 2 Maccabees 12:41–46, 2 Timothy 1:18, Matthew 12:32, Luke 23:43, 1 Corinthians 3:11–3:15 and Hebrews 12:29 as support for prayer for purgatorial souls who are believed to be within an active interim state for the dead undergoing purifying ...What religion was Jesus? ›
Of course, Jesus was a Jew. He was born of a Jewish mother, in Galilee, a Jewish part of the world. All of his friends, associates, colleagues, disciples, all of them were Jews. He regularly worshipped in Jewish communal worship, what we call synagogues.Where did God come from in the Bible? ›
I directed his attention to a similar Scripture at Deuteronomy 33:2 which states in part: “The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from Mount Paran.” — KJV. I tactfully pointed out that while Habakkuk 3:3 speaks of God coming from Teman, Moses wrote that God came from Sinai.How many years did it take to complete the Bible? ›
The Bible is a collection of writings from approximately forty separate authors, written on three separate continents, comprised in three separate languages, and was compiled over the span of an estimated 1,500–1,600 years.What do the Dead Sea Scrolls prove? ›
The Dead Sea Scrolls have been recognized for generations as one of the most convincing methods of proof of Jesus' existence, both historically and theologically. Because they date back so closely to the time of Christ, they are all the more solidified as honest records of the Hebrew Bible.What are the 14 missing books of the Bible? ›
This book contains: 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, The Book of Tobit, The Book of Susanna, Additions to Esther, The Book of Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, The Epistle of Jeremiah, The Prayer of Azariah, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasses, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, Gospel of ...Why was Enoch taken by God? ›
According to Rashi [from Genesis Rabbah], "Enoch was a righteous man, but he could easily be swayed to return to do evil. Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, hastened and took him away and caused him to die before his time.What did Jesus say about the Old Testament laws? ›
For instance, Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished” (Matthew 5:17–19).
What did Jesus say about Old Testament? ›
See how Jesus said it in Hebrews 8:6-13 and Matthew 9:16-17. In Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.Did Jesus break the Old Testament law? ›
James 2:10 says whoever stumbles at one point of the law is guilty of breaking it all, which means Jesus did not break any Old Testament laws.Has the Bible changed over time? ›
The Bible is the holy scripture of the Christian religion, purporting to tell the history of the Earth from its earliest creation to the spread of Christianity in the first century A.D. Both the Old Testament and the New Testament have undergone changes over the centuries, including the the publication of the King ...How many times has the New Testament been changed? ›
The revisers were charged with introducing alterations only if they were deemed necessary to be more accurate and faithful to the Original Greek and Hebrew texts. In the New Testament alone more than 30,000 changes were made, over 5,000 on the basis of what were considered better Greek manuscripts.
Why Does God Get Angry? In the Bible God gets angry at human violence. He gets angry at powerful leaders who oppress other humans. And the thing that makes God more angry than anything else in the Bible is Israel's constant covenant betrayal.Who decided the Old Testament? ›
Eventually, the question was taken up by Church councils. At the Council of Hippo, held in north Africa in AD 393, a group of church leaders recognized a list of books that they believed to be scripture. Later, the Council of Carthage affirmed that decision in AD 397.Why are there two parts of the Bible? ›
The Christian Bible has two sections, the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament is the original Hebrew Bible, the sacred scriptures of the Jewish faith, written at different times between about 1200 and 165 BC. The New Testament books were written by Christians in the first century AD.What was the Bible before the New Testament? ›
They had the Scriptures of Judaism – what is now called the Old Testament – but they had no writings of their own until Paul started to write to the churches he had founded, some time in the 50s AD, a couple of decades after the crucifixion of Jesus.Has the King James Bible been changed? ›
A committee of over 50 English and American scholars was established and began meeting in 1871. The result was the publication in 1881 of the English Revised Version, or Revised Version, which was the first and remains the only officially authorized revision of the King James Bible.How many different versions of the Bible are there? ›
As of September 2022 all of the Bible has been translated into 724 languages, the New Testament has been translated into an additional 1,617 languages, and smaller portions of the Bible have been translated into 1,248 other languages according to Wycliffe Global Alliance.
Who wrote the original Bible? ›
That single author was believed to be Moses, the Hebrew prophet who led the Israelites out of captivity in Egypt and guided them across the Red Sea toward the Promised Land.What was taken out of the Bible? ›
- The Book of Enoch.
- The Protevangelion.
- The Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ.
- The Infancy Gospel of Thomas.
- The Epistles of Jesus Christ and Abgarus King of Edessa.
- The Gospel of Nicodemus (Acts of Pilate)
- The Apostles' Creed (throughout history)
- 1 Esdras (Vulgate 3 Esdras)
- 2 Esdras (Vulgate 4 Esdras)
- Judith ("Judeth" in Geneva)
- Rest of Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4 – 16:24)
- Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach)
- Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy ("Jeremiah" in Geneva) (all part of Vulgate Baruch)
In 1611, the new British state headed by King James I issued its translation of the complete Bible, "newly translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised. By His Majesty's special command.Which versions of the Bible are correct? ›
The New American Standard Bible is a literal translation from the original texts, well suited to study because of its accurate rendering of the source texts. It follows the style of the King James Version but uses modern English for words that have fallen out of use or changed their meanings.Is the King James Bible the most accurate? ›
Published in 1611, the King James Bible spread quickly throughout Europe. Because of the wealth of resources devoted to the project, it was the most faithful and scholarly translation to date—not to mention the most accessible.Who put together the first Bible? ›
Traditionally these books were considered to have been dictated to Moses by God himself. Since the 17th century, scholars have viewed the original sources as being the product of multiple anonymous authors while also allowing the possibility that Moses first assembled the separate sources.WHO removed the 7 books from the Bible? ›
However, in the 16th century, Martin Luther argued that many of the received texts of the New Testament lacked the authority of the Gospels, and therefore proposed removing a number of books from the New Testament, including Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation.What gospel was removed from the Bible? ›
Why was the Gospel of Judas not included in the Bible? There are other gospels that have been found over the last century that were not included -- among them, the Gospels of Thomas and Mary Magdalene. How different would the Bible be if they had been included, and why did some books make the cut while others didn't?