I don't believe in the bible. I do not believe it is the word of God. I do not believe that Jesus is my savior, or that the only way to have a decent afterlife is to believe that he died for my sins. However, I do believe that the bible is a very interesting book. It is not a history book, but it is a part of history. It was the first book to be mass distributed, and it still is a mystery to many people.
What truly fascinates me the most about the bible, though, is not the KJV that can be bought in any bookstore. It's the books that were taken out.
Like the Book of Enoch, for example. Why was this book taken out? In the book I just got for Christmas, Banned from the Bible: Books Banned, Rejected, and Forbidden, there's an introduction to the Book of Enoch that says, "It is hard to avoid the evidence that Jesus not only studied the book, but also respected it highly enough to allude to its doctrine and content."
So, what you're telling me is that the book was good enough for your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, but it's not good enough for modern-day Christians to put in their bibles?? What kind of sense does that make?!? That makes me want to read these banned books even more because it makes them more interesting.
The introduction also talks about.... wait for it..... MISTRANSLATIONS! You know, those things I keep going on and on about? People keep saying that the bible is the inerrant word of God, even though MEN, not GOD took out all these books, then translated the ones that were left (and would become the bible that so many people have right now in their living rooms) over and over and over again. Some of the things were mistranslated on purpose. The mistranslation that my book talks about is in Luke. The book says, "Other evidence of the early Christians' acceptance of the Book of Enoch was for many years buried under the King James Bible's mistranslation of Luke 9:35, describing the transfiguration of Christ: 'And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, "This is my beloved Son. Hear him."' Apparently the translator here wished to make this verse agree with a similar verse in Matthew and Mark. But Luke's verse in the original Greek reads: This is my Son, the Elect One (from the Greek ho eklelegmenos, lit., This is mine, the elect one. Hear him.)"
So, you mean that the King James Version of the bible is really just the version that was changed to match the beliefs they already had at the time, rather than an actual, accurate, direct translation the way "God" intended everyone to read it? YEP! The King James Version of the bible is the version he liked the best. They changed things on purpose, they took books out (even the books that Jesus himself approved of!!!!!), and they altered it so much that no one in their right mind could possibly say that it is the INERRANT word of GOD. It's full of errors! That is a FACT. It's not my opinion, and it's not something I'm making up to piss people off. It is a verifiable FACT.
No amount of BELIEF can make these things wrong. That's why they're called facts. You can believe all you want that grass is purple. You can sing, "THE GRASS IS PURPLE" from every rooftop in the world, and write it down in books and even have a following of millions of other people that are convinced that grass is purple. But the FACT still remains that grass is green, and nothing you believe will change that fact.
The same goes for the bible. You can believe all you want that it's the inerrant word of God, but that will never change the fact that it's not.
It was written, and edited by MEN. It was written by men to give people inspiration and hope, and to help other people be good people, but it is not perfect. It has helped people, it has saved people, but does it read exactly the way it did when it was first written? Nope.
I'm very much looking forward to reading the banned books to see what exactly could be good enough for Jesus himself, but not good enough for the people who believe he is their savior.
No comments:
Post a Comment