Random The Original Bible Is Drastically Different From Version You Grew Up With (14 items)

• 

  (#7) We Should Probably Throw Luke Out Since It's Such A Pieced-Together Amalgamation

  Though there's no book in the Bible that hasn't been severely edited, there may not be one that's as inconsistent in its revisions as Luke. Today, we know Luke is actually an amalgamation of the Western and the Alexandrian versions of the text. To further complicate matters, a third version of Luke exists that was written by a 2nd-century heretic who made his own version of Luke that somehow got mixed into the scripture.
• 

  (#12) Mark Blends The Greatest Hits Of Other Stories To Create A Cohesive Narrative About Jesus

  Up until the early 20th century, Mark was considered to be the most historically accurate version of the events of Jesus' life, but between 1901 and 1919, two different historians, William Wrede and Karl Ludwig Schmidt, showed that Mark was a theological construct that had been rebuilt with variant verses to form the best theological version of events.

  One of the biggest clues that the story was too good to be true was the idea that so many of Jesus' classic stories could be tied together in such a clean narrative. Biblical historians prior to the 20th century either ignored this fact or they simply didn't want to recognize that the story had been heavily altered and edited after its initial writing in order to tell a more coherent story. 
• 

  (#8) The Non-Confrontational Jesus In The Gospel Of John Was Probably Added Later

  Whether you're a believer or not, you probably know the phrase, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." It's one of Jesus' most quoted lines. But are those his words? In 2007, when studying New Testament manuscripts, Dallas Theological Seminary professor Daniel Wallace noticed that the memorable story of Jesus defending an adulterous woman was missing from the earliest and most reliable manuscripts. Many Bible scholars agree that these verses (usually found in John 7:53-8:11) are not original to John's Gospel. Those words were added sometime around the 5th century.

  There is debate as to whether this story should still be considered Scripture at all. On one hand, all of the stories about Jesus began orally, and this story could have actually occurred only to be written down much later. On the other hand, this story causes problems for scholars trying to draw the line between what should be considered canonical text and what shouldn't. 
• 

  (#5) No One Can Make Up Their Mind About Tobit

  Of all the books that have been edited out of the Old Testament, the Book of Tobit stands out for the tale it tells. Initially, this story of a marriage that helped capture a demon was left out of the Biblical canon because of its late authorship. Recently, however, scholars have its omission was because Raguel, the bride's father, wrote the story's marriage document instead of the bridegroom, as was required by Jewish rabbinical law.

  It's worth noting that the Midrash Bereishit Rabbah, a commentary on the book of Genesis written around 400 CE, contains a summary of the Book of Tobit—so it's not like no one knew about this book until they read it in the Dead Sea Scrolls. 
• 

  (#14) The 2011 New International Version Went Gender Neutral With Its Pronouns

  In 2011, the New International Version Bible began working more gender neutral pronouns into the text in order to create a more all-encompassing version of the story without all of those pesky hes, shes, hims, and hers.

  There were some people who really hate the idea of the Bible being gender neutral. The president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (basically the least gender neutral group ever) told the NY Daily News, "Evangelicals believe in the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture. We believe every word is inspired by God, not just the broad thought." 
• 

  (#1) The Gospel Of Mary Of Magdala Doesn't Fit With The Rest Of The Bible, So It Doesn't Get Included

  The Gospel of Mary Magdalene is an apocryphal text that Biblical scholars really don't want to include in the Bible—not because it was written in the 2nd or 3rd century (plenty of books in the Biblical canon weren't even finished until the 2nd century), but because it offers a different take on spiritualism than the rest of the books.

  In this book, Mary describes a discussion she has with Jesus and the disciples where Jesus explains that people have a spirit, a mind, and a second spirit that connects them with God. Many Biblical scholars believe that by adding this book to the Bible, the message of the book would be convoluted with conflicting philosophies that would teach people to find an inner harmony, rather than only to seek salvation from a higher power. 

New Random Displays    Display All By Ranking