Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 1 decade ago

is that true the Bible has been edited for purposes very evil?

for example some bibles.. add the Bible homosexuals.. to some texts.. when in the old versions the word homosexual cannot be found... and many translations include words like : virgin instead of young woman in isaiah.. ect..

10 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Yes. The Bible has been edited for some very not nice purposes. Things a Loving Being would never say.

    Source(s): Above average spiritual education
  • 1 decade ago

    maybe the word can be translated as homosexual. Do you think that specific word even existed 2,000 years ago?

    Also concerning Isaiah, the scripture says

    Isaiah 7:14

    Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

    If the word were young woman, how would a "young woman" with child be a sign from God. Over history hasn't there been over a billion young women with child? No miracle, no sign in that at all. ....but a virgin with child, now that is a sign! What is more the word can be translated as virgin.

    All the above being said... I wonder who's the one with the evil purposes. The Word of God stand true.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Some of the modern translations appear to have nefarious purposes. People are forever trying to put words into Father God's mouth that He never spoke.

    BTW - The mostly reliable KJV is clear in that a homo is a homo.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes. The eleventh commandment was "Be excellent to each other" but someone thought it was going too far and erased it. Fortunately, God produced an 80's comedy-adventure movie that brought the concept back to humanity. Thank you, Saint Bill and Saint Ted!

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The Catholic Encyclopedia states Bible is Skeptic and Concocted


    The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history. The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council. ("Canon of the New Testament")

    There is a lot of confusion about the earliest existing texts of the Bible. The oldest extant manuscript of the Bible is believed to be the Codex Vaticanus, (preserved in the Vatican Library), which is slightly older than the Codex Sinaiticus (preserved in the British Library), both of which were transcribed in the fourth century.

    As for the story of Jesus, there were at least 50 gospels written in the first and second century CE. Four of them (Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John) were included in the official canon during the fourth century CE and are found today in every Bible. All of the original copies of the gospels were lost. What we have now are handwritten copies, which are an unknown number of replications removed from the originals.

    Rudolf Bultmann, a prominent 20th-century professor of New Testament studies writes about the life of Jesus:

    We can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus, since the early Christian sources show no interest in either, are moreover fragmentary and often legendary; and other sources about Jesus do not exist. (Bultmann 8)

    Why Word Inspired by God (Bible) has three genealogies of Jesus pbuh.

    How could the "inspired words" of God get the genealogy of Jesus incorrect (See Matthew 1:6-16 where it states 26 forefathers up to Prophet David, and Luke 3:23-31 says 41 in number). Or for that matter, give a genealogy to Jesus who had NO father?

    There is difference of centuries between II Kings 19:1-37 and Isaiah 37:1-38.Why both has same verses.

    See II Kings 19:1-37, now read Isaiah 37:1-38. Why is it that the words of these verse are identical? Yet they have been attributed SAME WORDS to two different authors, one unknown and the other is Isaiah, who are centuries apart; and yet, the Christians have claimed these books to be inspired by God.

    What is According to:

    Christians boast about the Gospels according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke and according to John. However, if we think about it, there is not a single Gospel according to Jesus himself. According to the preface of the KJV (King James Version) new open Bible study edition, the word "Gospel" was added (see below) to the original titles, "According to John, according to Matthew, according to Luke and according to Mark." Incidentally, why does every "Gospel" begin with the introduction According to. Why "according to?" the reason for this is because not a single one of the gospels carries its original author’s autograph!

    Luke never met Jesus pbuh, Is the gospel of Luke really a hearsay.

    If you read Luke 1:2-3, you will learn, as I did, that Luke (who was not one of the 12 disciples and never met Jesus) said that he himself was not an eyewitness, and the knowledge he gathered was from eyewitnesses, and not as words inspired by God. Incidentally, why does every "Gospel" begin with the introduction According to. Why "according to?" the reason for this is because not a single one of the gospels carries its original author’s autograph!

    Was ‘Gospel according to Matthew’ was not written by Matthew, according to Bible?

    Matthew 9:9 proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name:

    "And as Jesus passed forth thence, He (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and He (Jesus) saith unto Him (Matthew), follow me (Jesus). And he (Matthew) arose, and followed Him (Jesus)." Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the He’s and the Him’s of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but a third person writing what he saw or heard - a hearsay account and not words inspired by God.

  • 1 decade ago

    Interesting. I've never thought of that before. I always thought the King James Version was THE book.

  • rona
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Peace be upon you

    to edit anything from what the God said ,it is a great mistake.

    what the God say , is suitable to everyplace and everytime and to everyone.

    But the God promised to keep his last book and protect it ,to be our corriculum in life.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It has been hacked and slaughtered. There are more mistakes in the NT than there are words. Really.

  • 1 decade ago

    umm yeah, obviously wake up people

  • 1 decade ago


Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.