Is there any evidence that the bible has been changed by men over the years?

I believe it has but I`d like to know for sure from valid sources

20 Answers

  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Despite the care exercised by copyists of Bible manuscripts, a number of small scribal errors and alterations crept into the text. On the whole, these are insignificant and have no bearing on the Bible’s general integrity. They have been detected and corrected by means of careful scholastic collation or critical comparison of the many extant manuscripts and ancient versions available today. Critical study of the Hebrew text of the Scriptures commenced toward the end of the 18th century. Benjamin Kennicott published at Oxford (in 1776-1780) the readings of over 600 Masoretic Hebrew manuscripts, and the Italian scholar Giambernardo de Rossi published at Parma comparisons of 731 manuscripts in 1784 to 1798. Master texts of the Hebrew Scriptures were also produced by the German scholar Baer and, more recently, by C. D. Ginsburg. Hebrew scholar Rudolf Kittel released in 1906 the first edition of his Biblia Hebraica (The Hebrew Bible), providing therein a textual study through a footnote service, comparing many Hebrew manuscripts of the Masoretic text. The basic text he used was the Ben Hayim text. But, when the older and superior Ben Asher Masoretic texts became available, Kittel undertook the production of an entirely new third edition, which was completed by his colleagues after his death.

    Concerning the Christian Greek Scriptures, Sir Frederic Kenyon stated: “The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.”—The Bible and Archaeology, 1940, pp. 288, 289.

    Centuries ago, Jesus Christ, “the faithful and true witness” (Re 3:14), repeatedly and emphatically confirmed the genuineness of the Hebrew Scriptures, as did his apostles. (Lu 24:27, 44; Ro 15:4) Extant ancient versions, or translations, further bespeak the exactness of the preserved Hebrew Scriptures. Manuscripts and versions of the Christian Greek Scriptures bear unassailable testimony to the marvelous preservation and accurate transmission of that portion of God’s Word. We are therefore now favored with an authentic, thoroughly reliable Bible text. A thoughtful examination of preserved manuscripts of the Holy Scriptures bears eloquent testimony to their faithful preservation and permanence, giving added meaning to the inspired statement: “The green grass has dried up, the blossom has withered; but as for the word of our God, it will last to time indefinite.”—Isa 40:8; 1Pe 1:24, 25.

    An example of such an error that has been corrected:

    KJV reads: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”

    However, , textual critic F. H. A. Scrivener wrote: “We need not hesitate to declare our conviction that the disputed words were not written by St. John: that they were originally brought into Latin copies in Africa from the margin, where they had been placed as a pious and orthodox gloss on ver. 8: that from the Latin they crept into two or three late Greek codices, and thence into the printed Greek text, a place to which they had no rightful claim.”—A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (Cambridge, 1883, third ed.), p. 654.

    Source(s): References: Manuscripts of the bible Ancient Scribes and the Word of God The Complutensian Polyglot—A Historic Translation Tool View the oldest bible online (1600 years old) Copies of the dead sea scroll available to view or download on pdf (bottom of page)
  • 8 years ago

    Depends on what you mean by "changed". It has been translated hundreds of times over the centuries because languages are always and it has to be updated to keep it in understandable languages. But that is not a "change". It is a translation.

    The real question is did it use to say one thing and at some point people totally altered the wording, removing the original text and put in something that is completely different or even opposite of the original text. The answer to that is no.

    If you examine the New Testament, there are currently over 2,300 known copies of different books from the New Testament in the original language that date from the early years of the Christian faith. These are preserved by several different sources, including some that were not Christian. When these manuscripts are compared with each other, they agree with each other over 99.3% of the time word for word. Of the over 7000 lines of text that make up the New Testament, there are fewer than 40 lines about which there is any real debate about the original reading. Most of those are word order (Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus - as many manuscripts saved space by replacing both phrases with a single letter symbol) and alternative spellings of the same word. That many manuscripts in agree with each other is pretty solid proof that the text remained unchanged for the first 300 years of its existence.

    All translations since then are made from the text of these early manuscripts. One good thing about having so many translations all through history is that if someone were to alter the text it would be obvious because it would disagree with all the hundreds and thousands of earlier texts.

    The Old Testament was more difficult to support. The oldest known Hebrew (the original language) manuscript we had dated from the 11th century AD. Although we had Latin and Greek translations that date back to the 3rd and 4th century AD. The Hebrew Old Testament was completed about 450 BC, more than 700 years before the oldest manuscripts. So it was possible that the text had been altered.

    Then in the 1950s the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. This is a collection of hundreds of thousands of Hebrew manuscripts, many of them being Old Testament books, that date from 70 AD to as far back as 400 BC, within a generation of when the original books were completed. These books show that the text we have today are accurate and reliable. For example, there is a copy of Isaiah that appears to date from 400 BC (Isaiah lived in the 500s BC) that agrees with your text in all but five (separate from each other) words. Again, remarkable prove that the text of the Old Testament has been unchanged for over 2500 years.

    You may be able to debate how well the Bible has been translated over the centuries, there have been some good translations and some poor translations. You may be able to debate that some of the ways the Bible was translated has led to people developing some doctrines that are difficult to support from the original language. But you will have a difficult time debating that the Bible has been altered over the centuries. There are simply to many hundreds of thousands of surviving copies (both original language and translations) that show the text has remained the same.

  • NDMA
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    Yes there is evidence of revision. As Rod points out the Alexandrian gnostic texts show many revisions. But that is the catch 22. We know these are revisions because we can compare the early unrevised texts with the revised texts. Having the ability to compare the two makes us able to toss out the corrupted texts and hold on to the uncorrupted texts. As result of this process of comparing MSS and tossing out the obvious corrupted text we have good confidence our Bible closely replicates the original. On the other side of the discussion, if all texts were exactly the same, that could be because they were unchanged or because only the corrupted texts are the only ones that remain. Ironically the fact there are corrupted texts, and we can identify those texts results is us having an even higher level of confidence in the trustworthiness of the text.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Bible Versions

    American Standard 1901

    Amplified Bible

    Common English Bible

    Contemporary English Version

    English Standard Version

    Español Otra/Other Spanish

    Español Otra/Other Spanish

    God's Word

    Good News Translation

    Holman Christian Standard Bible

    Interlinear Bibles

    International Childrens Bible

    Jerusalem Bible

    King James Version

    La Biblia de las Americas

    New American Bible

    New American Standard

    New Century Version

    New International Readers Version

    New International Version

    New Jerusalem Bible

    New King James Version

    New Living Translation

    New Revised Standard

    Nueva Traducción Viviente

    Nueva Versión International

    Original Languages

    Other English Versions

    Other Languages

    Parallel Bibles

    Reina Valera 1909

    Reina Valera 1960

    Reina Valera 1979 Actualizada

    Reina Valera 1989

    Reina Valera 1995

    Revised English Bible

    Revised Standard Version


    The Living Bible

    The Message

    The Voice

    Today's English Version

    Today's New International

    Versión Popular

    Source(s): And a few more versions are currently in print. Did you want the out of print ones as well?
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • The Three Words for Hell

    Gehenna: The Garbage Dump

    Gehenna (translated as Hell) was the place outside of the old city of Jerusalem called the Valley of Hinnon where waste was dumped; not only trash and garbage were disposed of there, but also corpses of humans and animals were burnt in the dump. In translating the Bible, the word Gehenna has changed from the meaning of a garbage dump to that of Hell: a place of eternal torment where the souls of unbelievers go.

    Hades: The Grave

    The word Hades has been translated eleven times as Hell in the following verses, where they imply that it is a place of eternal torment. Instead of a place of eternal torment, Hades is the Grave which is death; the place where dead bodies go. In the book of Acts where it states that when Jesus died His Soul was not left in the grave and neither did his flesh see corruption, it is clearly speaking of Hell as the 'Grave', that is to say the place where the fleshly body goes after death. The soul on the other hand is the part of us that is shaped by the actions we do in this life, whereas our spirits can be thought of as the spark of life that God breathes into each one of us, or the light that touches each soul that enters into this world (John 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.).


    Tartarus is used only one time in the Bible as the place where the Angels who sinned are chained until judgment. The Greek philosopher, Plato wrote that souls were judged after death and those who received punishments were sent to Tartarus.

    In conclusion, the word 'hell' has been added as a place of fiery torment and that's just one example of men changing the Bible

    Source(s): NonChristian
  • 8 years ago

    The hebrew bible contains no mention of the word hell, the closest is a place called the netherworld or grave (sheoul). Strangely, the KJV old testament has replaced netherworld and in some cases sheol with the word hell, so there is one piece of evidence.

    Their often strong conditioning will mean christians will not question the bible, that includes the notion that it has been corrupted by man as that would undermine their faith entirely.

  • 8 years ago

    Go to any book store. See dozens of bibles written for Christians, for teens, for fathers, for teen fathers, for executives, the "good news" the Jefferson Bible, and more.

    The King James VERSION is one of many versions.

    Try reading the bible's original languages and find out jsut how badly it is translated.

    Source(s): educated atheist
  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Many of the earliest surviving manuscripts show evidence of revision.

    One manuscript held in Egypt show that originally Jesus' cave was simply found empty. Then 150 years later, someone decided to add that he was seen rising to heaven. The editing is clearly visible.

    Yet christians reading this will just close off their minds to the possibility of this being true.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Yes, obviously. It had to at least be translated from the old languages to the newer. No one speaks Old English fluently anymore. I know A poem I'd had to memorize, and I know what the general translation is, but not what the words mean. ANYBODY could change it to say whatever they wanted, and just say, "But THAT'S what it SAYS!"

  • 8 years ago

    yes,because most of sentences are not similer with scince.that means bible changed many times.there is no son of god.

    read quran with meaning sentences and understand.I challange you,if you dont find simillarities btw Quran and scince then the quran is false.but you will not able to find any difference

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.