Dicono che “la vostra bibbia non è stata corrotta„. Realmente?


5 novembre 2005

Halil Ibrahimi

Pubblicato da Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi

Come-salaamu il barakatuh di wa di rahmatullahi di wa di alaykum del `;

Che cosa le differenze fra i manoscritti della bibbia rivelano? Questa carta è divisa nelle seguenti sezioni:

    1. Gli richiedono di produrre la prova sopra: QUANDO, COME e PERCHÈ era la bibbia corrotta
    2. Una volta, ci era un mito circa i manoscritti della bibbia
    3. Prova: più di 50 verses omessi o aggiunti, centinaia di altre sono cambiato
    4. Prove dal secondo e terzo secolo circa corruzione della bibbia
    5. I cambiamenti e le corruzioni dei manoscritti interessano la dottrina?
    6. ? =„ per il dio così amava il mondo„?

1.They gli richiedono di produrre la prova sopra: QUANDO, COME e PERCHÈ era la bibbia corrotta

Il mio countryman del collega, Hilki Berisha, in un articolo pubblicato dentro? La carta in tensione? allo scopo di evangelizing i musulmani albanesi di Kosovar, scrive:

    Molti musulmani presumono scorrettamente che il Qur? è stato rivelato per sostituire il Writ santo Hebraic e cristiano a causa della ragione presunta per cui questi ultimi scriptures sono stati corrotti, cambiato stati e persi?

    Le questioni che ora sono sollevate sono:

    1. Quando e dove il cambiamento è accaduto?
    2. Come il cambiamento è accaduto??? [1]

Ed e così via e così via, continuando con la logica prominente cristiana di? dicami come l'originale uncorrupted lo scripture specifico colto?. Il suo fratello in Christ da un Web site anti-Islamico fa due domande più specifiche:

    3. Che cambiamenti sono stati fatti?
    4. Dove la bibbia “originale„ che possiamo paragonarli a per dimostrare il cambiamento è accaduta? [2]

Siamo stati chiesti che questi domande e noi ora risponderemo loro.

“Un laico in Nuova Zelanda, Evan Saddler, interessato circa la formazione delle versioni moderne della bibbia quale ha creduto per essere preparato dai manoscritti corrotti, è stato sfidato da un pastor riguardo alla sua competenza a fare un tal giudizio. “Quante lingue sapete?„ ha chiesto al pastor. Sig. Saddler, un uomo di buon umore, risposto subito, “due! La Nuova Zelanda ed australiano.„

Unfazed da questo rejoinder divertente, il pastor ha premuto il suo punto. “Come potete renderti un esperto sulla traduzione della bibbia se non conoscete il Greco o l'ebreo?„ Sig. Saddler risposto facendo una domanda egli stesso. “Do you understand Greek?” When assured that the pastor did, Mr. Saddler requested an analysis of the Greek wording upon which the New International Version translation of Matthew 18:11 was based. The pastor diligently set about his assigned task, but soon discovered that it was not easily fulfilled. Looking up from his Bible in confusion and amazement, the minister exploded, “But there is no Matthew 18:11!” His observation was correct. The tenth verse is present, and the twelfth, but the eleventh is entirely omitted. Quietly, Mr. Saddler replied, “Now what use is your knowledge of Greek when the text is missing?”[3]

A lot of noise has been raised, pro and contra on Bible corruption. You may have heard that the corruption issue is all about hearsay, prejudices and nothing else. The above-cited fragment from the book ?Modern Bible Translations Unmasked? by Dr. Russell R. Standish tells us a lot. It shows gently the ongoing war between ?King James Version Only? supporters and the rest of Christendom on the issue of which Bible version[4] to use, since the discovery of different Bible manuscripts faced us with a lot of problems and cleaned out the mythology of One Unchanged Bible. A missing verse tells us about textual corruption; it either shows that once the verse was there and than somebody removed it or opposite, the verse was never there but somebody added. But is it only a verse? If that would be the case, there would be no need to lose so much energy on that. However, what if the number is being multiplied badly and that several other changes in manuscript readings arise beside the omission/additions that may put faith in the Bible as an unchanged scripture in a real mess? You are then advised to prepare yourself in dealing with such chaos when reading what follows, for it may shatter whatever previous beliefs you may hold about the Bible.

To continue reading, download the full document [in .pdf format]

One Response to “They say “Your Bible has not been corrupted”. Really?”

  1. tariq said on 6 August 2006:

    very nice article. heres the best part of the pdf file:

    “A layman in New Zealand, Evan Saddler, concerned about the formation of modern Bible versions which he believed to have been prepared from corrupted manuscripts, was challenged by a pastor concerning his competence to make such a judgment. “How many languages do you know?” asked the pastor. Mr. Saddler, a man of good humor, promptly replied, “Two!?New Zealand and Australian.”
    Unfazed by this humorous rejoinder, the pastor pressed his point. “How can you make yourself an expert on Bible translation if you do not know Greek or Hebrew?” Mr. Saddler replied by asking a question himself. “Do you understand Greek?” When assured that the pastor did, Mr. Saddler requested an analysis of the Greek wording upon which the New International Version translation of Matthew 18:11 was based. The pastor diligently set about his assigned task, but soon discovered that it was not easily fulfilled. Looking up from his Bible in confusion and amazement, the minister exploded, “But there is no Matthew 18:11!” His observation was correct. The tenth verse is present, and the twelfth, but the eleventh is entirely omitted. Quietly, Mr. Saddler replied, “Now what use is your knowledge of Greek when the text is missing?”
    (?Modern Bible Translations Unmasked? Dr. Russell R. Standish Evangelist/Revivalist, Dr. Colin Standish President, Hartland College, Chapter 7 http://www.sundaylaw.net/books.....mbtu07.htm)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.