Search and find articles and topics quickly and accurately!  See different advanced ways to search for articles on this site.

Further Topic Research:
Syntax help

The following article was sent to me by my two dear friends Rami Abdallah and Qais Ali; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with them.  This article originally come from Brother Al-Kadhi's work; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.

How did the Church explain all these centuries of tampering?

Due to the vast number of changes, omissions, additions and corrections of the Church that Christianity is beginning to discover, most of those who attempt to defend the actions of the Church are switching to a new tactic. That of trivialization of all changes. For example:

"...the rare parts about which there is still uncertainty do not affect in any way any doctrine"

Bible Translations, R.L. Sumner

In the book "The Story of the Manuscripts" by Rev. George E. Merrill, the good Reverend quotes Prof. Arnold as stating:

"there are not more than fifteen hundred to two thousand places in which there is any uncertainty whatever as to the true text.."

Notice how the good Professor manages to first start by alleging that the number of "variant readings" are only a fraction of their true number (according to him only 1500-2000), this number being in the respected Professor's estimation quite minuscule. He then goes on to explain how all of them are undeserving of his attention with only about a dozen being of any doctrinal importance. In this manner, in one paragraph many thousands of additions, omissions, and "corrections" of the church over the ages are suddenly transformed to only a dozen and then quickly reduced to none. Notice how casually and quickly centuries of tampering with the text of the "inspired word of God" is brushed off and justified?. For such men the answer is very simple. All of the changes to the text are all "trivial" and "inconsequential." For them only a few thousand, or a few tens of thousands of errors in the "inspired word of God" is a very acceptable. For them it is just a matter of the "spirit" of the book. For them, some of the words of God are not really that important and can be disregarded. Let us see what Jesus  has to say about such people:

"But he (Jesus) answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.  (Matthew 4:4)"

We also read in the Old Testament:

"that he (God) might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every [word] that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.  (Deuteronomy 8:3)"

"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.  (Deuteronomy 4:2)"

Look at it this way. If I were to tell you: "I would like to cut a few small pieces from your body. No more than, say, thirty or forty pieces." Would you then reply: "Fine. So long as you do not cut off any 'important' or 'big' pieces."? Should we not deal with the scriptures of God the same way?

See:  The Bible Just Cant Get It Right

 

 

 

 

 

Back to Answering Trinity section.

Contradictions and Errors in the Bible.


Send your comments.

Back to Main Page.