If you could rewrite the Bible what would you change?

[enoob57]

56 minutes ago, Ezra said:

It is also logically obvious that since Revelation is the last book of the Bible, and was placed there chronologically at the end, what applies to Revelation applies by extension to the whole Bible.  

There are other Scripture which confirm that no man has the right or authority to add a single word to Scripture, or to remove a single letter from Scripture. Every jot and tittle is there by the authority of God.

That is also why a word-for-word translation is necessary.  The KJV translators were very scrupulous about showing the added words of the translators in italics, to distinguish the words of God from the words of men.

also that the subject matter of Revelation has covered all events into eternity there can be no add or take from this point at it's end of begin....

[hmbld]

2 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

No I don't think that is logical to assume that because it was placed in the bible as the last book that this means these words were intended to be applied to all the rest of scripture.    

It was the last book to be written.   That is why it's placed last.

My point is the importance of not changing God's word in scripture can be made without misusing scripture to do it. The misuse of God's word is what opened Eve to deception.  We should not be following in her footsteps.

 

Regarding "added words" being in italics.   They are not  "added words" except only in the sense that the way the Greek language is constructed, they don't use words that the English needs to carry the idea being communicated,  yet grammatically, without those words, the sentence structure would be incomplete and not make any sense at all.

The "added words" are driven by grammatical need and are communicated by other words in the original language.    But when we translate those other words, we don't see it because the grammatical construction is not there.

This is why no English translation is perfect.  No single English translation can fully carry the meaning of the original scriptures.

 

 

Since the bible was not assembled as we now see it when Revelation was written, I can agree that we can not prove the verse was intended to be applied to the rest of the bible.  Yet, if scripture is inspired of God, then would it not be applicable?  Even if it only refers to Revelation, what scripture, inspired by God, would be allowed to be changed?  So in the end of this thought process, at least for me, it seems we can and should use that verse to show the importance of not changing God's word.  It does not seem deceptive to me, rather, I would agree scripture should not be changed.  Only if Revelation was from a man should we keep it confined to that one book.  If it is inspired by God, then it applies to the complete bible. 

[hmbld]

2 hours ago, enoob57 said:

also that the subject matter of Revelation has covered all events into eternity there can be no add or take from this point at it's end of begin....

You have a way with words!  I agree with you.

[Openly Curious]

On 12/26/2015 at 6:57 PM, Tanner Brody said:

I had a dream last night in which an angel appeared and told me "They are confused. Use your prose to unite them." When I awoke I thought deeply about this and realized what he's saying. There exists so much confusion today on the meaning of the bible (Catholic, Mormon, Jehavohs Witness, Seven Day Adventists, etc.. all interpret the scriptures differently). I would probably make changes to a few verses so it would be more clear, my first choice...

The Lord is speaking to Abraham in this story where God commands him to sacrifice his son:

‘Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.’ (Genesis 22:2)

This reminds me of the final scene in the Omen (1976) where the father stabs his son on the alter. Even if God intervens at the last minute, don't you think that child is going to be scarred emotionally for the rest of his life? I know if my dad tried to kill me and then stopped at the last minute tellng me God changed his mind I'd run far away in case it ever happens again.

Second choice...

In this verse, Samuel, one of the early leaders of Israel, orders genocide against a neighbouring people:

“This is what the Lord Almighty says... ‘Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” (1 Samuel 15:3)

This goes back to my early questions about why women and children had to die in Daniel 16:24.  Why kill all the innocents too? I would make it clear in the rewriting that slavery is wrong, killing gay people is wrong, and adjust other things so that they can't be taken out of context. Any book that has been transcribed over and over through 2000 years something may get lost (even the meanings of word has changed since then) so I believe the angel had a good point.  

If you could pick just one or two scriptures (old or new testement) in the bible and change it, which would you choose?

ZIP not one solitary word would I change.  It is Jesus Christ who is speaking to us in these last days and not angels ( Hebrew 1 ).  Your so called angel is trying to give you doctrines of demons pure lies perverting and changing the truth into a lie.  It seems you have the itching ears to go along and accept totally following and listening to this false spirit.   Heaven help us to preserve God's word.

[The_Patriot21]

You know, it has been brought up, that one thing one person would like to change, is people misinterpreting it. Another thing I would like to add to that, is the misnotion that people think they need MORE then the Bible, to understand God. The book of enoch was just one example, there are other apocraphyl books, that people have claimed were scripture. None of them line up with scripture, all of them contradict scripture, yet people still choose to be deceived by them. Its not a matter of "opinion" but a matter of right, and wrong. A matter of Gods holy word, and allowing oneself to follow a lie. Since when is the Bible NOT enough?

[coheir]

On 12/29/2015 at 10:41 PM, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, coheir.

Be careful. There's no guarantee that the "book of Enoch" was written by an "Enoch" at all, certainly not "the seventh from Adam!" And, the Hebrew name is actually Chanokh, pronounced more like "Hah-NOKE," except that the first consonant is pronounced more like the soft Scottish "ch" in "Loch Ness," and the last consonant is pronounced more like the hard gutteral "kh" of German, as in "the Third Reich!"

The book is literature. It has its place in history as a work written a few centuries before the Messiah, but it should NOT be taken with the same authority as Scripture! It's an interesting read, and it reveals what somebody believed to be true back then, but it is NOT inspired by God. It has some intrinsic value, but take it with a grain of salt!

Oh I am well aware it is not part of the cannon and is NOT scripture. That alone does not make say it can not be read. It is not scripture but it can be read as a book. That is what my post said. thanks though for watching out for me.

[coheir]

On 12/29/2015 at 11:35 PM, other one said:

I would agree in it's present condition it should not be cannon, although several of our early church fathers did.    But even if we don't consider it inspired, since it is quoted in the Bible we should not discard it either.    And I do think the Bible refers to it being the teaching of Enoch.

Considering that Mathusala lived 300 years at the same time as Enoch, and Noah lived about 300 years when Mathusala was alive, and Abraham was about 58 when Noah died, there would have not been many generations for the knowledge of Enoch to have been passed down.      Does whoever put it to pen make that much difference?  By the number of different manuscripts that was found in the dead sea scrolls, it appears that the book was well known during the time of Christ here on earth...

Just because we may not consider it canon, doesn't mean we should discard it either. Especially since things are supposed to get as they were in the days of Noah......    which is what Enoch is partially about.    Actually the book seems to be written for this time period.

When I read it I knew it was not part of the Bible. I would not tell anyone to put it above the Bible. But I did get some understanding out of it the Bible did not share.

[enoob57]

On ‎12‎/‎26‎/‎2015 at 5:57 PM, Tanner Brody said:

I had a dream last night in which an angel appeared and told me "They are confused. Use your prose to unite them." When I awoke I thought deeply about this and realized what he's saying. There exists so much confusion today on the meaning of the bible (Catholic, Mormon, Jehavohs Witness, Seven Day Adventists, etc.. all interpret the scriptures differently). I would probably make changes to a few verses so it would be more clear, my first choice...

The Lord is speaking to Abraham in this story where God commands him to sacrifice his son:

‘Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.’ (Genesis 22:2)

This reminds me of the final scene in the Omen (1976) where the father stabs his son on the alter. Even if God intervens at the last minute, don't you think that child is going to be scarred emotionally for the rest of his life? I know if my dad tried to kill me and then stopped at the last minute tellng me God changed his mind I'd run far away in case it ever happens again.

Second choice...

In this verse, Samuel, one of the early leaders of Israel, orders genocide against a neighbouring people:

“This is what the Lord Almighty says... ‘Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” (1 Samuel 15:3)

This goes back to my early questions about why women and children had to die in Daniel 16:24.  Why kill all the innocents too? I would make it clear in the rewriting that slavery is wrong, killing gay people is wrong, and adjust other things so that they can't be taken out of context. Any book that has been transcribed over and over through 2000 years something may get lost (even the meanings of word has changed since then) so I believe the angel had a good point.  

If you could pick just one or two scriptures (old or new testement) in the bible and change it, which would you choose?

2 Ti 3:16-17

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
KJV
well anything at all would be to render us who have it unabled to perfection....

[thereselittleflower]

On 12/30/2015 at 6:08 PM, the_patriot2015 said:

You know, it has been brought up, that one thing one person would like to change, is people misinterpreting it. Another thing I would like to add to that, is the misnotion that people think they need MORE then the Bible, to understand God. The book of enoch was just one example, there are other apocraphyl books, that people have claimed were scripture. None of them line up with scripture, all of them contradict scripture, yet people still choose to be deceived by them. Its not a matter of "opinion" but a matter of right, and wrong. A matter of Gods holy word, and allowing oneself to follow a lie. Since when is the Bible NOT enough?

Did you know that books now considered part of the apocrypha by part of christianity, the deuterocanonicals, were always part of scripture from the beginning of christianity?

[Riverwalker]

The bible is word of God and I would no presume to think that I know better thann Him what should be in it.  I have full faith and confidence that bible canon contains what it should. Even those who include the appocraphyl books notate them as add ins, not part of canon. 

When I was a young Christian, I did wish I could remove James 1:2-3

² My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, ³ knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience.

 

But now that I am on the otherside of such patience producing trials, I have begun to see God's wisdom

 

⁴ But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing.