Page 1 of 1

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 5:41 pm
by Ult_Sm86
So, apparently England has released the World's oldest Bible free onto the interwebs for viewing and admiring.

That is to say, you can read the oldest recorded Christian-text, online, for free. :thumbup cool.

Strange though...
Originally more than 1,460 pages long and measuring 16in by 14in, it was written by a number of hands around the time of Constantine the Great.
It offers different versions of the Scriptures from later editions of the Bible, notably in St Mark's Gospel which ends 12 verses before later versions, omitting the appearance of the resurrected Jesus Christ.
I wonder how many people are going to sit with that tidbit of information.

What do you guys think on this?

Some thoughts to get us started:

I think it's great. Historical text, of any kind, should always be public. You can't learn by making stuff up for the future, you have to learn from the past.
That said, I think the Library of England or England Library (whichever it is) did Christianity a huge service because this might shed some light on the idea of Bible not being translated literally but more as a resource for guidance and parables.

Maybe some high horses will be left at the watering hole. Y'know?
Naturally, not everyone will accept this. Probably a good portion.

However, I feel it is very important to exhaust ones thoughts on something like this, in a collected, calm manner. I really hope there comes some responses from Churches, (positive ones of course) and dare I ask for a few hundred reprints? :surprise

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:35 pm
by Bamfing_Bob
Sounds cool. I may take a gander...

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 1:42 am
by Saint Kurt
Ult_Sm86 wrote: I wonder how many people are going to sit with that tidbit of information.
Well, there are three other gospels in the New Testament.

Ult_Sm86 wrote:
...I think the Library of England or England Library (whichever it is) did Christianity a huge service because this might shed some light on the idea of Bible not being translated literally but more as a resource for guidance and parables.
It may surprise you then, to discover that most Christians already think of the Bible this way and have done so for centuries. They didn't even need a new historical translation or anything. :)

-e

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 1:51 am
by Ult_Sm86
Oh, I never said majority don't, but there's a nice hunk that does not get this.

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 5:56 am
by wingyding
Oh yeah, there's a pretty good bunch around here (here being where I live, not the forums) that really do believe the bible was written by facsimile from heaven.

I say believe and not think because I doubt many of the aforementioned bunch actually do think.

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:18 pm
by Ult_Sm86
Here, here.

I would like to see this thing for myself but I haven't been able to actually find it yet. Is it not up until later or something?

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 8:44 pm
by Elfdame
I, along with tons of Catholics and Orthodox throughout time and the world, think and believe that a lot of the weird sh*t in the Bible really did happen. Sorry, that's how I am.

The next few posts will probably be all about how all Christians pick and choose which parts are both literal and figurative, and which are only metaphorical, but that's okay. Have at it. We Catholics/Orthodox already have an out for that one: the belief that God guides the Church (in the LONG HAUL, not necessarily each guy in a funny hat) to discern the Truth. That had to happen with the Bible in the first place; some committee had to pick and choose which books belonged. Of course, Luther wanted to dump stuff like James and Revelation, but I could be wrong about that.

I'm not infallible. (Just don't tell my grandkids that. :D)

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:26 am
by Ult_Sm86
Well the argument here Elfdame is not "Can theists of the catholic persuasion handle my debunking", because trust me nobody here wants me to start on that. That's not something I enjoy doing.

The argument here is actually, "Can theists of ANY persuasion, handle this change in their 'solid' book of 'infallible evidence'."
There are many people, not just Catholic, or Orthodox, or Southern Baptist, but of every Sect of christianity, who take the stuff a little far, and a little too seriously. There's plenty of evidence to say otherwise, but that's not the discussion. The discussion is, are they willing to buy that certain stuff was left out. What is the concern here with that?

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 5:40 am
by Angelique
I think we can. For one thing, is it a real change? Is it a change of any consequence? 12 missing verses in one Gospel account do not debunk the other three Gospels, for instance.

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:03 am
by Ult_Sm86
By "They" I was referring to those Wingy and I were speaking of, the fundamentals and nonsensicals alike who read the word of the Bible and claim that God has decreed no love for anyone gay and that Slavery is cool by god, and such like that.

So I might suggest losing that "we" there, it sort of connects you to the fanatical.

And it's not just 12 missing verses. It's entire Gospels are left out. Entire books. Most of which are completely new concepts to the original idea o the Bible.

And you be surprised what 12 lines can do. People have killed for the same number of lines, if not less, because those lines were in the Bible. (Or Koran, or Torah, etc, etc, but I cite the Bible primarily being this is what we are talking about.)

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:24 am
by Angelique
Ah, but I am one of those "theists of any persuasion."

And really, entire Gospels left out? Then the Codex Sinaiticus would hardly be the world's oldest Christian Bible. Bible fragments, maybe. Not the whole thing.

[Edited on 5/8/2009 by Angelique]

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:28 am
by Ult_Sm86
Next line:
There are many people, not just Catholic, or Orthodox, or Southern Baptist, but of every Sect of christianity, who take the stuff a little far, and a little too seriously.
That's what I meant by the "Theists of any persuasion"

I was not referring to Christian Everyman, I meant the blips and fundamentals that can be found in any/all Sects of Christianity.

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:44 am
by Angelique
And see, even among fundamentalists, I don't see any furor over this for some reason.

I also think you're exaggerating about "whole books" being missing. The only difference between modern New Testaments and the Codex Sinaiticus was the order of the books.

[Edited on 5/8/2009 by Angelique]

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:56 am
by Ult_Sm86
My error, I was under the impression it was one entire book, and I see that it was instead hunks and order.


Regardless, I am still concerned some people will not take this news well. I am simply saying I feel there are going to be people who will not be so open to this change.

Should it change.

Should it change?

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:55 pm
by Angelique
But it isn't a change. The footnotes in a Bible I was given back in 1988 prove it was already well-known to Bible scholars that Mark's "longer ending," the "general resume...concerning the appearances of the risen Christ" found in more detail in Matthew and Luke was added by the second century by someone other than Mark and was not found in some manuscripts. It was also suspected that, judging by the way the Gospel otherwise cut off very abruptly after the Resurrection, that the original conclusion of Mark's Gospel was lost.

The "shorter ending" has been found immediately after Mark 16:8 in more than one Greek manuscript dating even later than the Codex Sinaiticus and by itself, without the longer ending in an even more recent Latin copy.

The Church wasn't shaken to its foundations then. Christianity and the Bible as the Inspired Word of God weren't debunked then. And the lack of any uproar from the fundamentalists just shows this is old news and that you probably underestimate the power of faith to withstand every "breaking development."

[Edited on 5/8/2009 by Angelique]

World's Oldest Bible Offers New Perspective

Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 8:10 pm
by Elfdame
Yeah, Ang -- people didn't quit believing in evolution just because a bunch of the stuff they taught me back in the 1960's is now re-evaluated (eg, what various subspecies of our human race looked like and when they lived, or dinosaurs evolving into birds rather than reptiles). Didn't shake their belief at all. I am still open on the idea of evolution as the force by which God created the heavens and the earth.

And, Bman dear, I'm afraid I *am* one of those blips and fundamentalists. Really. Maybe not by your definition, but in some ways of your definitions, yeah.

And Ang is also right about the last bit of Mark being in question. Same with one of my FAVE stories from John (woman caught in adultery). It is how it is.

Good discussion, BTW. I do understand your main theme of "If you've been taught since you were a puppy that The Bbile Never Changes, how do you evaluate newer research and findings?"