# History of the Bible



## Ronnie T (Jul 6, 2012)

History of the Bible 

If someone asked you where to find the Bible verse that begins, 'For God so loved the world...you'd probably know he was asking about John 3:16. If you had a Bible, you could find it for him in no time. But there was a time when no one could find a single verse in the whole Bible. There was no John 3:16, Genesis 1:1 or any other verse because the Bible wasn't divided into verses or even chapters. Worse yet, there were hundreds of years when there weren't even any word divisions. Punctuation marks, capital letters and even vowels were omitted. In those days, if Genesis had been written in English, it would have started: NTHBGNNNGGDCRTDTHHVNSNDTHRTH."" You would have had to spend hours or days just to find your favorite verse.

Words were divided by Jesus' time, but vowels weren't used in Hebrew Old Testaments until the sixth century A. D. Gradually, capitalizations, punctuation and paragraphing worked their way into the Old and New Testaments. But Bible chapters such as we have today didn't come into being until the 13th century. They were the work of Stephen Langton, the Archbishop of Canterbury.

For the next 200 years, the Bible, now divided into chapters, continued to be copied by hand. Then in 1448, Rabbi Nathan startled the world by breaking the Old Testament into verses. The New Testament wasn't divided into numbered verses until 1551 when a French printer, Robert Estienne did the job. He was planning a study Bible that would have side-by-side columns in three translations when he got the idea. He was so rushed for time he decided to do the dividing on a trip from Paris to Lyons. Some people have suggested he did the work on horseback and his sometimes awkward divisions resulted when his 'jogging horse bumped his pen in the wrong places."" Yet, with a few exceptions, Estienne's divisions provide us with the verses we have today.

So just as number of people were used in writing of the Bible over a period of centuries, it was the contribution of countless scribes, hundreds of years, and three men in particular,a Catholic archbishop, a Jewish rabbi and a Protestant printer,who turned 'NTHBGNNNGGDCRTDTHHVNSNDTHRTH"" into Genesis 1:1. 

*From: Campus Life, March, 1981, p. 40, Miller Clarke


----------



## dixiedoug (Jul 6, 2012)

Now with the advent of texting and its shorthand we are returning to abbreviations.  No more cursive writing, then no more lower case, then no more vowels.....

Very interesting article.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 9, 2012)

Ronnie T said:


> History of the Bible
> 
> If someone asked you where to find the Bible verse that begins, 'For God so loved the world...you'd probably know he was asking about John 3:16. If you had a Bible, you could find it for him in no time. But there was a time when no one could find a single verse in the whole Bible. There was no John 3:16, Genesis 1:1 or any other verse because the Bible wasn't divided into verses or even chapters. Worse yet, there were hundreds of years when there weren't even any word divisions. Punctuation marks, capital letters and even vowels were *omitted*. In those days, if Genesis had been written in English, it would have started: NTHBGNNNGGDCRTDTHHVNSNDTHRTH."" You would have had to spend hours or days just to find your favorite verse.
> 
> ...


I know you realize this, but "omitted" is not quite the right word. It, not you, implies that they were there originally. The punctuations were "added" later. I think much more was added such as the "articles" in the greek. Maybe someone more in the know than myself can explain this about the greek


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 9, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> I know you realize this, but "omitted" is not quite the right word. It, not you, implies that they were there originally. The punctuations were "added" later. I think much more was added such as the "articles" in the greek. Maybe someone more in the know than myself can explain this about the greek



You're right.

"Were not there" is more accurate than "omitted".


----------



## speedcop (Jul 9, 2012)

omitted or not, I still enjoyed the article


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 9, 2012)

I did also.
I admire all the people throughout history who've worked tirelessly to make sure we have a Bible that is as accurate as it can be.


----------



## centerpin fan (Jul 10, 2012)

Ronnie T said:


> I admire all the people throughout history who've worked tirelessly to make sure we have a Bible that is as accurate as it can be.



Amen to that.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 10, 2012)

Early on, the writings were handled very different. At first they were not considered inspired so they changed things to suit themselves. Later after they were considered inspired, we became very careful about each word. We have tons of manuscript "variances". They were careless. Some manuscripts have whole paragraphs recopied after themselves. We have whole pages that repeat themselves. The "variances" were shocking from our viewpoint. Early on, they were not careful. Later, they became very careful. Why? Because mindsets changed from being writings to being inspired. Bart Erhman has a good book pointing out and explaining this subject. It is a good read. He approaches it from an unbiased viewpoint.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 10, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> Early on, the writings were handled very different. At first they were not considered inspired so they changed things to suit themselves. Later after they were considered inspired, we became very careful about each word. We have tons of manuscript "variances". They were careless. Some manuscripts have whole paragraphs recopied after themselves. We have whole pages that repeat themselves. The "variances" were shocking from our viewpoint. Early on, they were not careful. Later, they became very careful. Why? Because mindsets changed from being writings to being inspired. Bart Erhman has a good book pointing out and explaining this subject. It is a good read. He approaches it from an unbiased viewpoint.



Very very very few people take the time to learn when, where and how it all started and why it has become what it is today.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 10, 2012)

bullethead said:


> Very very very few people take the time to learn when, where and how it all started and why it has become what it is today.


I don't consider that I have studied this to the full extent but I have studied it in parts and found it super interesting. It does however seem strange that Christians would rather learn greek or something that has very very little impact rather than learn the history from which their very own faith comes from.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 10, 2012)

bullethead said:


> Very very very few people take the time to learn when, where and how it all started and why it has become what it is today.


And we will never know how it might have turned out differently had the writings of the opposing beliefs who considered themselves Christians had remained. But them having all been banned and destroyed, we will never know what their arguments were. Imagine if we had record of several early writers argueing that Matt 28:19 was added, and possibly pointing the finger at who was responsible for this. But most of the opposing writings were burned


----------



## bullethead (Jul 10, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> And we will never know how it might have turned out differently had the writings of the opposing beliefs who considered themselves Christians had remained. But them having all been banned and destroyed, we will never know what their arguments were. Imagine if we had record of several early writers argueing that Matt 28:19 was added, and possibly pointing the finger at who was responsible for this. But most of the opposing writings were burned



I hold you in high regard for thinking outside of the box. Too many people take things at face value and do not want to dig any further.


----------



## StriperAddict (Jul 11, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> Bart Erhman ....


 
I just came across an interesting response to a Bart Erhman interview with him on the book "Throwing Away the Bible", this is part of the final note from someone who also makes interesting points.  I especially agree with the "by revelation of the Spirit" point the writer tries to communicate.  After this was sent on to Bart, he had no further comment.  

___________________________

You have not allowed God to express Himself, which has robbed you of much good. You have basically taken the position that God does not exist, or if He does exist, He cannot or does not wish to communicate with His creation. That is not true! He does wish to communicate, and not only that, He has done so and will continue to do so, as He chooses. Victor and I have heard from Him, and we have been personally led and taught by Him for over 60 years combined. This is nothing new; He has been doing this from the beginning. He lives, Bart! He is God. 
I see something more about where you went wrong: 
When you were converted, you became a believer in the Bible, not God. In your own words:
“...starting with my born-again experience in high school, through my fundamentalist days at Moody, and on through my evangelical days at Wheaton—my faith has been based completely on a certain view of the Bible as the fully inspired, inerrant word of God” 
When you found out that the Bible is not perfect according to the letter (and It is not), your god was trashed, and you gave up on it. You went on to throw out the “baby with the bathwater.” You had never received a love of God, the Truth, but had instead trusted in your knowledge that came by the letter, which had failed you. Having your confidence in the letter destroyed, and having none in God to begin with, you were left with nothing. 
This had to happen; it was inevitable. All idols and all idolaters will fail. A person can never know God by reading and trusting in the Bible, which is counting on his or her intellect. Jesus said that the Kingdom of God does not come that way, by men’s observations. It is to the babes, not to the wise and understanding of this world, that the revelation of the One Who illuminates the Bible is given. The Bible does not, of Itself, illuminate God, but God illuminates the reader of the Bible to perceive and receive His Word, which is to know and understand His purpose and meaning. We know the Bible because we first know Its Author. 
There are multitudes who, believing in the Bible, do not know the Author, and who wrongfully trust in the letter by their own understanding and righteousness. Such remain in the wrongness of their nature, though they are right in declaring that the Bible is truth. Jesus spoke to some of these, telling them that searching the Scriptures was not doing them any good, because the Scriptures point to Him, and they do not believe *HIM*. That is where you went wrong, Bart. You never knew or believed Him, the living God and Father of spirits. This is not a condemnation, but a fact. Having known the “Jesus” of men, it is destined for you to also know the true Christ of God. Darkness stands no chance against the Light Who lightens every person who comes into the world. 
As did Jesus, so also have we, in His Name, spoken to Bible worshippers. Read False Christianity Unmasked and Bible Worship Used by Men to Cover Evil. 
You once asked in an article or interview: 
“If one wants to insist that God inspired the very words of scripture, what would be the point if we don’t have the very words of scripture? In some places, as we will see, we simply cannot be sure that we have reconstructed the original text accurately. It’s a bit hard to know what the words of the Bible mean if we don’t even know what the words are!”
God never intended that man should rely on pinpoint accuracy of translation to know Him. It was His deliberate intention that we do not have letter perfect Scriptures. That is how He frustrates the legalistic and self-righteous dependence of man on the external appearance. As I have been telling you, we know Him by the internal and Unseen, His Spirit, understanding what He says from the spiritual realm, though we read imperfectly translated words, or read no words at all. Furthermore, we can know whether something is true or false by our revelation of Him, which is His desire for us, and His way. He leads His people into all truth. That is how we knew about the apocryphal nature of the angel stirring the pool (John 5:4) and the corrupt addition of 1 John 5:7, and that is also how Victor was corrected on John 8. 
Another example: When I was a new believer in 1979, some Mormons told me that their book was inspired by God. How are we to know if something is inspired or not? By God! I, being a babe, depended on Him to reveal the Book of Mormon to me, as He had revealed the Bible to me. He did. It is a fraud. Why wouldn’t He do this for me? He comes to bring us into the knowledge of the truth and fellowship with Himself, and lies are not of Him. The person who comes to Him will know the truth, Bible or no Bible. 
The relationship of man with God, formed by His will and doing (as with Abraham and Moses, who did not have the written word), is now complete in Jesus Christ, the One of Whom the Scriptures testify. Read my testimony and Victor’s.
I know these things will profit you. If not now, surely later.
By the grace of God and His revelation in Christ Jesus,
Paul
*Bart did not reply.*


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 11, 2012)

StriperAddict said:


> I just came across an interesting response to a Bart Erhman interview with him on the book "Throwing Away the Bible", this is part of the final note from someone who also makes interesting points.  I especially agree with the "by revelation of the Spirit" point the writer tries to communicate.  After this was sent on to Bart, he had no further comment.
> 
> ___________________________
> 
> ...


I am not surprised at Bart not replying. He is not aggressive in anything he does. He respects mens beliefs. Has many friends who are Christian with whom he works side by side.   In his college classes, at the end of the class only, he sets aside a day, for those who wish to know, to explain what he himself believes. His students go the entire class without knowing that he does not believe. When it comes to anyone who says they know what they know by revelation, it becomes a dead end because at that point, it becomes one man's revelation against anothers. Bart is smart enough to realize that every belief system out there makes this same claim. In the world of Acedameia, I'm surprised that this fellow played the revelation card. He apparently is not a scholar.  Bart's thoughts are that if God inspired it then why would he not have preserved it. The fact that he does not consider it inspired should not be the cause of his non belief. I myself believe the central story within the scriptures but do not consider it as a whole to be inspired. His biggest hang up was the problem of suffering. As a side question, I have not heard of this book you mentioned. Is it one of Bart's books?


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 11, 2012)

Just checked into this. There is no such book. That is the derived opinion of this particular site owner. He is like a third grader argueing over Santa compared to Bart.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 11, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> Just checked into this. There is no such book. That is the derived opinion of this particular site owner. He is like a third grader argueing over Santa compared to Bart.


You guys will not like this, I suspect that he is "oneness". Pasted from his site; 

The trinity is a manmade concoction, an “explanation” of the Person of God that is false, confounded and confusing. “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” (Deuteronomy 6:4 KJV). (Diabolical Doctrine 6) “God is three persons,” The Asininity of the Trinity, & Jesus Christ Is


----------



## StriperAddict (Jul 11, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> As a side question, I have not heard of this book you mentioned. Is it one of Bart's books?


 Yes  ... correction, no.  See next post 



1gr8bldr said:


> When it comes to anyone who says they know what they know by revelation, it becomes a dead end because at that point, it becomes one man's revelation against anothers.


It is doctrinally, emphatically important, otherwise we would toss out Paul's inspiration, and then the gospel itself:
Consider:
*Galatians 1:12*
For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a *revelation* of Jesus Christ.

*Romans 16:25*
"Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the *revelation* of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past"

*Ephesians 3:3*
that by *revelation* there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief.

*Galatians 2:2*
It was because of a *revelation* that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain.


Everything we have of understanding God we have by faith/revelation from the Holy Spirit.

Also, and by way of a surrendered heart to Him who died for us, cannot attain anything of spiritual value, if... God does not open our hearts.  Paul's prayer for the body of Christ:
*Ephesians 1:17*
that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of *revelation* in the knowledge of Him.

Also... as concerning the future, we need the Spirit to reveal Christ at His appearing again: 
*1 Corinthians 1:7*
so that you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the *revelation* of our Lord Jesus Christ

Finally...

*1 Corinthians 14:26*
What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a *revelation*, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

Let all things be done for edification.  I like that. The end result of our "revelation" is not to set our words in stone and make doctrines out of them, but for the building up of the body, and to share the truth with a fallen world.

This is not to mean we always get every thing perfect, otherwise we'd have to be in eternity. But God uses worn vessels of clay in the preaching of His gospel for edification and the hope that a heart will hear, turn and come to Him who died and rose again.

Me, I'm sure my posts come with warts 'n all, 

But even God used one whose letters "are *weighty* *and* *strong*, but his personal presence is unimpressive *and* his speech contemptible.” to establish churches and turn the world upside down for Christ!!  *2 Corinthians 10:10*


----------



## StriperAddict (Jul 11, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> Just checked into this. There is no such book. That is the derived opinion of this particular site owner. He is like a third grader argueing over Santa compared to Bart.


 
My bad, it is not a book. Just the title of the message post from the interviewer.  Sorry.

See? "Warts n all"


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 11, 2012)

That guy is quite the character. This is from his site. ;

*Click HERE or scroll down to the list of false teachers.*

He has hundreds in alphabetical order. I bet he's on their list LOL


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 11, 2012)

Bart's newest book is "Did Jesus really exist". Bart tries to prove that Jesus  *did*  exist.


----------



## StriperAddict (Jul 11, 2012)

1gr8bldr said:


> That guy is quite the character. This is from his site. ;
> 
> *Click HERE or scroll down to the list of false teachers.*
> 
> He has hundreds in alphabetical order. I bet he's on their list LOL


 
Agreed. When he cited Billy Graham, among others, I had a chuckle, thought that was a bit "out there". 

The article I cited had good things to say of our understanding of both scripture and revelation, as it pertains to any believer drawing close to God.  I just chose to throw out the bathwater, not the baby


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 11, 2012)

It gives good example of how Bart refrained himself when this guy  played the "revelation" card. We have to be ultra careful when someone claims they know something by revelation. Bart gets this often, I expect. I'm glad you brought up the thread because through it, I found out that Bart has a new book that I am anxious to read. I think it will score big that a famous aurthor like Bart who is known by Athiest and Christians, acknowledges that Jesus existed. Knowing his past works, he will make his case air tight. Since so many out there are after Bart, ready to knock him off his ladder, he has to forgo the questionable topics, and spend his time with things he can prove without any leaks. Should be in the Christians best interest


----------

