Confirmation is a sacrament that perfects Baptismal grace and gives the Holy Spirit to deepen our connection with God, strengthen our bond with the Church, and help us bear witness to the Christian faith. In the Latin rite, the sacrament of Confirmation is conferred through anointing with chrism on the forehead, which is done by laying on the hand, and through the words: “Accipe signaculum doni Spiritus Sancti” (Be sealed with the Gift of the Holy Spirit). The bishop dips his right thumb in the chrism and makes the sign of the cross on the forehead of the one to be confirmed.
The rite of confirmation emphasizes the celebration of the word of God, which begins the rite of confirmation. The goal should be the full, conscious, and active participation of the entire assembly. The Anglican Church has undergone various changes in the rite of confirmation, such as omitting the Creed, profession of faith, and some newly confirmed individuals joining those who bring gifts to the altar.
The sacrament of Confirmation involves anointing the forehead with blessed oil and a prayer for each recipient to experience the power of the Holy Spirit. It is seen as the sealing of the covenant created in baptism, and those being confirmed are known as confirmands. For adults, it is an affirmation of their relationship with God and becoming a full member of the Christian community.
The Rite of Confirmation recalls Pentecost and the Spirit-filled experience of the early Church and affirms the Spirit-filled experience of the Christian. The goal is to ensure that the entire assembly participates fully and actively in the rite of confirmation.
📹 This One Small Change Made The Batch 10X Better!
Our website! https://herculescandy.com/ ————————————————— Subscribe and hit the for new videos every …
What are the two actions matter during the Rite of Confirmation?
Baptism involves the use of natural water, while Confirmation involves the imposition of hands and anointing with chrism. The form is “I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen”. The Eucharist involves wheat bread and natural grape wine, with the form being the Institution Narrative. Jesus, during his Last Supper, broke bread and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take this, all of you, and eat of it, for this is my body that will be given up for you”.
He also gave the chalice of his blood, the new and eternal covenant, to his disciples, saying, “Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my body, the blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins. DO THIS IN MEMORY OF ME”.
What are the key points of Confirmation?
Confirmation involves the laying on of hands by the bishop, anointing with oil, and the Sign of Peace. The bishop prays for the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the anointing signifies the candidate’s sealing with the Holy Spirit. To learn more about Confirmation, contact your local parish office and contact the parish priest or another suitable person. Any baptized person can be confirmed, and choosing a Confirmation name is a popular custom in many places.
What to do in Confirmation?
The Catholic sacrament of confirmation is a sacrament of initiation that establishes young adults as full-fledged members of the faith. It builds on the sacraments of baptism, penance, and holy communion, completing the process of initiation into the Catholic community. The sacrament of confirmation is called confirmation because the faith given in baptism is now confirmed and made strong. During baptism, parents and godparents make promises to renounce Satan and believe in God and the Church on their behalf.
At confirmation, they renew those promises, speaking for themselves. The seven gifts of the Holy Spirit are wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude (courage), knowledge, piety, and fear of the Lord. The 12 fruits of the Holy Spirit are charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, long-suffering, mildness, faith, modesty, continency, and chastity. These gifts are supernatural graces given to the soul, while the 12 fruits are human qualities that can be activated by the Holy Spirit.
What are the 4 main parts of Confirmation?
The Confirmation ceremony consists of four parts: Presentation of Candidates, Renewal of Baptismal Promises, Laying on of Hands, and Anointing with Chrism. After the Gospel, bishops and priests take their seats, and the parish priest or delegate presents the candidates for Confirmation. The candidates stand up to present themselves for the sacrament, marking their willingness to receive it. The names of the candidates are read out, and the bishop may ask the parish priest about their preparations before Confirmation. The parish priest usually provides a brief description of the candidates’ faith journey.
After a homily by the bishop, the young people stand to renew the promises made at Baptism by their parents and godparents. In Confirmation, they publicly profess their faith in God, their Father, and Jesus Christ, who sent them the Spirit to participate in the life and mission of the Church.
How can Confirmation change you?
The sacrament of confirmation serves to reinforce the personal relationship between the individual and Christ, offering a more profound and comprehensive expression of faith. It underscores Jesus Christ’s plea for the Holy Spirit to be bestowed upon the Church for the purpose of providing loving service within the community.
What changes during Confirmation?
The Sacrament of Confirmation is a Catholic sacrament that signifies mature Christian commitment and deepening of baptismal gifts. It completes baptism and brings the graces of the Holy Spirit, granted to the Apostles on Pentecost Sunday. Confirmation is often associated with the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It completes Baptism, symbolizing maturity and coming of age. It is a sacrament of empowerment, giving strength to follow Jesus and become involved in the mission left to the Church.
The Church teaches that Confirmation is a true sacrament instituted by Christ and different from Baptism. It is administered through hand-laying, anointing with chrism, and prayer, blessed by the bishop. All baptized persons can be confirmed. The effect of Confirmation is to give strength in faith, confession of faith, and an indelible character.
What makes up the essential rite of Confirmation?
Confirmation is a sacrament that involves anointing with Sacred Chrism, a mixture of oil and balsam, consecrated by the bishop. The anointing is done by the minister, who pronounces the sacramental words. In the West, it is done on the forehead, while in the Eastern Churches, it is done on other parts of the body. The effect of Confirmation is a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit, similar to Pentecost, which produces a growth in the grace of Baptism, roots the recipient deeper in divine sonship, binds them more firmly to Christ and the Church, and reinvigorates the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Only baptized individuals can receive Confirmation, which can only be received once, and the candidate must be in a state of grace.
What are the rites of Confirmation?
Confirmation is a rite where individuals who were baptized as children publicly affirm their faith and covenant made in baptism. The congregation prays for the blessing of the Holy Spirit and the strengthening of their faith. Confirmation is a personal decision to accept full responsibilities of membership in the church and is celebrated by the congregation. It originated as part of the rite of initiation for membership in the church, where the candidate was baptized after confessing their faith.
In the early church, only bishops were permitted to baptize. When Christianity became legal in the fourth century, the church experienced rapid growth, and priests were allowed to baptize, but the laying on of hands or anointing was reserved for the bishop. The word “confirmation” was first used in the early fifth century, and it was seen as the ratification or completion of baptism.
How has Confirmation changed over time?
Confirmation has evolved over time, from being exclusively for adults to now being available to children. It was once seen as a confirmation of faith, but now it is seen as a sacrament that confers grace. Confirmation is a crucial step in Christian life, given to those who have been baptized and are old enough to understand its significance. It involves a two-part ceremony: the bishop administers the sacrament by anointing the person’s forehead with oil and pronouncing a blessing, and the baptized person makes a public declaration of their faith during a Mass. This declaration is then welcomed into the larger Catholic community, strengthening the person’s faith and giving them the grace to live it more fully.
What is the rite of acceptance in Confirmation?
The Rite of Acceptance into the Order of Catechumens is the first public ritual of the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults (RCIA). It marks the change of identity from inquirers to catechumens, who are officially welcomed by the Church as disciples. This rite is considered the first consecration by the Church for those seeking Christian initiation and is marked with the cross of Christ as God’s own. The gathered community, inquirers, and their promise of discipleship are essential to this rite.
It is celebrated during Mass, allowing the entire Christian community to participate. The Rite of Acceptance can be celebrated several times throughout the year, with each parish deciding on at least two or three times to ensure timely welcome of inquirers.
What to say at the Rite of Acceptance?
The prayer requests that God bestow upon His people the gift of life through the crucifixion and subsequent resurrection of His Son. Furthermore, it implores Him to make His servants tangible evidence of the saving power of this act and to assist them in persevering in the footsteps of Christ.
📹 10 Changes Made to the Bible (Part 1 of 2)
Hello there guys! This video will be an in-depth examination of how our modern Bible was created and written and how it differs …
1. awesome to see that pre-adding the cereal worked! 2. I really enjoyed seeing the development and thought process for this recipe, and would love to see more of that kind of stuff with new recipes 3. Hopefully you will be able to fit in a couple of batches of this once the weather is cooler – it was almost 100 here today, so ordering anything with chocolate would be an exercise in messiness. 🙁
Heading off into the army soon and I really have to say it I have been perusal it all since I was a kid and I love y’all to death you are so amazing keep up the good work I love the improvement and subscriber count has definitely gone up since I’ve last watched the article very proud of you all! I’m going to do it now just pay taxes for the first time it’s weird I want to come see y’all sometime get some candy
Graham flour is a form of whole wheat flour made by grinding the endosperm of winter wheat into a fine powder. Both the bran and the germ is mixed back in so the final mixture is, sweet, nutty flavored coarse flour. You may be able to get away with using graham flour but toast it 1st and maybe add a roasted flavour. Probably a better cost savings than cereal. It doesnt have the added sugar of cereal and im guessing there may be some vanilla in the cereal recipe. I just wonder if it would make a better texture base with flour and add some of the cereal for decoration with marshmellows and chocolate. Either way what you made looks delicious for sure.
I commented a looooong while ago about a possible monthly subscription box. Small/samples that vary each month for folks to buy. If a monthly subscription box is impossible, maybe a limited box run using a Live raffle for those folks winning the chance to purchase a monthly sample box? Use the raffle monies for a local charity.
Could you do all the steps except adding the chocolate, spread the brittle super thin before adding marshmallows followed by golden grahams (use metal bumpers) & someone mashing them down. Followed by the rolling cutter before the brittle hardens. Enrobe the squares with chocolate, everything is covered eliminating it going stale. Your brittle looks and sounds yummy!
I had a possibly money making idea. Get your fabulous camera men out there on days when the tables are full of sticky goodness and take some beauty shots of the brittle, the enrober when it’s going, etc. Then offer prints, big ones. A row of good prints would fill up an empty wall beautifully! Heck, pictures of the boxed assortments, even.
If you layer this s’mores brittle with the last/top layer being marshmallow then you could torch the top without affecting the other elements, I make s’mores in a baking dish with the graham crackers on the bottom made like a cheesecake crust then layer Hersey bars on top of that and then marshmallows and broil the marshmallow. In my opinion it never tastes like s’mores unless marshmallows are toasted.
If the fresh marshmallows are problematic, why not think outside of the box like you did with the graham crackers? Instead of using fresh marshmallows, why not try using dehydrated marshmallows like they have in cereal? It couldn’t hurt to TRY it, since you already know S’mores is a hit as a flavor. Cereal was your answer to the graham cracker problem, maybe it’ll be your answer to the marshmallow problem too.
I don’t understand the pecans. They aren’t a flavor that’s part of smores, and you already have the crunchiness from adding the cereal into the brittle. I love all the smores ingredients, but since I loathe pecans (I find them bitter) I wouldn’t be able to eat this. A shame, because otherwise I would totally loooove this stuff.
Why is the kitchen so so junkie now? Seems like when Mat was there it was a lot neater and cleaner. This is crazy you just moved in and it is too small. I think you guys need to rent a couple of storage units to get the clutter out of the kitchen. I use to watch daily, you guys are not fun anymore. This is crazy you guys need an intervention on clutter and clean.
Sadly it looks like you ‘ll need to add a “Contains bioengineered food ingredients” label on that brittle. You used poisoned cereal. I’d check the labels a little closer at the grocery store next time. We vote with our dollars! No one should be eating bioengineered food. No long term studies. FRANKENFOOD!
Sidenote: The story of David and Goliath leaves out that David did the prehistoric equivalent of bring a gun to a knife fight. When even a moderately skilled person uses a sling you can hear it break the sound barrier. The rocks move at over 200 km/h, there’s an account of the Romans in 123 BC being repelled by slingers at a port landing, having to retreat due to hull damage, armor their ships and go back. That scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark where Indiana Jones just pulls out his gun and shoots the guy? David is Indiana Jones in that scene.
The Greek text is the LXX. The Masoretic text is an edited Hebrew text done with certain goals: addition of vowel points to the consonants; choice from among Hebrew variant readings to help in debates with Christian apologists; standardization of the Hebrew text. I’m sure this comment at approx. 6:21 of the lecture is just an oversight. I find your work well done and clearly presented. Thank you for doing this.
0:07 – Introduction 0:44 – A Few Basics about the Bible 4:37 – Example of a Bible’s lineage (crude example) 7:35 – Archaeological Findings & Old Manuscripts 9:07 – How do we know the Bible has been changed? & Textual Variants ———————————————– 13:04 – #10 – Goliath’s Height (1Samuel 17:4) 14:58 – #9 – Gospel Titles & Authors 19:11 – #8 – Women Omitted (Romans 16:7, Acts 17:4) 21:59 – #7 – Forgiveness on the Cross (Luke 23:34) 24:18 – #6 – The Johannine Comma (1John 5:7-8) ———————————————– 27:08 – Closing comments
I grew up in Mexico and I went to a Catholic elementary school. When I was in middle school they made several changes to the Catholic bible in Spanish, which bothered me because I was raised to believe every element in the bible was there for a reason. One of the changes was in John’s gospel, they changed from “In the beginning there was the verb” to “In the beginning there was the word”. I remember the priest at church saying that the change was correct because Greek, unlike Spanish, was more precise and one word has only one meaning, so the word “logos” had one, and only one meaning. At the same time in school I was learning that the word logos had many meanings and it was the source of “logic” as it use of “reasoning” or “thinking”, and the source of the word “biology” where “logos” meant “science of”, “knowledge of”, “study of”, “about of”. I was expecting some of the adults raising their voice to correct the priest, but they either didn’t bothered, or worse, they believed him. Most of the changes weren’t major, but I didn’t see anyone else mentioning in public any argument for or against any of the changes, just an attitude of “this is what we believe now”
11:01 lol It’s like Wikipedia before the internet. I have to add that it might seem very unprofessional to some to have that extra text in the margins from the scribes, but I absolutely love that they did this. It reminds us that these were painstakingly copied by hand by actual human beings and we get to see a side of them and their sense of humor that we otherwise never would know about. I think it’s wonderful.
You know it’s sad how it’s the actual religious people who seem to be unwilling to analyze the history of their holy texts for changes, because you would think they would be the ones who would most want to go back, re-analyze everything, and create a new version of the Bible that is closest to God’s word and original intent.
During my confirmation in a conservative Christian church, we were also taught the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Having seen National Geographic specials on the history of the Bible, I often brought up the fact that the bible we know is a translation of a translation. The minister eventually started asking us “Why can’t there be any mistranslations in the bible?” when he was testing our understanding of what we’d learned. The correct answer was something to the effect of, “because they always used the best translation.” I thought that was pretty weak.
The statement that the English Revised Version of the late 1800s is a revision of the King James version of 1611 misses the point that the modern versions began using the Alexandrian Greek text, while the KJV is the Byzantine text. Basically, the Byzantine text is fuller. Depending on one’s perspective, the Alexandrian text omits or the Byzantine text adds quite a few words here and there, as well as whole clauses, verses, and even two long passages (Mark 16:9-20; John 7:53-8:11).
First and foremost, it’s important to contextualize the sociocultural landscape of the Middle East in the first century, marked by a profound linguistic and cultural heterogeneity. Aramaic was the lingua franca in Judea, being the mother tongue of the apostles, which facilitated direct communication with the local populations. However, the Roman Empire, with Greek as the official language of the East, promoted extensive Hellenization of the regions under its dominion, making Greek a common language for trade, education, and public administration. The New Testament, originally written in Koine Greek, serves as one of the main indications that the apostles were knowledgeable in Greek. This version of Greek, known for its simplicity and broad usage, was accessible to a vast range of the empire’s population, including those regions far from the Greek cultural center. The choice of Greek as the language for the Christian sacred texts was not accidental but a strategic decision to reach a wider audience, transcending linguistic and cultural barriers. Moreover, archaeological evidence, such as inscriptions and manuscripts found in regions of Palestine, indicates the presence of Greek in Jewish contexts, suggesting linguistic coexistence. These artifacts, alongside references to Greek schools and the use of Greek in Jewish funerary inscriptions, reinforce the idea that Greek was known and used by Jewish communities of the time. The apostles’ ability to communicate in Greek not only expanded the reach of their preachings but also facilitated intercultural dialogue and the dissemination of Christian teachings beyond Jewish borders, reaching Gentiles and converting them to Christianity.
As a Muslima, i am told we should believe in Torah and Injeel (gospel). I am a bookworm growing up till i entered workforce when i was 23. I loved reading religious books, and read the Indonesian translation of The Bible/alkitab. Old Testament was ok but at times it was too gory and in many places too x-rated for me as teenager, while reading new testament i cant help feeling the Book of John was different from older 3 in regards to divinity of Jesus pbuh. It felt as if writer of John was trying to establish his own view of Jesus pbuh. After I found out that the 4 canonical gospels were NOT WRITTEN BY THE DISCIPLES THEMSELVES, but by ANONYMOUS PEOPLE, i felt despair in trying to learn what Jesus pbuh actually did teach. Who can verify whether these anonymous people can be even trusted? (And we havent even touched the problem of Aramaic vs Greek vs translations of translations of translations of translations available to public as of now) Gospels are like hadith in Islamic tradition. Bukhari/muslim/ahmad establish strict confirmation rule (who narrated, who retold the narration, whether the narrator actually met the prophet pbuh, whether the narrators in the chain of retelling all the way up to the source narrator that met the prophet were trustworthy). One link is deemed not reliable, the Hadith is no longer sahih (highest category). I cant find similar thing in gospel (where the writers of canonical gospels were even anonymous. No one knews who they were) Edit to add pbuh after Jesus pbuh name and clarifying chain of narrator and sahih Hadith
I really appreciate your approach to this, not patronizing or belittling Christians. I loved to learn about all of this, and will certainly look for more. I believe Christians shouldn’t be afraid to learn this, as at least so far none of these changes jeopardize the fundamental concept of the Gospel.
When reading the old testament I read the Tanakh. It is loaded with footnotes that give the different translations to passages. You get to see all of the different translations from different sources and it clarifies things a lot. It also give the meanings of Hebrew words and names and other footnotes. Always read the footnotes.
I’ve been finding myself sharing this article a lot differently. There are some out there who believe that thought the Bible has been translated, the meanings have never, ever changed. There is so much wisdom in the Bible, but it can not be “perfect”, no matter how much anyone wants it to be. Thank you so much for this series of articles!
The reasons people are reluctant to engage, debate or participate in conversations involving politics or religions: A lie is still a lie, even if the majority believes it to be the truth; and the truth is still the truth when the majority believes it to be a lie.’ “Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.” -Leo Tolstoy.
Maybe specific to my church/more common in Aussie churches, but we often go into the exact wording of the ancient language for certain passages and do a lot of analysis to overcome the language translation barriers. It’s really good for getting a better understanding of intended meanings and implications My bible also has a note for every single instance in which different sources had different wording. It’s really interesting and cool to see, but it’s also usually just, “some Hebrew manuscripts don’t mention this one guy out of this list of forty guys” and “many manuscripts say “of God” rather than “from God” and things that don’t really change the message Awesome article! Strong research, and I appreciate your respectful nature 🙂
As an English reviewer, living with a translator, just two funky translations can COMPLETELY change a text, our clients mainly have Chinese text translated into english and send that version to all other languages they want, and these versions might even be sent for another round of translating, my job as a reviewer is to look at the English translation and make sure it’s at least readable, however not all clients go through me and send it straight to translation which is when I can hear loud shouts of anger from the living room “WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT EVEN MEAN??” “AM I HAVING A STROKE???” ” fuck it they should’ve send context, I’ll just upload this shit…” So anyway if you can’t understand shit in your mobile games it’s because there was ONE bad translation at the very beginning. Same with an incredibly holy text that had been translating other translations for centuries, from my experience, I’d be truly shocked if even 5% of these texts books are similar to the original, it’s pretty sad really :/ so much lost….
You actually have PERFECT TIMING with this article! I mean this article does such a good job of making a lot of us feel a sense of disbelief and like real genuine doubt. Kind of like the crucifixion… When the apostles saw Jesus on the cross and thought to themselves “Oh no, this is not how it was suppose to end. Were we all wrong for believing? Is all lost?!” It seemed dark then, it seemed to them their world was ending. Yet Jesus rose from the dead, because He was and still is God. I pray we may ALL remember that as we reflect after this article. Thank you for this though, you put in a LOT of research work and your pursuit of truth is always noble Thank you
11,686 comments and I feel the need to leave one. Not being a hard core Christian, but raised in a religious family, I’m pretty familiar with the bible. I even read it all the way through when I was about 16 (almost 52 now). I skipped the begats in the old testament of course. I read it to better argue with my father about religion. He was a paradox religion wise. My dad was an engineer and you would think he would be agnostic at best, but he was actually a very spiritual man. I respected that later in life. In my teen years I would argue how stupid it was to think that the bible was the exact word of the Lord Jesus Christ and his ultimate Daddy God in the sky. I did learn from him though. You don’t have to take the bible literally, but the New testament is essentially a guide on how to be a decent human being. You don’t have to believe in Jesus’ miracles or his divinity, but only take his basic message to heart. Care about your fellow humans, and do what you can do to help those less fortunate than yourself in whatever way you can. I miss my dad. He died four years ago, December 22, 2016. I typed this comment December 26, 2020. We had our problems (pretty much my fault TBH) but I loved him, and learned to respect him and his beliefs as I got older. I actually miss our religious debates. 😉
We still have Greek and Aramaic original Ridings that scholars use to make translations either understandable without much changing meaning, and other translations that are meant to be direct translations or almost word for word translations. This is why we have our pastors and leaders in the church as trained professionals to disseminate the holy word of God. Russians, who were sent to the Gulag as religious prisoners because they are Christian pastors memorize the book of John, of course, not in the English version, but in the Russian version, which was translated from the originals as well as other translations. When this author says, do you believe me no I don’t believe him he uses words like gap that are code word for, misunderstanding and misrepresentation. He has misrepresenting history.
I like that we have so many manuscripts so we can see where the changes are . That’s the great thing about the writings of the Bible not being in the control of one person or group collaborating together . I’d rather have 1000s of manuscripts that have changed than having only 1 manuscript because then you can’t tell if it’s been changed . I think the nature of these manuscripts actually gives us more confidence in recreating the original . Which we are close to already . We have 99% of the original already
It’s amazing that Biblical inerrancy, a relatively new idea, still exists when it’s pretty clear there have been changes and there are contradictions in the Bible. Believing in an inerrant Bible makes as much sense as believing in a Flat Earth, although there are people who do believe in both an inerrant Bible and a Flat Earth.
The scripture’s not inerrant. There’s plenty that’s debated. However, there’s a whole lot more to be in awe of than there is to pick apart. Don’t rob yourself of the opportunity to read it. Something that really helped me understand how it could possibly be accurate after so much time are the redundancies. You can’t make non-trivial changes without someone comparing your translation to thousands of other known ancient scrolls. Ethiopian churches, for one, maintain scrolls that were written at a time when there would have still been living eye witnesses. The dead sea scrolls are thousands of years old. If compared to a modern-day translation, you’ll find the accuracy is uncanny. Of course, when you’re translating between eras and cultures and languages, people will disagree about some things. Read the Sermon on the Mount and think about how alien those ideas were at the time and how they are woven through the fabric of every society on earth today. Even if you never read a word, your life is completely different than it would have been had he not spoken those words.
Heya, as a Christian myself, great job on research and the article itself! I was expecting a poorly researched and completely biased argument, but nothing too bad (as far as I know, please don’t murder me, biblical scholars). Great job man! I just wished you could’ve mentioned the surviving number of copies that the bibles have coupled with its accuracy, and how most people calculate the number textual variants though. Would’ve been better if you mentioned a bit more about the Septuagint (LXX) or the Qumran cave scrolls. Also, it might be interesting if you can discuss extra-textual support on Christianity beliefs (ex: Testimonium Flavianum and the argument for its partial authenticity). 1 more thing, in John 21:24 “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.” wouldn’t this imply that the eyewitness himself (which is believed to be John) is affirming to the accuracy of the writings and it is not based on community or tradition? I’m in no way trying to discredit you of your work, in fact, I do think it’s very informative and eye-opening for us believers! I just wish people would consider that the basis of Christianity is not just baseless believe this believe that, feel this, feel the spirit and all, and we actually do have some basis for our beliefs 🙂
Excellent article. In the Near East, any scriptures that are not in Aramaic are considered interpretations and are not valid. To this day they hold a period of mourning for the defects found in the Greek Septuagint. Keep up the great work. I may leave some other comments in support of the facts you shared here. 💫
I love this! Thank you for educating me on subjects I didn’t know! 😊 I am a Catholic Theologian and I love learning truths that have escaped my studies. It is a delight that when it comes to study of Theology, there is always more to learn! You are entirely correct that most folks truly do not know how much the Bible has been altered. Before the Protestant Reformation, (which led to the Catholic Reformation), The Catholic Church attempted a Latin to English translation but found that there was too much lost in the actual translation. The King James Version had so many translation errors that the Catholic Church was called to an English translation. It was filled with many errors as well. Thus began revisioning on the part of both The Catholic and Protestant Church. Bibles are filled with footnotes for a reason! Revision after revision, translation after translation leading to even more interpretations. My go to is the New American Bible Standard Revised Edition. Wow, that’s a mouthful! I read footnotes “religiously”. You just earned a subscriber!
I knew all of this by the time I was 25. That just means I read a LOT! Books were my food & continue to be. I also was planning to be Ordained, but became Catholic, instead. In addition, I truly love the Middle Ages & would love to get back to my study of Biblical Hebrew & Koine’ Greek. I really wish Catholics had Bible College. But, we don’t. Also, Bible Colleges are very sectarian & usually (or used to when I was going to college) teach inerrancy as the author mentions he was taught. I was taught differently in Koine’ class in College (the language usually understood by everyone around the Mediterranean, the period’s “Lingua Franca”) & in Biblical Hebrew, privately tutored. So, it was a different take on Scriptures. One thing that I find interesting is that Israeli students can read the TORAH, in Hebrew, albeit with some difficulty as the shapes of the letters are a bit different, today. The meaning of some modern Hebrew may not coincide with the old & a teacher would explain the nuances, I suppose. When the Jews of their Diaspora returned to Israel, they made a concerted effort for their kids to be taught Hebrew. Even today, those who return are given classes in Hebrew. All this in one LONG lifetime! It’s amazing to me.
Thankfully, I’ve seen a more scholarly approach to the Bible being disseminated down to the popular level over the years. Most pastors I’ve had regularly talk about the original Greek/Hebrew rather than letting parishioners get away with thinking that the Bible is originally English. Pastors and modern Bible footnotes are more commonly citing the subtle variations in manuscripts, offering food for thought and deeper study. I’m a follower of Jesus, but I’m no stranger to the idea of people tweaking texts and doctrines to suit their needs or gain power (heck, that’s what Jesus spent much of his time dismantling in Israel). Christians need to be especially aware that even the best intentioned teachers can and have twisted God’s words. Thankfully we don’t just have the written Word, but we have the living Word, Jesus. He never changes, and he continues to transform the lives of people from many language groups, nations, generations, and levels of literacy. The true, timeless Word isn’t merely written on a page, but on hearts and minds. Thanks for your article and for getting this information into the hands of more people. Regardless of our spiritual backgrounds, we can all benefit from studying things more carefully.
Great article. I feel this definitely helps show that the bible is true as these tiny changes only help to show these are real exact events being described by real people with tiny changes over hundreds of years. I note that most translations have footnotes on all these we things to let you know if there is slight discrepancy between the ancient documents, too. A real book describing a real person compiled over hundreds of years with many different authors, each, astonishingly, telling one story, even hundreds of years before it happened. No other holy book has this. Meet the person it’s about.
I think it’s fair to say that when a book (in one language) is translated to many others, the exact meaning is often lost in translation. Still, when you consider that many ‘stories’ were written down many decades after they supposedly happened, is it not possible that as in ‘the telephone game’ the twentieth person to hear the whisper might well have a completely different idea of the original message?
The books we call the Old Testament, and the Jews call the Tanakh, are mostly survivor stories, of real-time catastrophic events that repeatedly overwhelmed the ancient world between Noah and II Isaiah. They books are disordered, now, first by Jewish leaders of the 7th Century, when they assembled the Tanakh, as a formal document, already nearly a thousand years after the events of Exodus, so important five books, Exodus: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, or, “This is what we remember”, “Holy God! What was that?”, “These are the things you will and will not do”, “This is what happened in the aftermath”, and “These are the rules of our order”. The five books associated with Moses (probably not a Jew, but possibly multi-racial Egyptian, somehow connected to the royal house) are sequential, but the rest of the Old Testament is jumbled, mostly because the scribes of the 7th Century BC didn’t believe the stories as told to them, certainly not in the way their grandfathers’ grandfathers would have. They were already safely separated by a century, from the last of the events that had terrorized their ancestors, over more than seventeen hundred years. The stories passed down from survivors told of unimaginable horrors and nightmare conditions, with unbelievable casualty figures. Jews had only been monotheistic for less than 500 years, adopting the practice about the time of Zoroaster, and perhaps, Akhenaten. The chronology of the ancient past is a confused mess, not merely because humans are lazy about record-keeping.
I remember hearing a quote from some us congresswoman “If English was good enough for Jesus then English should be good enough everyone” (I think she was protesting children being taught foreign languages in schools) I find Christian mythology pretty interesting, in the same way I find Ancient Greek, Norse and Egyptian mythology interesting but how anyone can think such a heavily edited and changed book, through multiple layers of translations should be relied upon as the direct word of god is utterly baffling
2:30 I was taught the same in private Christian school. Then I met a Jewish family and when I brought questions up as early as kindergarten I was never given an answer I could accept. Many time the only answer they gave me or told my parents to give me was “god always provides”…. 😢Still not acceptable.
It’s always great to see articles like these trying to educate people on the history of ancient texts and how textual transmission works. Unfortunately, there seem to be a number of factual errors or misconceptions in this article. I feel compelled to bring attention to a few: 5:12 Translation does not work like a game of telephone. The English Standard Version is not a translation of the Revised Standard Version. All modern translations use the oldest, most ancient, most reliable texts to translate directly from the original languages. These texts, with all of their variants, are collected and organized in the form of massive scholarly volumes called the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (old testament) and Novum Testamentum Graece (new testament). All modern translations use these compilations of original-language texts when making their versions. While the King James Version remains popular in many circles, it does not serve as any kind of base text for any modern translation or scholarship. This assumption of “telephone translation” unfortunately permeates this article. 12:00 When accidental mistakes are made, such as dropping words or lines, these mistakes don’t propagate into our modern translations. They are easily identified based on examining older manuscripts, and are trivially corrected (usually removed). These things really aren’t that controversial in biblical scholarship, and they happen all the time. For example, the Great Isaiah Scroll (of the Dead Sea Scrolls) is full of little tweaks and changes that are simply fixes made by scribes intending to preserve the original copy, which they are physically referencing in front of them while they write or proof-edit.
As for the Gospels being internally anonymous, it has nothing to do with them not being named then after they were given names. Youtuber InspiringPhilosophy has a extremely detailed article on that topic titled – Who Wrote the Gospels? some quotes; “Given the cultural context we should expect the gospels to be internally anonymous, so the argument that the gospels do not internally identify the authors is not actually evidence that they were known as anonymous works” – Michael Jones. “The absence of a name inside the body of an ancient work is entirely understandable because of all the other ways the author might be identified. There were of course numerous ways of indicating an authors name in or on a roll of codex, outside of the work itself” – Simon Gathercole
The problem with the height of Goliath is that there were a number of different lengths that made up a cubit throughout much of History. For instance, a cubit is anywhere from approximately 17 in, we’re six cubits and a span would make up about nine foot 6 in, up to 22 inches where four cubits and a span would make up about 9 foot 6 in. If you want to see a very interesting change, look at the ages of shem’s son grandson great-grandson great-great grandson, up to the great great great grandson. And their ages at the time they fathered their first child and the ages they were when they died. According to the Mt, Shem outlived all of them and would have been alive when Abraham was around. In all other earlier versions of the Bible there is an additional 650 years between the time of Shem getting off of the Ark and the time of Abraham. And yet there is no discussion in the Old Testament about Shem and Abraham meeting each other. That is a huge error intentionally changed probably so that eventually it would look like Christ did not have the Jenny ology are both the House of Judah and the house of Levi. Your assumption that Hebrews were only about 10% literate is without Merit. These people have a long history of teaching each other how to read and write, as well as being able to Converse in other languages because of the great deal of trade from at least four other countries. Old Greek is actually quite similar to Hebrew even though the Aramaic script was already in use. The earliest recovered piece of scripture we have is from approximately 90 ad and that is more then early enough to have been a direct writing by at least one of the disciples.
I grew up in Christian fundamentalist. The Bible is the unquestionable literal word of God. Written by men but inspired and given them to write down by God. It’s infallible and unquestionable. I have read the Bible front to back hundreds of times. I then went to Bible college and studied it in depth even more to the point where I translated books of the Bible from koine Greek to English myself. The more I learned about the Bible and the history behind the council of nicea the less I believed in it’s inerrancy. Especially translating it myself and seeing how portions where altered in order to fit thier agenda or to censor really sexual things or stuff that didn’t align with their beliefs.
Bart Ehrman and Bruce Metzger, though coming from different personal religious perspectives, both agreed on the reliability of the New Testament text. Despite the textual variants, they concluded that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by these variations in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament. Ehrman has mentioned that most variants are inconsequential, such as spelling errors or differences in word order that do not change meanings. He also suggested that the core messages of the New Testament are intact, and if he and Metzger were to draft a consensus statement on the original text, they would find very few points of disagreement. This consensus indicates a shared view that while textual variants exist, they do not compromise the fundamental doctrines of Christianity or the overall message conveyed in the Bible as we have it today
To be honest, this is the first time I am ever hearing of the idea of perfect preservation of the bible. It must be an American thing. And I am very surprised this is even an idea floating about. I have never heard any Christian claim the bible is preserved word for word. This is news to me. Anything translated is altered. For example, the does not does not exist in Hebrew. The overall message of the bible does not change because of translation. It’s not like.. love your neighbour changes into hate your neighbour lol
Finding out the real truth about religious texts can be tricky as there are different interpretations. However, researchers use methods like studying old stories, ancient writings, Enochian texts, early Judaism, Biblical Anthropology, and Archaeology to uncover accurate information. In simple terms, the genuine teachings of Moses (Torah) and Jesus (Christian Bible) are said to be kept in Ethiopia, right next to the Ark of the Covenant.
As someone who still attends church and still a believer, I always keep this in mind and is a strong advocate that all Christians should have at least basic knowledge about this. PS. Scientists — We have created BCE/CE to replace AD/BC and so it can belong to everyone. Me, An Intellectual — Before Christian Era & Christian Era?
One thing that’s important to note is that a lot of these changes are noted in a lot of modern Bibles, it’s not exactly as much of a secret as people think. The majority of modern Bibles put in the footnotes different translation notes, and potentially contested verses (such as the ending of Mark or the “He who has not sinned cast the first stone” verses in John). There are some who decide to dogmatically ignore these potential changes/errors in the Bible (mostly harcore Baptists who believe that the KJV is the ONLY correct version, ignoring all old manuscripts).
Thank you so much for making this confusing topic so so much fun to learn about!!! They tried to teach me at school, but in a way that kinda brushed off the inconsistencies and made me a bit suspicious. I always wondered how true to source some things in the Bible are and this quenches this curiosity somewhat!
There was no prototypical “original” version of the “Old Testament”. The word Torah in Hebrew means “teaching”. This was a collection of ancient stories that were orally passed down from generation to generation and was sung, rather than spoken, in an effort to make it easier to remember with repetition. Eventually after MANY generations, especially following the existential threat of the Babylonian Captivity, many of these stories were written down by different people. The written form became an especially important because by that point the hedgemony of the Babylonians forced the use of the Aramaic language on the populace as its primary tongue. Even though Aramaic and Hebrew are cousin languages, there are enough differences that it isn’t fully mutually intelligible. So, by writing down the sung words, using special marks on the letters to show how the syllable should be sung, it preserved the oral version of the then-endangered language of biblical-era Hebrew. But since there are inevitably variations on how people recalled that the ancient oral stories went, there are a few distinct differences in those original stories that got written down. And then eventually groups like the Masorites collated and redacted the collection of various tribal texts into what they thought best represented the totality of the stories.
As a Christian it honestly makes me kind of sad to hear about people who were raised in the church who literally think the Bible’s translation is always 100% accurate. When Christians say the Bible is inerrant what we really mean is the message/teachings of the Bible are inspired by God. Pretty much all educated Christians know that translation is not inspired by God, whereas the original authors were. Really wish there was more education on that side. The messages and teachings of the Bible have always been the same, it’s only misguided people who have warped and distorted it to fit their own agendas
A resource that might be of interest – Wikipedia has a good page called “List of New Testament Papyri”, which lists all the know extent manuscripts, with their dates and further details. Sorry, I can’t put a link but it’s easy to find. The earliest extent is the “Rylands Library Papyrus P52”, a tiny fragment containing only 7 incomplete lines of text on each side. It is dated between 100-175 CE. There are only 3 other papyri dating from the 2nd century and these are also just small fragments. One must get into the 4th century before finding close to complete manuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus is probably the earliest and may have been created on commission by Emperor Constantine.
Regardless of your belief in the Bible, assuming or saying that it’s a perfect translation is impossible. A lot of key points, stories, or doctrinal messages may be the same, but over the years things like imperfect translations, grammatical mistakes and “corrections,” or even removal of passages or books has occurred many times.
Fascinating to listen to your talk. Thank you. Are you aware of the Gospel of St. Barnabas? Many Muslims have read this gospel. The authenticity is debatable and I’m agnostic on this point. This gospel is well worth studying for someone with your deep knowledge of the Bible. I’m a practising Muslim and my ancestry can be traced to Omar the second Caliph. My education was in an Anglican school and a Catholic university. Learning to respect the church and Christianity while remaining a steadfast Muslim.
Your chart of Old Testament versions holds that Onkelos’ Aramaic translation is a derivate of Aquilas’ Greek version. This affirmation is, at least, highly controversial. It is based on a footnote of a 1935 book edited by James Elmer Dean. As a student of the Onkelos Targum I bear witness it is, in fact, a word-by-word literal translation of the masoretic Hebrew text of the Torah, only expounding occasionally where a word meaning must be made clear. These deliberate occasional changes are based on the Midrash, and are usually pointed out by the rabbinical Mefarshim, commentators. Onkelos is so literal that it is used by Jewish learners of Aramaic because of how easily each word is found it is exact form in the Aramaic Targum as it is in the Hebrew Torah – both in the Masoretic text and in the scribal scroll – which is what we refer to, in actuality, as the “unchanged text”.
I doubt that the different translations in 5.30 minutes into the program are only based on the previous english version. I am not deep into the english translations but for the Swedish versions, especially during the last 100 years, they are normally based on translations from the earliest manuscripts availiable in a critical manner. I would be really surpriced if english new translations are not made in a similar way.
I want to respectfully point out that a substantial amount of scholarship disagrees with this article on the authorship of the gospel. The fact that the oldest copies of the gospels do not include the names is absolutely normal. Hardly any copies of literary work from that period names its author. And the fact the letters themselves do not contain the name of the author isn’t surprising at all. How many books have you read that tell you, within the body of the text itself, who wrote them? Exactly. Instead, we have abundant early church attestation (I’m talking second century) most everybody was in agreement that Matthew was the work of Matthew (who would have been literate in Hebrew and Latin, so why is Greek surprising), Luke (a doctor, who likely was highly literate), Mark (Peter’s scribe, so also literate), and John (who writes in a very simplistic Greek, implying it was his second language). Paul, another Biblical author, repeatedly informs those receiving his letters that he isn’t actually writing them, but dictating them to his scribe. Why would this also not be a safe assumption for the gospel writers? Furthermore, if someone were to invent the authorship of the Bible, Matthew, Mark, and Luke would make no sense. Someone pretending to be an eyewitness, or somebody pretending to know who the eyewitness was would have picked Peter, James, or John before the others. The fact they picked the rarely mentioned (outside of his own book) Matthew, the unnamed (except in Paul’s letters) Luke, and the even more absent Mark is a strong indicator that they did know who the authors really were.
Among them, there are some illiterates who do not know their holy book; except that they follow their own desires and do nothing but conjecture. Woe to those, who write the book with their own hands and then say: ‘This is from god’, so that, they may sell it for a petty price! Woe to them, for what their hands have written and woe to them, for what they have earned. (Quran, chapter 2, verse 78)
As someone who did some research on this topic, I have to stay there is strong evidence for the validity of the New Testament gospels and their authorship, this article uses Bart Ehrman Soley as its source for all the information. OfCourse Bart Ehrman is a respected scholar, but a lot of scholars have pushed back on his ideas. all I’m saying is, it’s not as one sided as the article shows it to be.
Greek was a very common language in the Holy Land 2000 years ago. It is very likely that Jesus and the disciples could at least understand it, else they could not have conversed with the Roman’s or the people of the Decapolis. There is a growing argument that Jesus would have preached a lot in Greek.
So what he is saying any Christians should know unless they are believers that by name only. That is why I study Bible using the original languages that was written in first place. Because there are variations in translated Bibles therefore we have to go to original Bible to remove confusion out of our faith.
Your explanation of the English versions as translations and revisions of an older English version is simplistically misleading. Every new translation was undertaken by scholars using the most recent editions of the Greek NT and Hebrew/Aramaic OT and did not simply rely on the prior English versions. They did use the prior versions as guides for wording in translation style. Your explanation of copy errors to incite doubt about the original form of the text is also dramatically misleading. NT scholars place the reliability of the NT text at 99%.
1. Is there only one god, or are there multiple gods? If multiple, how is a person to choose which deserves obedience? 2. Would you agree that before anything can exist, something has to create it? Did your god create everything? If yes, who/what created your god? 3. Is your god infallible? 4. Is your god omnipotent? 5. Is your god omniscient? 6. Is your god benevolent, or malicious? 7. If your god cannot make mistakes, then it follows that everything it creates is either perfect, or that your god intentionally makes things that are flawed. Would a benevolent god intentionally create something likely to suffer because of its flaws? 8. If your god can do anything, and it created the universe, why didn’t it simply create a perfect world inhabited by perfect beings? If your god wanted obedience, and god is not malicious, why did god make disobedience possible? 9. If your god knows everything, does it already understand every thought and feeling you have? Does it instantaneously know everything you say and do? If yes, what is the point of religious rituals, such as prayer? 10. Why would an omnipotent and omniscient god not communicate directly and unambiguously with individuals, with no need of books, churches, prophets, signs, miracles, etc? If a person is not intelligent enough, or not “worthy” enough to speak directly with god, whose fault is that? Who made the person in the first place? If a person is unworthy or incapable of directly communicating with god, how can that person be capable of recognizing a valid spokesperson for god?
1. What was Reuben calling…….. 2. What was Simeon calling……. 3.what was Levi calling…….. 4. What was Judah calling…… 5. What was Issachar calling….. 6. What was Zebulun calling….. 7. What was Dan calling…… 8. What was Gad calling…… 9. What was Asher calling….. 10. What was Napthali calling…. 11. What was Joseph calling…… 12. What was Benjamin calling…… Each tribe has a specific calling from GOD…..calling such as sonship….watchman…and high priest..
I seriously cannot believe how someone can actually believe that the Bible is literally the “words from God”, and I’m Christian myself. That’s not only ridiculous, it’s dangerous. No wonder people kill others because of religions and create wars because of them. That’s nothing else than lunatic thinking.
George Macdonald, my favorite preacher, mentioned a couple instances where he thought the bible was changed, and he was vindicated on one of them, mark 10 24 used to say “how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter the kingdom of God?” Now it says “how hard is it to enter the kingdom of God” Which lines up with the vatican and siniatic manuscripts and makes since what idot ever thought he could have the kingdom of God by his riches. What’s he gonna do bribe st Peter at the pearly gates?
Trinity is not explicitly mentioned beside 1 John 5:7-8, but you can read it clearly in other parts of the Bible. Isaiah 9 6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. 7 Of the greatness of his government and peace there will be no end. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 10: 30 I and the father are one John 20:27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” 28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” (Thomas called Jesus God) 14 “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God(a); believe also in me. And many other verses. The Jews understood this, because they wanted to kill him, because he said he was one with God. John 14:25 “All this I have spoken while still with you. 26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name John 10:33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
Hey, I don’t want to go on and on, but I have thought about the Trinity concept a lot and I think there is sufficient evidence of it in the Old Testament, regardless of that Johannine Comma incident. The first verse of Genesis refers to God as ELOHIM, which is plural. Why are there 3 or more “gods” creating things if God is one single entity. In Isaiah 6, God Himself says within earshot of Isaiah “Whom shall I send? Who shall go for us?” That suggests that God is more than one entity. I forget where God says this, but he says “Let us make man in our image.” Why is God dialoguing with himself and using the first-person-plural pronoun? So then when you get to the New Testament, even if the oldest manuscripts don’t explicitly state the 3-in-1 nature of God, you still have in the story of Jesus’ baptism an event where the Father makes a declaration, the Son performs a ritual, and the Spirit descends from heaven. So even without that little text you mentioned, there is sufficient evidence otherwise for a Trinitarian view of God. Rationalist people will still see this as a paradox, which it is. And to that I say that paradoxes are proof in themselves that logic is not perfect. Intuition is a higher form of cognition than reason is. Paradoxes also, in my opinion are proof that God exists. If we are God’s creatures, why would we be able to fully comprehend Him when we are such small things compared to Him? Anyway, I appreciate articles like this, because I find the average Christian’s cognitive dissonance comes out when this subject comes up.
We Muslims don’t look at the Bible as words of god as the intro say. The Quran explains that the Torah and enjeel have been changed so we don’t actually study it or need to read it as we feel the Quran is complete and Allah never asks us to read the Bible. I myself read it cuz I’m curious but as Muslims we generally don’t
Personally I have always stuck with the KJV . It changed my life from misery to ministry. I believe it was a God ordained translation for English speaking people. If you search for mistakes or inconsistencies I guess you will find them . As for me I search for Jesus, and find Him . I pray before reading, for the guidance of The Holy Spirit,whose ministry is to guide us into all truth . There are many modern bibles that are tending to deny the Divinity of Christ . I don’t put down anyone who wants the easier option of the modern bibles, however plz note the curse on those who would change it Rev 22:18,19 . I tremble as I see the state of the Laodicean church, now . The prophecies are working out exactly as written . I appreciate the work you have put into this post, thank you. I also say thanks to God for giving me an elder in the church who recommended kindly that I stick with the KJV . It has been worth the little extra work to understand it . I now have a version where the difficult old words are noted and translated right there where they occur with a notation . Godbless your efforts to search out truth cheers from Pat NZ .❤
I haven’t seen this whole article yet but I’m intrigued. I was raised in a corrupted fashion. “Christian Catholic”, most people don’t understand the Roman Catholic Church started out pretty corrupt, refising to help general populations understand and read the Bible for themselves. Which is the opposite of what Jesus taught. They also murdered Christians and had the first print of the (Wycliffe? I believe the first English version, though perhaps not the first mass-produced via the Printing Press?) Bible to the public, burnt as well. It’s sad to hear of more extreme lessons such as mentioned here about the word being unchanged. That’s anti-Biblical in itself. It does say the Bible was written to be the trusted Word of God. But not that it will not change and other people will copy and alter it’s messages. But we are also told to ask questions and to do so also of our faith, eith aim to keep faith in tact of course. Just as the Bible says there will be many false prophets and a branching out of the church, of the saints into carious denominations…this is part of that IMO. We are supposed to commit to and actually study the Bible as Christians. Not to just let someone else tell us what it says and means. I am actually quite suprised out of the four versions I commonly compare, and a few I occasionally add…MOST of the Bible does contain the same messages. And the most vital messages are in tact (besides perhaps some very new versions and sects like Mormonism…) Like many mysteries beyond our comprehension as humans, we don’t know why this is allowed to happen.
Certain words have been changed to keep the original meaning throughout evolving language. Only 50 years ago if someone was referred to as ‘Gay’ it would mean they are happy and jolly. Words’ meanings change, so to keep preserve the meaning of ancient texts, they must be adjusted accordingly. Isaiah 40:22 There is One who dwells above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers. He is stretching out the heavens like a fine gauze, And he spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. The direct translation of the Hebrew word חוּג into English is ‘Chug’ and means ‘Circle’. In Ancient Hebrew one word could have several meanings depending on the context in which they are spoken or written. This is similar to modern English. For example, ‘Read’ can be pronounced ‘Red’ or ‘Reed’ which gives them a slightly different meaning. ‘Chug’ does mean circle, but it means a circle as seen from the viewpoint of the horizon from a high vault or mountain. If you were on a high vault and you could see the horizon encompassing you without any corners, you would deduce that you were on a circle. If you then travelled hundreds of miles in any direction and viewed the same thing from any other high vault, the deduction would be the same and that it was as viewed from anywhere on it. The only shape fitting this description is a sphere. Because the ancient Hebrew language had no direct word meaning sphere, the word Chug (חוּג) was used. There’re lots of words that present the same problem in modern languages.
I’m not convinced that there always was a single original. Authors often continue to revise their work. The modern popular song “Halleluja” is a great example of this. The three endings of Mark is another example. Also, Jesus said His Spirit would advise and remind the holy authors. The Spirit can change the earlier forms of the text. Wouldn’t it be a hoot if God wanted to mess with our minds a bit?
Well, its odd that none of the soldiers could use a sling, and one might make the point that David was brave. But I believe that the real point is that where the story says that David said out loud that while he was a boy, with no armour, and no weapon but a small sling, he had faith in the “one true God” The point is that since he trusted in God, God stood besiide him and supported him..The point is that “with God, all things are possible”
But, changes in the text need to be understood in context to the whole of scripture. We cannot dismiss the resurrection because there have been minor changes from text to text. The fact there are differences point to the validity of the resurrection. If someone was concocting these stories up, they would have tried very hard to make everything exactly the same. Witnesses bring the same story to the table, but not verbatim. That would be contrived, and therefore suspicious. It’s minor differences, but overall unity, which make the story more believable, not less.