Was the Bible Changed Over Time?

For more information, please read, Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels (UPDATED AND REVISED)
amzn.to/42XtJhu
To purchase the entire series of complete videos, please visit: Cold-Case Christianity Video DVD: amzn.to/2yoRGAW

[@SuperDavidEF]

Wow, this is stuff I never knew and I've run into people who claimed that the Bible has been changed over time. Now, I can answer these arguments with the truth!

[@CDdogg303]

Right! This is the type of stuff every Christian should know

[@jcloved8012]

This people do it to watch you trip. This guy didn't even cover the fact that we have early records of the Bible that date back to within 100 years of when Jesus resurrected.

[@ianmartinesq]

The decentralized nature of the church and the proliferation of scriptures is a strong assurance that the scriptures were not modified. There are manuscripts from all over the Christian world. If the church in Rome wanted to change the scriptures the Eastern Churches aren’t going to change their manuscripts on orders from some guy in Rome. This is one way in which the fractious nature of the early church is actually a benefit. Because it means all the manuscript were never in one set of hands that could edit the Bible.

[@mannya7765]

100%

[@rickintexas1584]

We are very fortunate to live in a time when knowledge can be shared so easily.

[@benthecaptain7419]

A refreshing look at ancient texts, using modern tools to establish validity.

[@thebumblebeemovie3514]

Thank you for doing this stuff. It’s really been helpful to me in understanding my beliefs and finding proper foundations for them.

[@myvidaloka]

Loved this. Because there’s a certain someone on twitter who keeps saying that the Bible had been changed because he’s going by what his study bible is telling him.

[@Hesgrenade]

Thank you for this. I've never heard this kind of logical explanation before

[@kolton1688]

Thanks for posting your videos, ive learned a lot on how to defend the gospel. Thanks again bro.

[@nschlaak]

Thank you for doing your due diligence in researching the veracity of God's word.

[@DamianS1893]

Greatly appreciate your channel... God bless ✝️👍🤙✌️

[@sethsz3577]

This is really great information. Thank you

[@v_osornio]

God really using your detective skills to help share the gospel. God bless you brother 🙏 amazing work.

[@Cpthilton]

This good stuff.

[@lionel8554]

Thank you so much for this I am so grateful for this information and so blessed. I often wonder watching your videos if you’ll ever enter the debate arena? We need more apologists like you! God bless you ✝️🫶🏾

[@ianmartinesq]

If you like this, you should read his books. And you should try Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell.

[@mannya7765]

I highly recommend Frank Turek as well.

[@bibleviews]

I Love how you made videos in a court house

[@lizhoward9754]

My question has nothing to do with the accuracy of a writer of the gospels but about the accuracy of the whole NT. If the oldest and earliest book of the NT was written 100 years after Christ, how reliable are the oral histories? Wouldn’t that be like tasking someone to write about WWI with no written documentation and only oral stories? The writer would be dependent on someone like me to relay stories my grandfather told me about being in WWI. It would make for an interesting book but it would just be a collection of stories, right? It gets even more complex with “newer” parts of the NT written as much as 300 years after Christ. Now that would be like asking a person living today to write about the Revolutionary War with no written documentation, no evidence but just oral stories. Thanks for addressing my questions. Maybe I am missing something.

[@sauliruottu5871]

I'm not the guy detective on the video but the thing is that oral "documentation" was the way information moved back then, and it had more weight than in this age we're living in. Printing press hasn't been around that long, and printing in masses was not easy prior to that. You could say that if we apply the same speculation people have towards the oral tradition regarding the Bible to all more ancient historical information we have on other events/stories etc., we really don't have much to rely on about anything.

[@vharboe]

Look at what Paul says about the 500+ persons who saw the risen Jesus: some had passed, but most was still alive. They were eyewitnesses. Their stories was easy to check out. Also remember that in that time, the majority of people were illiterate. They therefore relied on memorizing huge amounts of scripture - their brain was well trained to remember things, much more than we are today (although we can train ourself to do that). If you look at the original language, you will often find that the verses had a rhythm that would make them easy to remember - think of how child rhymes are built up, such as "I'm a little teapot", "humpty-dumpty" and so on. The NT was written down very short time after the cross, with the oldest parts (most scholars agree that revelations was written latest) around year 95-96. That's about 60 years after the cross. The Gospels were written between year 66 and 95, so 30-60 years after the cross. But what's even more interesting is what Paul writes in Galatians, written in 54-56 and is an authentic letter from Paul. There he tells about when he visited Peter, three years after his conversion on the road to Damascus. That most likely happened in year 33-34, but it could have been closer to year 36. Which means that, at the latest, Paul met Peter 6 years after the cross, if we say the cross happened in 33. Now, how reliable is this? While I cannot tell you what I had for dinner two weeks ago, I can tell you the weather, location, the exact spot I was when I watched 911 unfold live on CNN. I can remember a lot of details from that day, because that had such an impact on me - even though I am Norwegian. More locally, I can remember the weather, where I was and what I did when the news about the terrorist attack on Utøya happened here in Norway. Even though some details could have been forgotten, the big picture won't change. I saw the twin towers come down. I heard the shots at Utøya (the video clips on the news later on had the shots edited out to protect the viewers from the horrors). And John, Mary and Mary plus others, saw Jesus being crucified - and they all saw him risen. You don't forget something like that. As for the resurrection: 500 people does not have the same illusion. The jews could easily have debunked it by showing a tomb that was not empty after all, just a short stroll outside Jerusalem. The guards was roman soldiers. If they drank or fell asleep while on duty, they would be severely punished. And they had absolutely NO interest in just another dead jew. Even facing the risk of severe punishment, they told what they experienced at the tomb. There is a LOT of other evidence such as this, but you'll better look up Gary Habermas here on YT for that. We also know that Jesus lived, which is documented by among other sources, Tacitus (google Tacitus on Jesus). No scholars disagree - even Richard Dawkins admit (although it hat do be dragged out of him...) that Jesus lived. As for the authenticity of the Bible, we have thousands upon thousands of documents and fragments that shows us that the Bible today is the same as the earliest manuscripts. Also - of all the persons who lived in ancient times, nobody is as documented as Jesus both within and outside the Bible. Even jewish historians admit that He lived, and they had (and have) all the reasons you could ask for to hide THAT fact. Given all this evidence, what does it point to? I did believe in Jesus before. This just makes me certain, because I cannot overlook the overwhelming amount of evidence. He lived. He died. He rose. He lives. If this was not true, Christianity would be meaningless.

[@JaydenElder]

They were written 20 to 50 years after Christs death and compiled from numerous eye witnesses and testimonies

[@krystal6612]

Oh this is so good❤ I just sent it to like 5 people I know❤ this is such BEAUTIFUL FACTS❤ JESUS FAN NEVER EVER BE ERASED FROM HISTORY OR FROM TODAY❤ JESUS IS ALIVE AND LOVES YOU❤

[@failforwardfast8609]

Thank you

[@canadiankewldude]

*_God Bless_*

[@jazzed2b]

JWW thank you so much for your research on all of this. Your credentials in investigation only brings credibility to your arguments.

[@ChevySamk]

also the variants are just spelling errors, various other mistakes, and reorganization of words because the greek is relaxed in its sentence structure

[@johnbrown4568]

Well described facts assuring that the Gospel of Jesus is reliable. Thank you brother.

[@RevCRsanchez6794]

I need the transcript of this video presentation. I have a muslim, who I am engaged in conversation about Jesus' deity, that believes that the Bible was corrupted.

[@neochris2]

Don't just stop with this video, look at this other one. Muslims are usually told that Bibles are corrupted. But the Quran itself defends the Gospel as something trustworthy by the time of Mohammed writing the Quran. Nothing in the Bible has changed since the time of Muhammed to today, therefore it is still just as trustworthy as then kzbin.info/www/bejne/fZrZXnZpntWcnq8si=hZokSqKoWxW9zRjD

[@pasoleati07]

Anybody have links to the other two segments that he is referring to? (One of them was about whether they were written early, and the other was about was there corroboration.)

[@lunarember5592]

I just know the one that was written early?

[@nenemens]

Your lessons are so full of wisdom. You're a great soldier for Christ. God bless you 🙏🏽

[@ameyers67]

I find that the New Testament is a very reliable scripture. However, what about the gospels found in Nag Hamadi? What about the Dead Sea Scrolls? Why was the Apocrypha removed from the Bible in the late 1800's? What was lost in translation from Hebrew to other languages? Did the Deuteronomists remove Jesus Christ from the Old Testament?

[@binhanh296]

My faith is firmed, no man can talk me out of my faith to the LORD my God. 😄😄😄

[@ryanwoolard1688]

Great

[@Ryan_Nath]

ignatius, arinayus ? how do you spell these names, I want to read there writings :)

[@johnlee7699]

First is correct 💯 Irenaeus God bless 🙏🙏🙏

[@AustinDallasPictures]

Praiss God, thank you!

[@shanemcguire5347]

It's Historically proven that the Canon of scripture was done before the first century was completed and that is the New testament Cannon they already had the Old testament

[@gregoryt8792]

Amen

[@midimusicforever]

The Bible is legit!

[@username00009]

🙏🏼

[@mvj1153]

Where is part 1 and 2?

[@MrDavidObeid]

Here’s a cold case for you! Ignatius and Polycarp were Catholic. Read the letters for yourself and ask yourself if you find Church, Bishops, and Sacraments or if you find *Sola* Scriptura or Sola fideiem.

[@humbledrummer777]

Why don't you just tell us?

[@Jamo12]

It’s not the words that have changed over time as much as the interpretations

[@douglaswood3010]

I agree. There is only one interpretation of Scripture. That interpretation is the original intended meaning that God inspired, not man’s opinion.

[@Roz-zi1ye]

We can believe the word of God as true, but we need to look at the Greek and Hebrew texts to make sense of a lot of the English translations. There are some words/ details that have been lost in translation.

[@captainkrajick]

King James Bible 1611 doesn't lose any in translation

[@nadams8863]

Amen✝️❤️🙏😊

[@robb6059]

Srila Prabhupada: As soon as you interpret or change the scripture, the scripture loses its authority. Then another man will come and interpret things in his own way. Another will come and then another, and in this way the original purport of the scripture is lost.

[@blackukulele]

most of the variants in the New Testament are copyist errors of spelling or different word order (but not different words) . In Greek, because of the nature of the language, word order is not important for understanding what is being said..

[@Haziq-sd5hv]

Yes it has change

[@Hey-Patchy]

Nope, Islamic stubbornness on the subject will not change facts 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@kellywicker8985]

Ignacious Polycarp Eranaus... help with spelling of names please. 😢

[@S_F_D_]

❤

[@therealdirtdiggla203]

💪💪

[@jamesv2471]

You mention Ignatius... He was Catholic, just as every other Church Father, just as every Christian before the schism, and certainly before the Protestant reformation from the 1500's. Here is one of his most famous quotes: "See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there, let the multitude of the people also be; even as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." (Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Chapter 8). Deacons, Bishop, the Eucharist... All 100% Catholic, the 1 true Church of Christ, present from the beginning of Christianity, instituted by Christ himself.

[@billb3673]

Get a KJV Companion Bible and a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance and your good to go.

[@anyq_CS]

everybody know they dont revert the changes in john 5:7😅

[@quincycuthbert5408]

no sir this is not the case

[@Kowaiweeb36]

How?

[@dkgrace6743]

You are making men help God preserve His word. That is not correct. It is God who helped man preserve His word. God simply made a promise to preserve His word. If it was left to man, it would be a mess. Which means there needs to be a perfect preserved word of God that He promised would always be. Where is that for you? I have found it in the KJB. Ps 12:6 KJV The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Ps 12:7 KJV Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. It's better to trust in God than men. Where did I come up with that? Oh yeah there is a verse that tells us that. Ps 118:8 KJV It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.

[@johnglad5]

....

[@rickvergara2552]

All translation are a form of paraphrase, seek original language and the church fathers who spoke them

[@Rage-td9wv]

Also changing a single word here and there is called subtle, which the dragon in the Garden was called.

[@christopherbrown9279]

Of course it has. If you look for the facts you'll see.

[@captainkrajick]

Facts like?

[@normanmcdermid1951]

I believe that the catholic church changed various places in scripture to promote the trinity.

[@karltiedemann7222]

Well without the doctrine of the trinity the man who died on the cross was just that- a man

[@lshed28]

You just want to deny truth.

[@lshed28]

Jesus is God. We have the Dead Sea Scrolls which verify.

[@aniam.9996]

Great point! Read KJV and you will see that your faith is even stronger as that is preserved God’s Word in English. Dont trust new translations.

[@karltiedemann7222]

Been looking in to that. Do you have any help that you could give me or refer me to a source or video that helped you to come to that conclusion. I watched some of Kent hovids videos and saw where other “Bibles” were wrong.

[@captainkrajick]

​@@karltiedemann7222check out Truth is Christ. His channel is very helpful on this issue. Another Pastor is Pastor Gene Kim from Real Bible Believers

[@dsheppard8492]

Two accounts of what must have been altered at some time. Jesus praying that this cup will pass in the garden of gethsemane, is contrary to all that Jesus represents to us in the balance of his actions. also,,, the temptation in the wilderness,,, 'the power attributed to the devil is not found anywhere in scripture, he could not force Jesus to go anywhere with him, He could not have transported him to Jerusalem to the temple. This is nonsense. 'these two stories are the manipulation by catholic clerics in the early going and sounded good to the other Catholics so they stuck,,, they were allowed!!! They both make Jesus to appear as simply a man and not as the mighty God he is, in their effort to refute Modalism.