Thread

A cursory glance of Wikipedia indicates that there was robust debate about the King James translation as far back as the 1600's : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version I think it's a bit rich to claim that any version of a text is "literally the same" for 2-3000 years.... Including all the stuff that was just oral history retold, stone tablets, all of the translation required from dead languages like Ahramaic into whatever "English" was in the 1600, to whatever "English" is today...

The brainwashing is strong in this one

Even if the Bible texts would be authenic, they left important parts out of the final book. Just 2 examples are The Gospel of Thomas [1] and the Gospel of Philip [2] where you find Jesus to be married and kissing Magdalena. Both Gospels were rediscovered 1946 in Nag Hamadi [3]. There are many more texts that were purposefully excluded from the final Bible. Most of this happened in the year 325 [4] when emperor Consratin I. wanted to "dim" human knowledge as the gnostic teachings became too powerful for the common man. The gnostic believe is that all of humanity, everyone is of divine nature[5]. This was (is) of course a problem for the slave owning class. Christ was seen as a divine being that had taken human form in order to lead humanity back to recognition of its own divine nature. Salvation through direct, experiential "knowledge". Also all texts around reincarnation didn't make it to the final Bible. 𝗜𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗻𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵. Emperor Consratin I. would have had a hard time ruling over them. [1] https://www.gospels.net/thomas [2] https://www.gospels.net/philip [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nag_Hammadi_library [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism