Originally posted by TrashMan
//// There is a difference - the Old testament was passed down for generations first verbally and then in written form, and in times were priests took it upon themselves to interpret it and write it far more freely.
That's why it's not quite genuine or correct. The New Testament was writtne immediately by the apostols and their closest folowers, and Christ was directly cited. So it is far more accurate and a univarsal moral guidebook for all times.
Actually, there are continuing claims of editing and changes to the NT by the church over the years; changed or omitted verses, etc, based upon examining ancient manuscripts.
In particular, I believe there is an issue over whether the spear was thrust into Jesus before or after death; apparently there's evidence of alteration from the older manuscripts.
What you should remember is that this is a document dating from 2 thousand years ago, repeatedly copied, translated, etc by an institution with a vested interest in removing any ambiguity from it.
Unfortunately, the best pages I have on this are (via google; not looked for too long)
http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/reli1.htm &
http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/reli2.htm . You might find the title implies initial bias, of course, so I'm trying to find info on a Channel 4 documentary from a few months ago which examined the question of the church altering the bible to gain followers in the 10th+ centuries.
EDIT;
http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/B/believeitornot/debates/bible.html *ding* found it;
[q]The same goes for the four Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Beckford dives down into the ancient catacombs beneath a church in Rome to discover why Mark, the first Gospel writer, started to write about Jesus in the first place – as an encouragement to the first generation of Christians, who were facing persecution. He discovers that although the Gospel writers seem to be giving us direct reportage from the life of Jesus, each of them actually had his own spin on the story. While Matthew was keen to show how Jewish Jesus was, for the Jewish wing of the early church, Luke pushed the Roman angle. He packaged the teaching and miracles of Jesus to show that even civilised Roman citizens could believe in him.
There have been many TV programmes that have tried to bury the Bible – but this is no hatchet job. We get a clue about this when we see Robert Beckford at the tomb of Christ, inside Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulchre. As he stoops to leave the tomb, he wipes tears from his eyes. 'I was really moved by the experience,' he says. 'I am a Christian; I believe in the teachings of Jesus, so to be in a holy place, contemplating life, moved me. And I'm sufficiently secure in my African Caribbean maleness to express a full range of emotions without fear of censure!'[/q]
Sadly, I can't seem to find a full transcript.
