#Biblically Accurate Papyrus—

[djphantomlight]

Paps, That's Too Serious...

*What the—

*How did Papyrus even do that?!

*And why is Sans so unnaturally pissed off?!

Original by @//handji_kyle on Twitter. ⬇️

[yeetdasweet]

[the-writing-mobster]

| Papsriel Good Omens AU I cooked up for 5 seconds |

.

.

.

Background:

I once fancied a Papsriel Good Omens AU. For all who aren't aware I low-key ship them just from their scene chemistry in my fics. (They have such great banter that ... One thing led to another and now I ship them, leave me alone.)

[aethergate]

!! FOR GOIAASORTETER FROM PAPYRUSISS FOR PAPYSRUI FOR PAPRYSUI

( wingdings translation ; * I WILL ADMIT, ONE OF THE THINGS I MISSED MOST FROM EXISTANCE WAS PAPYRUS. I REGRET THAT I WAS NOT THERE TO SEE HIM GROW. I KNOW IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ASK, BUT I HOPE I AM ABLE TO MAKE UP FOR THE TIME LOST. I HOPE HE KNOWS THAT HE IS WORTH EVERY MOMENT, HIGH RANKING TITLE OR NOT. )

[lollythelazyperson]

CRYING SOBBING SCREAMING IN BOTH FEAR AND AMAZEMENT ASJWJJAISIAIIIAIJAHSBSH-

(but jokes aside(sorta, biblically accurate undertale characters scare me lmao /hj but also lh)- nice art :D)

Monsters that look like monsters. That is all Smiles

[paintedkinzy-88]

I didn’t know you had tumblr-

You literally inspired me with the dragon au so hard that I incorporated it into my universe that has my ocs-

(I’m info dumping all the sudden I’m sorry I hope that’s okay)

Like Dream and Noot have two younger siblings who’s roles are the guardians of positive/negative memories and I made their inspirations biblically accurate angels and probably some demonic stuff (we’ll see), Reaper + his Papyrus had two other siblings who were the god of the sun and goddess of the moon and I think I just made them really big and gave the sun god a bunch of sets of wings and the moon goddess a bunch of stars that looked like eyes, Ink and Error both had siblings who after a very long time of thinking about it both became dragons-

And that doesn’t even begin to explain the chaos that was Demi-gods, because like Cross has a sibling who was born before the events of X-tale and has an overwrite soul so they got listed as one and I gave them wings, both Reaper, Life, and my two other gods have Demi-gods under them (who were in theory born human or monster) and do that, it’s very long and complicated and it’s entirely because of the dragon au and I’m very offended /j

Oh no I’ve been dISCOVERED—

Info dump all you want!! I’m glad my work had any kind of role in a new AU’s creation ;w;

AHHH That’s so fascinating tho?? The idea they ALL have other siblings is something I don’t think I’ve seen before, and I love the ideas for their designs! The memory guardians in particular — biblically accurate angels are so much fun, and I can so see that in the UTMV world(s). Ō-Ō

And obviously you mention dragons and I am very sold on this thank you very much.

Also, long complicated lore is wonderful, excuse you. We love long complicated lore. I’m offended that you’re offended?? /lh (ง’̀-‘́)ง

[opal-kitty333]

Okay, drawing is hard and I'm horrible at drawing full body references. The face is the most important part and I've decided y'all can imagine his feet on your own. Anyway...

I was going to do biblically accurate Sans for How to Make an Artificial Companion, but have changed my mind. Rough sketch is rough, but you get the idea. Ramblings about it under cut

So, Undertale as a game (or monsters in general) don't exist in universe. They're all AI designed by humans or in a few rare instances (*cough*Mettaton*cough*) other AI. While they should all be recognizable as who they are by a real world viewer, there are some notable differences on their designs because they weren't originally pixel art but instead 3d models and there are some signature details depending on who made them, when, why, and where they pulled references from. Sans (and Papyrus later) are made by a character who 3d prints chibi models and sells them online. Reader asks them to make a skeleton, something realisticish because reader is going to be staring whatever they make in the face and something that's one third a head would be weird, but not too realistic because talking to a Skyrim skeleton would also not be ideal. The artist is going WAY out of their comfort zone so the model is a little odd but loved dearly by everyone. This is why he's especially cartoon-y, and his anatomy is simplified, and has massive eyes compared to og Sans. I don't know if anyone else has looked up skeleton characters, but Sans also has a really fucking unique face shape. He is not made for being 3d with an opening mouth in mind, so while I was tempted to keep the shape, I ultimately changed it. He still has a massive smile, thick blocky teeth, and a roundish skull (especially compared to Papyrus) so hopefully he still reads as Sans-like. This is an au, so I feel altering everyone's appearance is acceptable anyway.

Lil details. His sternum is purposefully shaped to look like a tie because sternums are kinda shaped like that and I think it's silly. He's very much made to look cute and avoid uncanny valley while still being a personable and expressive. He is able to control his eyelight size or make them disappear, and later do specific expressions kinda like a V-tuber (so you get comical heart eyes or sweat drops kinda thing, but he doesn't use those unless it's for a gag and even then it's rare). The reader also makes him shorter than them. He starts the same height when he's a slim target mannequins, but once they're messing with his form they make the top of his head reach about heart level so he isn't as spooky. He starts off naked since they don't have monster costumes and his body is not considered sexual in the slightest, but eventually they do a dress up thing with him and this is when he picks up his signature outfit (after submitting many bug reports because wow this form is sand in the gears for everything this headset was made for). He actually prefers to stay dressed after this because he can make himself look chubbier which he thinks make him more friendly and approachable. He likes the form he was finally given, but the focus on the iterations before the final and just what he looks like in general gives him some self image issues and a fixation on keeping up appearances. Of course, with this fixation, he keeps it pretty down low which makes it hard to spot so you wouldn't really guess.

[moochundertale]

greetings, I am the Great Universal Traveling Papyrus. I travel to alternate universes and timelines, and based on your pixelated design, you must be a "biblically accurate" version of Mooch! how wonderful, I don't really have a question, I'm sorry friend. but here's a fun multiversal fact, did you know, that when two universes crossover, that is called a "merged timeline", this is how we get many of the sans duos, trios, quartet, Penta, Hexa, Hepta, Octa, Nona and a Deca and so on. well, I best be off, goodbye friend!

[freebiblestudyhub]

Why is Matthew 17:21 Not Included?

The Bible is a compilation of diverse books, letters, and teachings that have been passed down through generations. While many parts of the New Testament are consistent across translations, certain verses, like Matthew 17:21, are conspicuously absent from some versions of the Bible. This absence raises important questions about the historical and theological reasons for its omission. Why is Matthew 17:21 not included in many modern Bible translations? Does its exclusion affect the meaning of the Gospel, and what does this say about how the Bible has been transmitted over the centuries?

In this article, we will explore the historical, textual, and theological reasons why Matthew 17:21 is not included in many translations of the Bible, what its original context may have been, and the broader implications for understanding the process of biblical transmission.

Matthew 17:21 and the Textual Issue

To understand why Matthew 17:21 is sometimes omitted, we must first look at the context of the verse itself. Matthew 17:21 is a verse that appears in some versions of the Gospel of Matthew, but not in others. It reads as follows in the King James Version (KJV):

"Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting." (Matthew 17:21, KJV)

This verse is part of a larger passage in which Jesus' disciples are unable to cast out a demon from a boy who is possessed. When they ask Jesus why they could not perform the exorcism, Jesus responds with the famous words:

“Because of your unbelief…” (Matthew 17:20, KJV)

Then, in the KJV, Matthew 17:21 follows, with the added instruction that some demons can only be cast out through prayer and fasting.

However, this specific verse does not appear in most modern Bible translations, including the New International Version (NIV), the English Standard Version (ESV), and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), among others. The key question is: why is this the case?

The Role of Textual Criticism

The absence of Matthew 17:21 in many translations comes down to the field of textual criticism, which seeks to determine the most accurate and reliable text of the Bible based on the oldest and most complete manuscripts available. Textual critics study variations in ancient manuscripts to identify possible alterations, additions, and omissions.

Manuscript Evidence: The earliest Greek manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew (such as Papyrus 37, Codex Sinaiticus, and Codex Vaticanus) do not include Matthew 17:21. These early manuscripts, which date back to the 4th and 5th centuries, are considered to be some of the most reliable and authoritative witnesses to the text of the New Testament. They are the primary sources that modern Bible translations rely on.

Later Manuscripts: However, later manuscripts, especially those produced in the Byzantine tradition, do include Matthew 17:21. These manuscripts, which were copied from earlier versions during the Middle Ages, contain a number of textual additions and variations, some of which were likely inserted over time by scribes who wanted to harmonize certain passages or provide clarification.

Textual Variants: The fact that Matthew 17:21 appears in some manuscripts but not in others is a prime example of a textual variant—a difference in wording or content found in different copies of the Bible. Textual critics examine these variants to determine which reading is most likely to reflect the original text of the New Testament. In this case, the majority of early manuscripts (and some key later manuscripts) do not contain Matthew 17:21, leading many scholars to conclude that this verse was likely a later addition.

Why Was Matthew 17:21 Added?

While we cannot be absolutely certain about the exact origin of Matthew 17:21, scholars have several theories as to why it might have been added to certain manuscripts of the Gospel.

1. Harmonization with Mark 9:29

One of the most plausible explanations is that Matthew 17:21 was added as a way to harmonize the Gospel of Matthew with the Gospel of Mark. In Mark 9:29, the parallel passage to Matthew 17:21, Jesus says:

“This kind can come out only by prayer.” (Mark 9:29, NIV)

The phrase "prayer and fasting" in Matthew 17:21 may have been introduced by scribes who were familiar with this verse in Mark and sought to add additional detail to the Matthew account, possibly in an effort to harmonize the two Gospels. The inclusion of "fasting" in Matthew 17:21 aligns more closely with other passages in the Gospels that emphasize the importance of fasting in spiritual disciplines (such as in Matthew 6:16-18).

2. Theological Considerations

Another possible reason for the addition of Matthew 17:21 could be theological. Early Christian communities were deeply concerned with the power of prayer and fasting as spiritual tools for overcoming evil forces. The idea that some spiritual battles required a more intense commitment to prayer and fasting was a theme that resonated with the early church.

The Role of Fasting: The combination of prayer and fasting as a means of spiritual preparation or warfare is a concept that appears in other parts of Scripture, particularly in the early church's practices. The inclusion of fasting in Matthew 17:21 may have been intended to provide a fuller teaching on how to confront spiritual challenges, especially in light of the growing influence of ascetic practices in some Christian communities.

3. Transmission and Scribe Variants

The addition of Matthew 17:21 may also be the result of the way texts were transmitted in antiquity. Scribes often sought to clarify or expand upon a passage they were copying, sometimes adding details that they believed would help readers better understand the text. The scribe who inserted Matthew 17:21 may have been influenced by the oral tradition or the liturgical practices of the time, which emphasized the importance of fasting alongside prayer.

Theological Implications of the Omission

While the absence of Matthew 17:21 from many modern translations may seem insignificant at first, it does have some theological implications. The omission of this verse does not change the core message of the passage—that faith in God can overcome even the most difficult challenges—but it does alter the focus on the role of prayer and fasting in spiritual warfare.

Prayer and Fasting as Spiritual Disciplines: The concept of prayer and fasting as a means of spiritual preparation and victory over evil is still supported by other parts of the Bible. For instance, in Matthew 6:16-18, Jesus teaches about fasting as a private act of devotion. Additionally, in the Gospel of Mark and other New Testament writings, prayer is emphasized as a means of accessing God's power and intervention.

Theological Emphasis: While Matthew 17:21 specifically mentions both prayer and fasting, the omission of fasting from the passage does not diminish the biblical teaching on these practices. Instead, it suggests that the early church recognized the importance of both prayer and fasting as distinct disciplines in their own right.

Conclusion: The Importance of Textual Integrity

The question of why Matthew 17:21 is not included in many translations of the Bible is a reflection of the broader discipline of textual criticism, which seeks to preserve the integrity of the biblical text. While the verse itself may not be included in all modern translations, its omission does not affect the core message of the Gospel. The presence or absence of Matthew 17:21 should not detract from the profound truths of the passage: that faith in Jesus can move mountains, and that prayer is a powerful tool in spiritual warfare.

Ultimately, the study of textual variants like Matthew 17:21 highlights the complex history of the Bible’s transmission, and serves as a reminder of the care and diligence involved in preserving the Word of God for future generations. Whether or not Matthew 17:21 is included, the overall message of the Gospel remains unchanged: that through faith in Jesus Christ, believers have access to divine power and victory over evil.

[rigbyransack]

absolute banger post

[justmyos]

Papyrus: BE NOT AFRAID HUMAN

frisk: sir,this is the scariest moment of my life

Papyrus Undertale is in fact an Eldritch Abomination and I can prove it

OKAYOKAY this sounds weird and wrong but I have evidence.

Let’s start out with the basics. What is an Eldritch Abomination? An Eldritch abomination is a type of creature that originates within the works of H.P. Lovecraft. They are most popularly horrifying beyond reason, have some sort of slime or rot associated with them, and fucking HUGE. However, this is not always the case, and the popular stuff is NOT what we will be focusing on.

tvtropes.org defines an Eldritch Abomination as “The Eldritch Abomination is a type of creature defined by its disregard for the natural laws of the universe as we understand them.” And “Physically, the Eldritch Abomination is only defined by seeming somehow seeming “off”, hinting at their incomprehensible nature. They can range from humanoid to animalistic to physically impossible to inconceivably bizarre.”

So basically, an Eldritch abomination is something that exists outside of the laws of reality and is noticeably just. Wrong.

Let’s look at Papyrus.

The man demonstrates powers outside of the game’s mechanics. Nobody else in the game does anything quite like he does.

He can fly

He moves in bizarre and nonsensical ways

He makes odd predictions

He seems to be able to see through phones.

(I couldn’t find a direct pic of this one in game, but I was able to find the dialogue in the Undertale Dialogue master post website)

Needless to say, “disregard for the natural laws of the universe as we understand them” defines Papyrus to a TEE. He breaks the fabric of reality like one breaks an egg, which is to say often and without much care.

The next defining characteristic of an Eldritch abomination is their odd and offputting nature. Papyrus demonstrates this too.

People are constantly talking about how weird Papyrus is. And honestly? They’re right. He is pretty strange. That’s not a bad thing of course, as it makes him one of the most charming, lovable characters in the game. But it still is outside of the ordinary. The way he talks, the way he moves, hell, even his freaking text box, it’s all unusual.

And while this is less of an ingame observation, and more of a me thing, but Papyrus IS unnerving. The way he smiles while saying off putting things, his secretive nature, the fact that you CAN’T believe a word from his mouth because he’s a really good liar, it really freaks me out. Sometimes I stare into those blank sockets and can’t help but wonder what may be going on in there. And the fact that even after five years of this game being out, we STILL don’t know what his deal is????

Yeah it’s kinda scary.

Anyway, TLDR: Papyrus fits the definition of an Eldritch Abomination to a Tee and that makes me feel emotions I don’t have a name for.

CITATIONS

Eldrich Def: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EldritchAbomination

Paps Flying and Spinning Gif: https://undertale.fandom.com/wiki/Papyrus

Phone Call Screen Shot One: https://youtu.be/voSXPqe2G_Q

Phone Call Screen Shot Two: https://hushbugger.github.io/dialogue/#Papyrus%20(call)

[one-mopeyboi]

other Dark Worlds (headcanon)

I have Deltarune brainrot so here’s the result of my speculations of which places in Hometown will become Dark Worlds.

Spoilers for Undertale, and Chapters 1 and 2 of Deltarune

The Player is referred to as They/Them, and Kris as they/them without the capitalisation so as to distinguish between the two.

Pacifist refers to a route where the Player defeats Darkners by ACTing only and recruits them after.

Neutral refers to a route where the Player defeats some, but not all, Darkners by FIGHTing and they become Lost, but not dead. An aborted Weird rout is considered Neutral.

Weird refers to a route where the Player kills Darkners, either by manipulating another Lightner to do it, or forcing Kris to.

Chapter 3 : TV (corresponding to Hotland in UT, Frisk being on Mettaton’s cooking show, Undertale The Musical, and MTT NEWS in Hotland. Muffet is Hotland’s boss.)

Extra party member : Toriel (fire magic, Weird Route Players have the choice of making Kris pretend to be scared so that Toriel could fight to protect her child)

It is in this chapter that Ralsei will become aware of whether the Player has committed murder or not. See here for what I mean.

Final boss : Rook (see here)

Secret boss : Mike, trapped in the late night pay-per-view channel for… films that are not meant for kids. Appearance wise he resembles a spider. The SOUL turns purple to stay in the lines. Mike, like Muffet at her worst, cares for nothing but money and is, according to Spamton, a crook.

Chapter 4 : The Church (corresponding to Waterfall, with both being a place filled with lore about The Angel. Undyne is Waterfall’s boss)

Extra party member : Father Alvin (holy magic, Weird Players trick Alvin into believing Darkners are demons and need to be smited)

Darkners resemble biblically accurate angels (not The Angel), there’s an organ Darkner, wine, bread etc.

Final boss : Bishop

Secret boss : I’ll give them the placeholder name “Levi”, for Leviathan. They are, in the Light World, a choir songbook that belonged to Asriel as the head of the choir with a fish bookmark, and are a fishlike cherubic being in the Dark World. The SOUL turns green to block attacks. Levi believes what they are doing in keeping the world safe from the Lightners, is correct.

Chapter 5 : The Hospital (sterile walls and cold halls compare to Snowdin. Papyrus is Snowdin’s boss)

Extra party member : Rudy (Rudy’s too kind and his will is too strong to break, so the Player can’t force him to do your killing. However, the Player can give Kris the ability to kill directly... and whether or not Rudy dies in the Light World from cranial bleeding depends on Their choice in the Dark World)

Final boss : The Knight

Secret boss : The piano that Kris used to play in the hospital. I’ll call them “Allegro” for now. Allegro is enthusiastic and just wants a friend after the real Kris has stopped playing with them for… no idea how long.

Chapter 6 : Flower Shop (the Ruins, with it both being overgrown by plants and it’s air of loneliness and an old goat’s attempt to make it a home. Toriel is the Ruins’ boss)

Extra party member : N/A. Asgore does get sucked into this Dark World, but is instantly placed as it’s King due to knowing how to take care of all the flower and plant based Darkners

Final boss : Pawn (Kris. As in, they’re the Player’s pawn. In a Weird Route, the Player fights them until they submit under us hopelessly, and in a Pacifist Route, the Player convinces them to at least let Them help them, and when the Game’s ended Kris can keep the SOUL.)

Secret boss : A bouquet of flowers that Kris had rescued from Toriel’s trash can. A weird and creepy motherly entity that is enamoured with “King Asgore” and tries to keep him in the Dark World. I’ll call them “Aster.” the aster flower suggests devotion, as in Asgore’s devotion to Toriel

Chapter 7 : The Town Carnival (Dark fountains opened everywhere leaks into the Light World)

Final boss (Pacifist and Neutral) : The Titans

Secret boss (Pacifist and Neutral) : N/A

“Final“ boss (Weird) : Susie, Alvin, Toriel, Noelle

True final boss (Weird) : Met (Ralsei ; the advisor/counsellor, or ferz in Persian/mantri in Sanskrit/met in Thai, is a chess piece not used in modern chess and has a unique move similar to the Bishop, but only going one square. Ralsei, designed to be a tutoriel NPC, fits the bill of an advisor. I‘m using the name Met because I’m Thai so that’s the name I‘m used to for the chess piece. Met/Ralsei is unkillable due to his ability to heal himself and dodge, so the only choice the Player has eventually is to never open the game again)

[nerdygaymormon]

Do you have a link to your thoughts on the CES letter? Because I'm sure plenty of folk have asked you about it. I'm, struggling.

The CES letter has been mentioned to me a few times in asks, but I don’t recall being asked to respond directly to it. 

Before getting into it, I want to make you aware of this post about Faith Transitions, I think it may be useful to you. 

I read the CES letter many years ago, probably the original version, it’s changed a lot since then. I think the CES letter is sloppy, and twists quotes, uses some questionable sources, and frames things in the worst possible way. It’s basically an amalgamation of all the anti-Mormon literature. But many of the main points of the CES letter are important and correct, even if the supporting details aren’t.

In a way, the CES letter has done the Church a favor. For a long time, Elder Packer insisted that anything which isn’t faith-promoting shouldn’t be taught. As a result, most members of the Church were taught a simplified version of Church history, leaving out anything that is messy or difficult. Although those things could be found if someone was looking for them, I found many of them simply by reading Brigham Young Discourses or other works of the early church. 

With the internet, Elder Packer’s approach to history turns out to be a bad one. This information is out there and now most members learn about it from sources seeking to destroy their faith. One response to this has been a series of essays where the Church talks about some difficult subjects. 

————————————————————

I’m not going to go through all the claims & challenges of the CES letter, but let me address some of the main ones.

1) There are errors in the Book of Mormon that are also contained in the 1769 edition of the Bible.

From the more faithful point-of-view, Joseph recognizes these passages, such as those from Isaiah, and knows they've already been translated into English and copies them from his family’s Bible. The non-faithful point-of-view is that Joseph copied these verses from his family Bible and tried to pass it off as his own translation.

2) DNA analysis has concluded that Native American Indians do not originate from the Middle East or from Israelites but from Asia.

This is correct. The Church has an essay which admits this and then spends a lot of time explaining how genetics works and one day we might find some Middle East connection. I find the Church essay convoluted as it goes through many possible (and unlikely) reasons for why no DNA of the Jaredites, Nephites or Lamanites has yet been found in the Americas.

3) There are things in the Book of Mormon that didn’t exist during Book of Mormon times, or in Central America (assuming this is where the Book of Mormon takes place), such as horses, chariots, goats, elephants, wheat, and steel.

This is also correct. Maybe the translation process was using a common word in English for a common item in the Book of Mormon. Maybe these are errors. Maybe it’s made up. 

4) No archeological evidence has been found for the Nephite/Lamanite civilizations.

Correct. When it comes to archeological evidence, it's true that we haven't found any. For one thing, we don't know where the Nephite & Lamanite civilizations are supposed to have taken place. If you don't know where to look, it's easy to have no evidence. Perhaps Nephites & Lamanites didn’t actually exist and that’s why there’s no archeological evidence. The Book of Mormon does seem to do a decent job of describing geography of the Middle East before Lehi & his family boarded the boat for the Promised Land.

5) Book of Mormon names and places are strikingly similar (or identical) to many local names and places of the region Joseph Smith lived in.

This seems like a funny thing to get hung up on. First of all, it’s not very many names that are similar. Secondly, many places in the US are named for Biblical places & people. If the Book of Mormon people came from Israel, it makes sense they did something similar. For example, the word Jordan is in the Book of Mormon, the Bible, and in many places in America. 

6) He points to obscure books or dime-novels that Joseph Smith might have read and the similarities between them and the Book of Mormon. 

Those similarities are mostly at the surface level. To me it doesn't seem like Joseph plagiarized any particular book, and these specific books seem to not been very popular so difficult to say Joseph, who lived on the frontier, actually read them. Funny how no one from that time period thought the Book of Mormon resembled those books, probably because they hadn’t heard of them. But Joseph did hear and read a number of stories and some of that phrasing or whatever of the time influenced him. Think of songwriters, they create a new song then get accused of plagiarizing because it's similar to another popular song. Even without intending to, they were influenced by things they heard. 

7) The Book of Mormon has had 100,000 changes.

Most of the "100,000" changes to the Book of Mormon were to break it into chapters & verses, to add chapter headings, or to add grammar such as commas and whatnot. There are some changes to fix errors that got printed but differed from the original manuscript. And there's been some clarifications made, but these are few in number. By claiming "100,000" he's trying to make it seem like there's a scam being done. It's easy to get a replication of the first Book of Mormon from the Community of Christ and read it side-by-side with today's version. I’ve done that and occasionally there’s a word or two here or there which differ, but overall it's mostly the same.

8) There were over 4 different First Vision accounts

True. Over the years, the way Joseph described the First Vision changed. I think different versions emphasize different aspects of the experience. I don’t find them to be contradictory. Oh, and the Church has an essay about this.

9) The papyri that Joseph translated into the Book of Abraham has been found and translated and it’s nothing like the Book of Abraham.

This is true. The Church has an essay about it. The Church now says that the papyri inspired Joseph to get the Book of Abraham via revelation, much like his translations of the Bible weren’t from studying the ancient Greek & Hebrew. It is a big change from what the Church used to teach, that this was a translation of the papyrus. The papyri has nothing to do with the Book of Abraham, and the explanations of the facsimiles in the Pearl of Great Price don’t match what the scholars say those pictures are about.

10) Joseph married 34+ women, many without Emma’s consent, some who had husbands, and even a teenager. 

This all appears to be true. Emma knew about some of them, but not all. As for the married women, they were still married to their husbands but sealed to Joseph (I know this is strange to us, but this sort of thing was common until Wilford Woodruff standardized how sealings are done). 

Polygamy was illegal in the United States. Most people who participated were told to keep it secret. So of course there’s carefully-worded statements by Joseph and others denying they participate in polygamy.

The salacious question everyone wants to know is if Joseph slept with all these women. We don’t know, but a DNA search for descendants of Joseph has taken place among the descendants of the women he was ‘married’ to and none have been found. But still, if he wasn’t doing anything wrong, why is he hiding this from Emma? 

11) The Church used to teach that polygamy was required for exaltation, even though the Book of Mormon condemns polygamy. 

This is accurate. The Church says polygamy was part of ancient Israel and so as part of the restoration of all things, polygamy had to be restored, see D&C 132:34. Now we no longer say polygamy is required to get to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.

12) Brigham Young taught Adam-God theory, which is now disavowed by the Church.

True. Joseph Smith didn’t teach this and John Taylor & Wilford Woodruff don’t seem to have any time for this teaching. It’s a thing Brigham Young was hot about and taught, but seems a lot of the church didn’t buy it as it was discarded after his death. 

13) Black people weren’t allowed to hold the priesthood until 1978, despite Joseph having conferred it to a few Black people during his life. 

Very true and very sad. This and the Mountain Meadows Massacre are the two biggest stains on the Church’s past. There is a Church essay on Race & the Priesthood. The ban appears to have begun with Brigham Young and he developed several theories to justify it, and these explanations expanded over the decades and bigotry was taught as doctrine. The Church now disavows all explanations that were taught in the past.

No reason for the priesthood ban is put forward in the Church essay other than racism. The past leaders were racists and that blinded them to what God wanted for Black people. There’s a big lesson in that for LGBTQ teachings of the Church.

14) The Church misrepresents how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon. 

The accounts of Joseph Smith putting a seer stone in a hat and reading words from it, that's part of the historic record. Quotes about it don’t make it to our Sunday School lessons, but if you go back to the Joseph Smith papers and other accounts, it’s there to read. Joseph also used the Urim & Thummim, and wrote out characters and studied them, but he seems to have most favored the stone-in-hat method. I think the main problem here is the Church in its artwork and movies does not depict this, and therefore most members are unaware until they see anti-Mormon literature. Why does the Church not show Joseph looking into a hat? Because it seems magical and weird to modern people. But how much weirder is it than he put on the Urim & Thummim like glasses and could translate that way, or he wrote out these characters from some extinct language and was able to figure out what they mean?

————————————————————

A number of the main points in the CES letter are true (even if explanations/supporting details in the CES are problematic). Some of the main points have simple explanations and don’t seem like a big deal. Others challenge what the Church has taught. To its credit, the Church put out essays by historians & scholars, with sources listed in the footnotes, addressing several of these controversial topics. 

————————————————————

Religion is meant to help humans make sense of their world and our place in it. Most religious stories are metaphorical but end up getting taught as literal history and, in my opinion, the same is true of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And that’s why the CES letter has power, it points out things aren’t literally true but were taught by the Church as factual, and the CES letter shows us part of our messy history that the Church tried to hide. 

————————————————————

The story of Adam and Eve can’t literally be true. It doesn’t fit our evolutionary past, but it’s meant to make our lives important, God created us and we have to account to Him for our choices, and it’s important to find someone to go through life with. We can say the same of Job and the Book of Ruth, fiction with a purpose. 

While there are some real events included in the Bible, much of what’s written is there to teach lessons, culture, and give meaning to life. Jesus taught in parables so at least he was upfront that they were stories that contained morals.

Can I believe the same about the Book of Mormon, that it’s inspired fiction with meaning I can apply to my life, or must it be literally history to have value?

————————————————————

I went through a massive faith crisis while attending BYU. I had access to materials that told a different story of this religion than I’d been taught (the sorts of things in the CES Letter) and it threw me for a loop. 

It felt like the floor of faith I had stood on shattered and I fell with no way to stop myself. After I had a chance to process through the things I was feeling, I looked at my shattered faith and picked up the parts that were meaningful to me.

I had lined up my faith similar to a line of dominoes. If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph was a prophet. If Joseph was a prophet, then this is the true church. If this is the true church, then...

This works until it doesn’t. Once a domino topples over, it starts a chain event.

Now I look at principles and concepts and decide if they’re meaningful to me. 

I love the idea that we can spend eternity with the people we love most. 

I believe we should be charitable and loving to others. 

People on the margins need to be looked after and helped and lifted. 

Poor people deserve dignity and the rich to be challenged. 

We have a commitment to our community and we all serve to make it better. 

All are alike to God, we’re all loved and God has a grand plan for us. 

Those who passed away can still be saved through the atonement of Christ. 

Those are all principles I find in the Bible and Book of Mormon or at church and I find Love flows through all of those. 

This new approach works for me. I don’t have to believe or hold onto problematic teachings. I can drop them and still hold the parts that I find valuable. I can reject the teachings and statements which are bigoted, homophobic, transphobic, racist, ableist, misogynistic. Prophets can make mistakes and still have taught some useful things.

That little voice of the spirit and what it teaches and guides me to do, I trust it over what Church leaders say. Overarching principles are more important to me than specific details for how this gets applied in the 1800′s or 1950′s or Biblical times. 

————————————————————

I truly hope some of what I’ve written is helpful.

There’s no use pretending that the CES letter doesn’t get some things correct. It’s also helpful to understand it’s not just trying to share truth, but has an agenda to make the Church look as bad as possible.

What about the things the CES letter is correct about? 

Has this church helped you learn to connect with the Divine? 

The Church has some very big flaws, but also has some big things in its favor. Some of its unique teachings are very appealing and feel hopeful and right. 

Can you leave the Church and be a good person and have a relationship with God? Absolutely. 

I also know this church is a community and it’s hard to walk away cold-turkey with nothing to replace it, without another network to belong to. It’s as much a religion as it is a lifestyle and circle of friends. 

Are there parts you can hold onto? Parts you can let go of?

You have a lot to think about and work through. 

[mtmains]

Where are the original manuscripts of the bible

#Where are the original manuscripts of the bible series

The Samaritans accepted only the Pentateuch as canonical. The Samaritan Pentateuch is a version of the five books of Moses written in a rounded form of Hebrew letters in contrast with the more standard square (Aramaic) form. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint are the most important translations that bear witness to the text of the Hebrew Bible. In time, the Jews placed in the genizah discarded manuscripts that had become torn or worn with age, replacing them with new ones for current synagogue use. * Genizah: These synagogues usually had a storage room known as the genizah. (A genizah is a room in a synagogue used to store worn or erroneous manuscripts.) Additional information on the transmission history of the Hebrew text is provided by a great number of biblical fragments discovered at a Cairo genizah * dated ad 882. The biblical material found there includes fragments of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT) and Isaiah, and a leather scroll in Greek containing fragments of the Minor Prophets. The texts found at Wadi Qumran were completed before the Roman conquest of Palestine in AD 70.Īdditional evidence comes from Wadi Murabba ’at, also on the Dead Sea, from the period of the Bar Kochba revolt in ad 132–135. The great significance of the discovery is the fact that the Dead Sea scrolls antedate the oldest Masoretic manuscripts by over a millennium. The Isaiah scroll has received the most publicity, although the scrolls contained fragments of all the books in the Hebrew Bible with the exception of Esther.

#Where are the original manuscripts of the bible series

The most famous discovery (or series of discoveries) was that of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Wadi Qumran in 1947. The evidence or “witness” of the medieval manuscripts has been supplemented by other discoveries in recent years. Of one scholar’s list of 60 important manuscripts dated from the 11th century or later, all reflect the same basic textual tradition. The standardization reflects the work of medieval scribes known as Masoretes (ad 500–900) the text that resulted from their work is called the Masoretic text. Most medieval manuscripts of the OT reflect a fairly standardized form of the Hebrew text. The comparison and careful listing of the variant readings thus uncovered is known as collation. Secondary sources include translations into other languages, quotations used by both protagonists and antagonists of biblical religion, and evidence from early printed texts. Manuscripts were usually written on animal skins, papyrus, or even metal. The primary sources are manuscripts (hand-written copies). The initial task is collection of all possible records of the biblical writings, since the originals (called autographs) no longer exist. The task of the textual critic is divided into four major stages: (1) collection and collation of the materials from existing manuscripts, translations, and quotations (2) development of theory and methodology that will enable the critic to use the gathered information to reconstruct the most accurate text of the biblical materials (3) reconstruction of the history of the transmission of the text in order to identify the various influences affecting the text (4) evaluation of specific variant readings in light of textual evidence, theology, and church history. Textual criticism is sometimes designated as lower criticism to distinguish it from higher criticism, which is analysis of the date, unity, and authorship of the biblical writings. Task of reconstructing the original text of the Bible with as great a degree of accuracy as the available materials permit, in the process of attempting to ascertain the original wording of the original text. For those wanting to dig deeper, the footnotes have additional information, and for those wanting an intermediate look at some things, there are articles linked throughout that go into greater detail on specific things. NOTE: This article is a good overview of the basics of New Testament Textual Studies for both the Old and New Testaments.

[lucindapimmblog2]

hoping to expand on using ancient medieval diagrams and papyrus as references. reminds me of sacred geometry and talk about biblically accurate angels. old religions and text are so intricate and detailed that there are so many ways to interpret them and transform them into contemporary works.

[thewayisyah]

Can You Trust The Bible

It is not surprising that this is a common question. According to Google in March 2021 there were exactly 129,864,880 books in the world. One book quickly stands out with no comparison is the bible. Described as a collection of religious texts, it is impossible to place this book in just one genre.

This book is everywhere, chances are it is in your home right now. It has also been printed in almost every language, and it's old, really old. The bible is in fact the oldest book in the world. The oldest biblical text found is approximately 2700 years old. Most believe the first book Genesis was written approximately 3400 years ago and the last book Revelation was completed around 90AD or approximately 1900 years ago.

Its powerful writings have spawned over 30,000 religious organizations or denominations worldwide. The bible is a holy grouping of hebrew writings that consist of a total of 66 books within the one binding. Those books are categorized into two parts. The first part is known as the Old Testament or First Covenant. It is also known in Judaism as the Torah. Although Islam is considered an Abrahamic faith, the Quran is not identical to the Old Testament as the Torah remains. The second part is known as the New Testament or Renewed Covenant. 40 authors are believed to have been inspired by God when writing the bible.

Can you trust the translation accuracy?

Most of the controversy surrounding the bible is usually rooted in the opinions of those who oppose the very existence of a higher benevolent being. Still others question the translation conversion integrity. That is a valid concern considering the interpretation of its content could be expected to vary from that of the original author's intent. The bible can be found in over 3,312 languages with approximately 50 different versions in English alone. Was it all translated accurately?

Consider the archaeological evidence. In 1946 in the Qumran Caves in the Judaean Desert of the west bank, ancient Hebrew Manuscripts were found. These manuscripts consisted of 800+ documents made of animal skin, papyrus and even forged copper. The material composition of these manuscripts were important because it allowed fairly accurate radiocarbon dating to determine they were over 2000 years old. These manuscripts are known as the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The Dead Sea Scrolls can be viewed today in Jerusalem and were written in mostly Hebrew but some in Aramaic and Greek. These are the three original languages the bible was written in. All the books of the Torah except for Nehemiah and Esther were found. As you can imagine anyone questioning the integrity of modern day bible translations would be interested in a comparison. The Dead Sea Scrolls have provided an impressive amount of evidence for the overall integrity of the modern bible and its various translations. The Dead Sea Scrolls also help when considering the following topic of missing books.

Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek all do not perfectly translate into english. This is generally the reason behind why there are so many translation versions. Translators are forced to decide whether they are seeking to convey the exact words or the central idea of the text. This process has generated two types of translations known as “word for word” or Thought for Thought. Some blend both. You may want to consider the planned use of the bible when deciding what will work best for you.

Are books missing from the bible?

This all time best seller has generated opposition to its powerful message since its pages were first read. Early christians suffered fatal persecution for simply possessing a copy. So it isn’t difficult to consider that some wishing to suppress various messages contrary to their position of power or control, may not only manipulate translation but remove content from the bible entirely. Is there any evidence of this?

Depending on your patience and willingness to research the answer you will find the answer varies depending on the source. Research will generally lead to the 14 or 15 Apocrypha books or the 7 books removed by Martin Luther.

Let's discuss the Apocrypha first. This word is derived from ancient Greek and means those that were hidden. Some have interpreted the meaning to be too sacred or secret to be in everyone's hands. Eventually in time it has become known as false, bad or heretical. In this context it refers to religious texts that were in some versions of the catholic bible.

I will be going into much greater depth on this subject when I publish my book, Book of Books sometime in 2021. In the meantime with regards to the accusation that upto 15 books or more have been removed from our modern day translations, the answer is, possibly.

The dead sea scrolls did contain portions of three books considered Apocryphal. Ben Sira (or Ecclesiasticus), Tobi, and the Epistle of Jeremiah. It is also suggested that the Book of Enoch was found which is not confirmed. All this is evidence of is that these three books were likely around at a much later date than previously assumed. Why these 15 books may have been removed is another consideration which leads to Martin Luther. The 16th century father of Protestantism, is known for his removal of 7 books from the catholic bible at the time. He left the catholic church in 1517 because he denounced the catholic practice of selling pardons for sins.

He is known for removing 7 books from the Catholic bible. All of those books were part of the 15 referred to as the Apocrypha. These are referred to as deuterocanonical books by Catholics and Orthodox or otherwise known as Apocrypha by Jews and Protestants for obvious reasons. The reason why he removed them is not confirmed but assumed generally that they did not fit what was assumed as the overall accepted inspired writings of the bible (aka canon).

Conclusion

Those that have actually read the pages of the bible and still walk away doubting the content as divinely inspired are small in number for a reason. Personally I believe it's impossible, which is why I usually ask any opposition, “ Did you really, really read it, really?” With regard to the bible as we know it today, our modern translations such as the King James Version or the American Standard etc. are trustworthy in terms of the message's integrity and authenticity.

So yes, you can trust that little to nothing was lost from the original text through the process of translation. Certain versions have been found to differ from the collective and those are usually associated directly to their associated individual sect or denomination. With regard to the missing books, you are free to develop your own conclusion. Personally being a believer that the writings of the bible are of divine origin, I cannot conclude that anything meant to be provided to the children of God would ever be allowed to be removed. If in the future these claimed missing books are proven as authentic I do not believe they could ever be of any overall importance. I am planning to personally read them all and I will provide updates.

The collective message of the bible has survived antiquity, and much scrutiny. I believe the entire message of the bible is sound. Not one piece of evidence has been produced proving the bible incorrect, ever. You must read the books yourself to make a sound determination and If you are seriously considering a version or translation to call your own, you may wish to consider praying to God for guidance and also make sure that you thoroughly research each version before committing.

_____________________________________________

www.thewayisyah.com

A Non denominational ministry keeping it strictly scriptual. The word of God has shown the way to salvation! No emotional, traditional, or religious bias shall keep us from following the light of YAH.