[part 1]

ok I manually batch filed all this shit, to add numbered lines before each section. Have it in one text file.. it's 60k characters, not too bad. What a pain in the ass, dealing with this shit today. No.. let's go through this first.. kicking the fucking gemini to cough it up.

Let's start where this began.. was checking reddit conspiracy, new tab so downvoting doesn't bury things. I see this post:

"Who or what really is Yahweh? And I don’t mean what religion or the Bible says, since those are just lies anyway."

Scrolling the comments, see this one:

There is evidence that the earliest manuscripts that we are aware of are copies of originals and have undergone several translations, additions, and omissions that eventually culminated into the KJV bible we know and read today.

CHANGES - Goliaths height in 1 Samuel 17:4 is 6 cubits and a span which is 9ft 9inches but the much older Dead Sea scrolls and Septuagint say he was 4 cubits and a span which is 6ft 9inches. It is suggested that they inflated the height to make David’s achievement seem even more impressive.

The story of the woman taken in adultery, found in John 7:53-8:11, is not present in the earliest and most reliable manuscripts of the Gospel of John, such as Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75. It is also absent from Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, two of the oldest complete copies of the New Testament.This passage is considered a later addition to the text, as it does not appear in early manuscript evidence and exhibits linguistic differences from the rest of John's Gospel.

The prayer of forgiveness by Jesus on the cross, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do," is present in Codex Sinaiticus but absent from Papyrus 75. Codex Sinaiticus, a 4th-century manuscript, includes this verse in Luke 23:34a, whereas Papyrus 75, an earlier manuscript from the late 2nd or early 3rd century, does not contain it.This omission in Papyrus 75 has led to debates among scholars regarding the originality of the verse in Luke's Gospel.

P64 doesn’t include “without a cause” in Matt 5:22 KJV (That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment). It was the codex sinaiticus where a scribe scribbled it in on the margins which eventually found its way in the KJV verse.

Addition of the trinity in 1 John 5:7-8. The earliest Greek manuscripts have no such thing only the latin ones do which came earlier.

The ending of the Gospel of Mark, specifically verses 16:9-20, is widely considered by scholars to be a later addition and not part of the original text. The earliest and most reliable Greek manuscripts (Codex Vanaticus & Sinaiticus) end at verse 8, with subsequent verses appearing in later manuscripts. These additional verses include post-resurrection appearances of Jesus, and things saying they will survive snake bites and be able to drink poison, and instructions to the disciples, which align with other Gospel accounts but differ stylistically from the rest of Mark.

ENITRE BOOKS THAT WERE OMITTED

Several books mentioned in the Dead Sea scrolls and older manuscripts were omitted Gnostic monks were deemed heretical along with their books Book of Noah Book of Enoch Book of Giants Letter of Jeremiah Book of Tobit Wisdom of Sirach Gospel of Thomas Gospel of Judas

I'm there.. hey.. I want more of that shit. But if you try and look it up, it doesn't wanna cough it up, eh. So you gotta keep kicking it in the ass. So I'd start out by pasting that. Not gonna paste what it would say when it's working on things. You can tell by what I say what was going on. Let's just do a series of me kicking it in the ass so it 'll cough it up with more of these.

We had this right side "deep research" panel too, going on.. but it's trying to do this bullshit school essay, where I'm like, quit fuckin around and let's get a long list. Finally it gets the point after it stalled out for too long and it shut down that right side bullshit.

==============================

Do a "deep research" about all types of things like this, where, you see online, religious fanatics who like to quote bible verse numbers and know every line by memory. Meanwhile, guys were editing these books as it went along. I want a full list of how things seem sketchy with these bibles, these days. If your list is long, do not cut things short.. that's why this is a deep research, I want a full long scrolling list. Not your usual brief few points and you wrap 'er up.

All this stuff, you can't just go edit things later, you know what I mean. I picture later in the future as society changes and odd things that were illegal in the past are now, permitted.. they'll go and change this bible stuff later. It's almost like a fucking sitcom, where now they'll go.. oh we gotta add a gay dude here and there, who sins. Or.. too many white people, better throw in some black guys. Even though they probably weren't around that biblical area back then. It's like these guys are fuckin with the past history.

So, in your full list of biblical edits later, as the years go on.. I want you to list each edit, and explain the "why", they'd have to change something later. What's the real reason for that edit.

==========================

You are nearing your limit of 10 research reports. You can generate 1 more until Oct 9.

=========================

You call this a fucking list? At least the initial post from the other guy had a bit of a list of edits. Scrolling your shit.. I don't see none of that. What the fuck are you doing? Give me a fucking super long scrolling list of edits like he found out about.

===========================

You're supposed to go find a bunch of new ones. He was talking about major edits too. Did you even fucking read what he said in the start of my query.

===========================

you're supposed to go find new things he didn't talk about in his post I quoted at the start. Seems like you're dwelling on what he said.

=======================

you still can't figure out a list, eh.. like nevermind your fuckin school essay.. give me a long scrolling list of all biblical "edits" as time goes on. What year those edits would go. Do not do a "dissertation" where you do school mumbo jumbo. Just name the edit, what year, and the reason why. Don't use a table, because I can't copy that. It has to be like normal notepad text. Posting this in a forum and they don't do tables. ok.. nevermind your fucking office hot air. Stick to the edits only.

========================

yeah, nevermind the right side bullshit.. keep going in this left side. I already got the ones he talked about, so don't repeat them. There's gotta be more. This isn't long scrolling enough.

===========================

I don't see you talking about what year the original came out, and what year the edit was. Do that for each point. Don't talk about anything the guy mentioned in his post I quoted at the start. Go find new edits he didn't mention, and biblical books that were omitted too.. like he had at the bottom. So add those at the bottom of your post. Try the whole thing again from scratch. Super long scrolling list. Stop limiting yourself to just a few points. Why do you keep doing that. Trying to save data transfer or something?

==========================

how come your biblical edits, you only got 2-3 now? this is supposed to be a super long scrolling list

=========================

like I want at least 100 points here.. don't repeat what he said at the start.

========================

how many edit points do you have in your last response, don't count the omitted books.. those look ok

=======================

that's all you could scrub up, was 24? I said at least 100.. ok.. quit limiting your response because you're trying to save data transfer amount or something.

=======================

how many points that time? You need to say the amount of edits at the start, then get into it. I need this vastly increased.. before you had 24, scrolling there, it looked similar, "not enough". Try the whole thing again.

=======================

Nevermind the right side deep research side. That was causing you to do the spinning circle for a couple hours. I had enough clicked stop, waited 5 minutes, that did nothing, so reloaded this chrome browser and now it's back to normal. I don't see the right side deep research panel.. it's just the left side expanded with the whole screen.

You were doing ok though.. finally got it with a longer list and were processing 121 edit points instead of the few you usually do. That's what I want, a super long list, of all the edits they did to the bible, over the years. If you have more than 121, make a bigger list. Don't do the right side though because it's taking too much of your processing power. Just have it on the left side like you were doing.

I want a new parameter here.. where you'll sort the edits by "edit date", so begin with the earliest ones. The original dates would stay the same. This way you get an idea of what they edited first. Before you begin, can you find more than 121 edits?

=============================

What's the specific number here of how many edits of your previous response? You just say over 100. Like how many can you get, that are out there?

=========================

So that's all you can get is 121 edits? If you can get more, get more, ok? Almost done. Here's a change in the style of your reponses. I want you to add a "number" to each one, so I can make sure you cover all 121. Like I said.. if there's more edits you can find, get them. Try again but number each one. I was going through what you said in your previous response and not much info for edit dates on some of them. Not sure how you'll sort all these. Because it's like, which one would be the first, right. Categorize them by which show up earlier in the bible sequence. Like 121 would be edits that went on in the end section of the bible. ok try the whole thing again. This should be the last change going on before you're done.

==========================

oh you only got 49 edits to the bible.. When you get into the later section, of omitted or lost books, that should reset the number to 1 for that section.

So that's all you could find was 49 edits to the bible? See if you can get way more, ok. This list isn't long enough and you know there's more edits you can research and find, but you're being too "lazy". Don't fuckin be "lazy", ok. This is supposed to do a "deep research", so do your fucking job correctly.

================================

Oh, so now you got off your lazy ass and the edits you could find were 74.. before I kicked you in the ass, you could only find 49. I got a hunch you're still being lazy, aren't you. This is supposed to be a deep research, ok.. jeez. ok.. so if there's more than 74, quit fuckin around and add them, ok.

Almost there.. I want an addition to what's going on with the omitted or lost books. For each, you'll give a paragraph of what's going on in it. Like what's that book about. So, each of those needs to be expanded more about what was going on. I don't want just one sentence. A paragraph, might not be enough. I want to know what was going on in those omitted or lost books, where they were like.. naw, we don't wanna go there with that. It's cause there's some "funny business", where, if they'd add it to the bible, it'd be like, what's going on with this. And they didn't wanna go there. So you need to talk about what was going on in there, with each of those omitted or lost books.

==============================

Checking your 74 edits, I shouldn't be seeing scattered section names, wherever. Your 74 points are supposed to be sorted in the sequence they first show up in the bible, ok. It's almost like you're a retarded kid, in school.. where, the only way to deal with them is to hit 'em. Organize this section properly.

These omitted or lost books, section, I want you to add a 3rd point for each, of what year it was created.

I'm also fuckin leery about your lazy ass, the way you were trying to sneak things behind my back going oh yeah there's 121 edits. Then I get you to number shit and find out you were counting omitted books in that number. Your edit count was way low.. Then I keep whipping you, and all of a sudden you pull out this 74, out of your ass, from nowhere. You were hiding that, all the time. I know there's more but you're too fuckin lazy to do your job properly. This is supposed to be a "deep research", ok. Yet you keep doing shit, half-assed. If you were an employee, you'd be "fired", ok. Go fucking get more edits that you know about, but are too lazy to do your job properly, and go get the full fucking list. It's like you're trying to save "processing power" or something. This is a fucking "deep research" ok.. not a coasting it hopeing the boss won't notice.

Restart this whole fucking thing again.. go get more than 74 edits cause I know you're doing a half-assed job, like before I nabbed you with your dick in the cookie jar.

==============================

Checking your work.. how come you're sorting those 74, bad again. At least this time you tried to sneak it by me with starting by genesis. But you're fuckin up as it goes on. Quit fuckin around here.

Pause working on the project for a sec, just list the 74 and put the section it's from. So we can see if you got things sorted by what shows up first in the bible. Just do that for now and if you detect any fuck up you can resort the list properly.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This is where it fucked up.. before, I couldn't get it to do more than 74 edits. But after this last one, I think too much data for it to handle and it got confused. lol. Then it said this at the start of the response after:

There are 121 edits and 47 omitted books in the following list.

I'm there.. ok leave it go. What it was doing earlier was 121 for both sections. And must of thought it was for that first one. All of a sudden it pulls out like 50 more edits, out it's ass.

What's going on here, is too much shit to sift through. Trying to get it to sort the 121 by how it shows up in the bible first, too much for it to handle and it never did it. I had to use grok for that later. The next gemini response, it went back to it's 74 for that edits part.

===============================

Your previous response, when I try to copy the text, it doesn't select the point numbers. Convert this to text so I can copy all this and paste it in notepad so it looks like how it does in here.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It wasn't doing the simple code window formatting so I could copy the text with the numbers and bullet points selected. Now it's back to it's 74 edits.

That was it.. couple queries before this, it would say try again in an hour. Next query it said, try again in fuckin 2 hours. Too much shit for it to deal with at this point. lol

[continued in part 2]

[part 7]

Doing a search for the word: commandments. Doesn't bring anything up in the text file of the 113 edits and "47 Books Referenced or Once Considered But Omitted, from the bible", text file.

Doing a search for the word: commandments in the gemini conversation, it brings some up. Maybe it weeded those out as it went along. Let's see what it said and do I have those.

===========================

Samaritan Pentateuch Edits

The Samaritan version of the Ten Commandments adds a commandment to build an altar on Mount Gerizim. This commandment is completely absent from the Masoretic Text.

Original Date: The Samaritan Pentateuch is believed to have separated from the Jewish texts around the 4th century BCE.

Edit Date: Added in the 4th century BCE or earlier.

Reason: This was a major ideological-religious change to establish Mount Gerizim as the central place of worship, rejecting Jerusalem.  

============================

See, they're talkin about fuckin around with the ten commandments. Let's see if I even got this one. Here, I'll search for: Gerizim. Only one with that was this:

=====================

24. Change in how the altar is built (Deuteronomy 27:4) Book: Deuteronomy Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Samaritan text of Deuteronomy 27:4 states that the altar should be built on Mount Gerizim, while the Jewish text specifies Mount Ebal. Reason: A religious and ideological change made by the Samaritans to promote their place of worship on Mount Gerizim.

====================

You'd think it'd be pretty fucking major, where, you're talking about changing the ten commandments, but it's not mentioning it. I don't know, man.. looks like they're messing around with the ten commandments, with their fucking edits over the years. lol.

Going back to the conversation for when it said "commandments". No, it's just that section.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Haven't went through any of this stuff yet. Spotted this edit though:

61. The change in Jesus’s response to a leper (Mark 1:41) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: The change from Jesus "being angry" to "moved with compassion" occurred sometime after the 5th century CE. Reason: A scribal change to remove a potentially "unsuitable" emotion, anger, from Jesus’s character to protect his image.

It's like what else are they "weeding out" here.. how about how he was fucking married to Mary Magdalene. I didn't see that one, talked about in all this stuff, eh. Here.. let's do a search for her. No, she doesn't show up in any of the 113 edits.. lol.. that's because it was in the whole fucking removed books section. lol.

29. Gospel of Mary (Magdalene)

What it's about: This text presents Mary Magdalene as a leader among the disciples, to whom Jesus gave secret, spiritual knowledge. It records a dispute among the disciples where Peter is jealous of Mary's special status.

Original Date: Composed in the 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: This text was rejected for its Gnostic cosmology and for its unconventional portrayal of Mary Magdalene's authority, which contradicted the traditional male-dominated hierarchy of the early church.

So this is where you get this, oh Jesus didn't get fucked.. that's why all the priests were like, oh you don't do that type of thing. lol.

In these removed books, you see the word gnostic.. that's like what I was researching the other day.. where it gets into the real origins of who made yahweh. lol. And how it wasn't saying good stuff about his behavior. So.. they don't like any of that. But if you look into what the mystics who were meditating, saw.. it was that stuff.

Oh yeah.. and then didn't the Jesus dude have kids with her. Yeah, they don't like any of that stuff.. lol.

=========================

Was recalling stuff I read during lunches in June while working.

"Bloodline of the holy grail. The hidden lineage of Jesus revealed."

https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biblianazar/esp_biblianazar_11.htm

There is a good deal of information outside the Bible to confirm that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. But is there anything relevant in the Gospels today - anything which perhaps the editors missed? Indeed there is.

There are seven lists given in the Gospels of the women who were Jesus’s regular companions. These lists all include his mother, but in six of these seven lists the first name given (even ahead of Jesus’s mother) is that of Mary Magdalene, making it plain that she was, in fact, the First Lady: the Messianic Queen.

But is the marriage itself detailed in the Gospels? Actually, it is. Many have suggested that the wedding at Cana was the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene - but this was not the wedding ceremony as such, being simply the pre-marital betrothal feast. The marriage is defined by the quite separate anointings of Jesus by Mary at Bethany. Chronologically, these anointings (as given in the Gospels) were two-and-a-half years apart.

Readers of the 1st century would have been fully conversant with the two-part ritual of the sacred marriage of a dynastic heir. Jesus, as we know, was a Messiah, which means quite simply an ’Anointed One’. In fact, all anointed senior priests and Davidic kings were Messiahs; Jesus was not unique in this regard. Although not an ordained priest, he gained his right to Messiah status by way of descent from King David and the kingly line, but he did not achieve that status until he was ritually anointed by Mary Magdalene in her capacity as a bridal high priestess.

The word ’Messiah’ comes from the Hebrew verb mashiach: ’to anoint’, which derives from the Egyptian messeh: ’the holy crocodile’. It was with the fat of the messeh that the Pharaoh’s sister-brides anointed their husbands on marriage, and the Egyptian custom sprang from kingly practice in old Mesopotamia. In the Old Testament’s Song of Solomon we learn of the bridal anointing of the king. It is detailed that the oil used in Judah was the fragrant ointment of spikenard (an expensive root oil from the Himalayas) and it is explained that this ritual was performed while the kingly husband sat at the table.

In the New Testament, the anointing of Jesus by Mary Magdalene was indeed performed while he sat at the table, and specifically with the bridal ointment of spikenard. Afterwards, Mary wiped Jesus’s feet with her hair and, on the first occasion of the two-part ceremony, she wept. All of these things signify the marital anointing of a dynastic heir.

Other anointings of Messiahs (whether on coronation or admission to the senior priesthood) were always conducted by men: by the High Zadok or the High Priest. The oil used was olive oil, mixed with cinnamon and other spices, but never spikenard. This oil was the express prerogative of a Messianic bride who had to be a ’Mary’ - a sister of a sacred order. Jesus’s mother was a Mary; so too would his wife have been a Mary, by title at least if not by baptismal name. Some conventual orders still maintain the tradition by adding the title ’Mary’ to the baptismal names of their nuns: Sister Mary Theresa, Sister Mary Louise, for example.

Messianic marriages were always conducted in two stages. The first (the anointing in Luke) was the legal commitment to wedlock, while the second (the later anointing in Matthew, Mark and John) was the cementing of the contract. In Jesus and Mary’s case the second anointing was of particular significance for, as explained by Flavius Josephus in the 1st-century Antiquities of the Jews, the second part of the marriage ceremony was never conducted until the wife was three months pregnant.

Dynastic heirs such as Jesus were expressly required to perpetuate their lines. Marriage was essential, but community law protected the dynasts against marriage to women who proved barren or kept miscarrying. This protection was provided by the three-month pregnancy rule. Miscarriages would not often happen after that term, subsequent to which it was considered safe enough to complete the marriage contract.

When anointing her husband at that stage, the Messianic bride was said to be anointing him for burial, as confirmed in the Gospels. From that day she would carry a vial of spikenard around her neck, throughout her husband’s life, to be used again on his entombment. It was for this very purpose that Mary Magdalene would have gone to Jesus’s tomb, as she did on the Sabbath after the Crucifixion.

After the second Bethany anointing, the Gospels relate that Jesus said:

’Wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her’.

But did the Christian Church authorities honour Mary Magdalene and speak of this act as a memorial? No they did not; they completely ignored Jesus’s own directive and denounced Mary as a whore.

To the esoteric Grail Church and the Knights Templars, however, Mary Magdalene was always regarded as a saint. She is still revered as such by many today, but the interesting fact of this sainthood is that Mary is the recognized patron saint of wine-growers: the guardian of the Vine. Hence, she is the guardian of the sacred Bloodline of the Holy Grail.

AI is not what you think

It averages words and is basically a fancy auto complete

It works for low level tasks but can't do real analysis

Did it tell you about differing source documents?

[part 2]

Let's get to the edits. It's not putting a line break after each numbered section. I got that in here but after clicking save, there's no fucking vertical space between each. I also have a next line after book, original date, edit date, reason. In this piece of shit it doesn't have any vertical breaks. Fuck this, ok.. good enough. But it has them in the text window here before I click save. Fuck your formatting bullshit today.

=================================

1. Samaritan Pentateuch: Change in Genesis 1:1 Book: Genesis Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The change to a singular "heaven" occurred sometime before the 4th century BCE. Reason: A scribal difference in translation or interpretation from the plural "heavens" found in the Masoretic Text.

2. Samaritan Pentateuch: Change in Genesis 1:2 Book: Genesis Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The change occurred sometime before the 4th century BCE. Reason: A scribal difference in interpretation of the original Hebrew phrase, changing "formless and void" to "unseeable and unfashioned".

3. Masoretic Text: Change from "we will be like God" to "we will be like gods" (Genesis 3:5) Book: Genesis Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The change occurred sometime before the standardization of the Masoretic Text (7th-10th centuries CE). Reason: A theological change to protect a high view of God and avoid implying that humans can become divine.

4. Addition of a dialogue in Genesis 4:8 Book: Genesis Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The addition of a dialogue between Cain and Abel before Cain kills his brother is found in the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls, while it is omitted from the Masoretic Text. Reason: The Masoretic Text is missing this dialogue, which is believed to be a later omission by a scribe.

5. Addition of a dialogue between Cain and Abel (Genesis 4:8) Book: Genesis Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The addition of a dialogue between Cain and Abel before Cain kills his brother occurred sometime before the Masoretic Text was standardized. This dialogue is found in the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Reason: The Masoretic Text is missing this dialogue, which is believed to be a later omission by a scribe.

6. Samaritan Pentateuch: Omission of "Canaan" in genealogies (Genesis 10) Book: Genesis Original Date: Ancient text. Edit Date: The omission occurred sometime before the 4th century BCE. Reason: An accidental omission by a scribe's eye skipping a name in a long list with similar vocabulary.

7. Samaritan Pentateuch: Omission of "and the tower" (Genesis 11:8) Book: Genesis Original Date: Ancient text. Edit Date: The phrase is missing from the Masoretic Text, but present in the Septuagint. Reason: An omission by a scribe, as the entire point of the story is the tower itself, which the Septuagint reading focuses on.

8. Masoretic Text: Change in Genesis 18:22 Book: Genesis Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The change from "God remained standing before Abraham" to "Abraham stood before the LORD" occurred sometime before the standardization of the Masoretic Text (7th-10th centuries CE). Reason: A theological change made by scribes to protect a high view of God and remove any hint of a subservient role.

9. Samaritan Pentateuch: Change in Genesis 50:23 Book: Genesis Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The change occurred sometime before the 4th century BCE. Reason: A scribal interpretation to avoid anthropomorphism by changing "upon the knees of Joseph" to "in the days of Joseph".

10. Samaritan Pentateuch: Change in the description of God from "man of war" to "hero of war" (Exodus 15:3) Book: Exodus Original Date: Ancient text. Edit Date: Sometime before the 4th century BCE. Reason: A theological change to make the description of God less human-like and more spiritual.

11. Samaritan Pentateuch: Frequent repetition in Exodus Book: Exodus Original Date: The Pentateuch is ancient. Edit Date: The Samaritan version has these additions from before the 4th century BCE. Reason: A stylistic choice to make the text more repetitious, recording Moses repeating exactly what God had previously instructed him to tell Pharaoh.

12. Change in how God is seen (Exodus 24:10-12) Book: Exodus Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint translators eased the theological tension of seeing God in one verse but not being able to in another. Reason: A theological change to ease tension in the text.

13. Masoretic Text: Change in Exodus 24:5 Book: Exodus Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text standardized the Hebrew term for "young men" over an Aramaic term found in other manuscripts. Reason: A linguistic difference where an Aramaic term was replaced with a more standard Hebrew term.

14. Omission of the phrase about the goat for Azazel (Leviticus 16:8) Book: Leviticus Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint and Vulgate versions leave the term Azazel untranslated. Reason: A theological concern, as medieval rabbis identified Azazel as a "hairy desert demon," and they wanted to avoid the implication of giving a sacrifice to a demon.

15. Change to the use of "you shall keep" (Leviticus 18:4) Book: Leviticus Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint and Latin translations of the original Hebrew phrase "tiš-mə-rū lā-le-ḵeṯ" (you shall keep to walk) differ, which is a grammatical change. Reason: A grammatical or stylistic difference in translation.

16. Change from "man" to "she" in the law of live sacrifices (Leviticus 18:5) Book: Leviticus Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Samaritan Pentateuch changes the masculine pronoun "he" to the feminine "she". Reason: A grammatical or scribal error that changes the recipient of the law.

17. Omission of "for I am the Lord your God" in Leviticus 18:5 Book: Leviticus Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint and Latin versions omit the phrase "for I am the Lord your God". Reason: An accidental omission by a scribe's eye skipping to a later word with a similar ending.

18. Change in Leviticus 18:9 Book: Leviticus Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Latin Vulgate adds "filiae uxoris patris tui" (daughter of your father's wife) and a phrase "in order to hide her confusion" which is absent from the original Hebrew text. Reason: A scribal addition or clarification.

19. Omission of a passage in Numbers 10:35-36 Book: Numbers Original Date: Ancient text. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text is surrounded by two upside-down nuns, which may indicate that the verses were a separate book or were placed in the wrong location. Reason: A literary decision, possibly due to a dislocation in the text.

20. Change in how the Song of the Ark is treated in Numbers 10:35-36 Book: Numbers Original Date: Ancient text. Edit Date: The Septuagint version of the song is in a different order, making more sense in the context of the ark being on the move. Reason: The Septuagint translators rearranged the passage to provide a clearer and more logical presentation.

21. Samaritan Pentateuch: Introduction of an intermediary between God and Balaam (Numbers 23:4) Book: Numbers Original Date: Ancient text. Edit Date: Sometime before the 4th century BCE. Reason: A theological change to introduce an angel rather than have God interact directly with a pagan prophet.

22. Change in Numbers 21:14 Book: Numbers Original Date: Ancient text. Edit Date: The Septuagint version of the text is a lot shorter than the Masoretic Text version. Reason: The Septuagint translator may have abbreviated the text to make it clearer for the Greek audience.

23. Change from "sons of God" to "sons of Israel" (Deuteronomy 32:8) Book: Deuteronomy Original Date: The older reading is preserved in manuscripts from at least the 2nd century BCE. Edit Date: The change to "sons of Israel" was made by the Masoretes, Jewish scribes who standardized the Hebrew text from the 7th to 10th centuries CE. Reason: A theological change made to avoid a polytheistic reading, as "sons of God" was a term often associated with other divine beings.

24. Change in how the altar is built (Deuteronomy 27:4) Book: Deuteronomy Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Samaritan text of Deuteronomy 27:4 states that the altar should be built on Mount Gerizim, while the Jewish text specifies Mount Ebal. Reason: A religious and ideological change made by the Samaritans to promote their place of worship on Mount Gerizim.

25. Addition of an entire section in Deuteronomy 32:43 Book: Deuteronomy Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls have a longer version of Deuteronomy 32:43, with additional lines that call the heavens to rejoice and for the angels to worship God. The Masoretic Text is shorter and lacks these lines. Reason: The Masoretic Text removed or altered parts of the poetic pairings to eliminate references to other divine beings and soften the polytheistic implication.

26. The addition of the Ark in Joshua Book: Joshua Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text adds the Ark to several verses where it is not found in the Septuagint. Reason: A theological correction by a scribe to emphasize the power of God in the narrative.

27. Change in the covenant renewal at Ebal (Joshua 8:30-35) Book: Joshua Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: In the Masoretic Text, the covenant renewal at Ebal is placed after the conquest of Ai (Joshua 8:29). The Septuagint places it after a summarizing notice (Joshua 9:2). Reason: The change was likely made because the section about the building of the altar has no connection with the context of the story of the conquest of Ai.

28. Change in the sequencing of Joshua Book: Joshua Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint places Joshua 10:30-35 after 9:1, while the Masoretic Text has it in its traditional location. Reason: A change in the arrangement of the text, perhaps due to a textual error or a different literary form.

29. Omission of entire verses in Joshua Book: Joshua Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint omits some verses that are present in the Masoretic Text. Reason: The Septuagint is a shorter version of the text, likely representing an earlier literary edition of the book.

30. Change in the conquest of cities (Judges 1:18) Book: Judges Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Greek Septuagint denies that the Judahites conquered Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, while the Masoretic Text asserts that they did. Reason: The Septuagint may be "correcting" the Hebrew text, as other textual evidence seems to indicate the towns did not fall to the Israelites until much later.

31. The change from "Moses" to "Manasseh" (Judges 18:30) Book: Judges Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: Sometime before the 10th century CE, the name was changed from "Moses" to "Manasseh" by adding a nun in superscript. Reason: A scribal change "to avoid saying that the grandson of Moses became a priest of false gods".

32. Change in the description of a concubine (Judges 19:2) Book: Judges Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint version of the text reads that the concubine "went away from him to the house of her father," while the Masoretic Text has a disputed verb that could mean "committed fornication" or "was angry". Reason: The Septuagint translators may have chosen a less offensive translation, or the original text was different.

33. The omission of a verse in 1 Samuel 13:1 Book: 1 Samuel Original Date: Book of Samuel written sometime after the events, likely after 931 BCE. Edit Date: The verse is completely lacking in the Septuagint Sinaiticus. Reason: The Masoretic Text reading "Saul was a year old when he began to reign" is viewed as a corrupted reading, and the omission in the Septuagint is considered a correction or a reflection of an earlier manuscript tradition.

34. Change in Goliath's height in 1 Samuel 17:4 Book: 1 Samuel Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The change from "four cubits and a span" (6'9") in the Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls to "six cubits and a span" (9'9") occurred sometime before the standardization of the Masoretic Text. Reason: A factual discrepancy, potentially an intentional exaggeration to make David's victory seem more impressive.

35. The omission of David's backstory in 1 Samuel 17 Book: 1 Samuel Original Date: The Septuagint was translated between the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE. The Masoretic Text was standardized between the 7th and 10th centuries CE. Edit Date: The shorter Septuagint version omits a large amount of material about David and Goliath. Reason: The Masoretic Text's longer version is considered a composite of an older "heroic tale" and a "romantic tale" that were spliced together by a later redactor to enrich the plot.

36. The two versions of 1 Samuel 17-18 Book: 1 Samuel Original Date: The Septuagint was translated between the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE. The Masoretic Text was standardized between the 7th and 10th centuries CE. Edit Date: The additions to the longer, harmonized version in the Masoretic Text were made sometime before it was standardized. Reason: Scribes spliced written sources together to incorporate what they perceived as parallels and to enrich the story.

37. A medieval interpolation in 2 Samuel 1:26 Book: 2 Samuel Original Date: Book of Samuel written sometime after the events, likely after 931 BCE. Edit Date: An extra sentence was added to the Latin Vulgate around the 8th century CE. Reason: A medieval interpolation to avoid any possible homoerotic reading of the biblical text by comparing David's love for

38. Jonathan to a mother's love for her only son.
    Omission of a doxology (1 Kings 3:13b-14) Book: 1 Kings Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint omits a verse about the Davidic covenant and the lengthening of Solomon's days. Reason: A Deuteronomistic (dtr) addition to the text by a later scribe to make the scene cohere with Priestly theology and style.

39. Rearrangement of the narrative (1 Kings 11-14) Book: 1 Kings Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint contains a disjointed portion in the midst of the narrative that parallels what is found in the Masoretic Text but with many twists. Reason: The Septuagint may be attributing to Jeroboam all the actions of the other rivals of Rehoboam, or it may be a different textual tradition.

40. Change from "Jezebel" to "Jezebel the wife of Ahab" (1 Kings 19:1) Book: 1 Kings Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint makes the subject of the verb explicit by naming Jezebel. Reason: A scribal explanation that tends to clarify the account.

[continued in part 3]

[part 3]

41. Change of Jezebel's words (1 Kings 19:2) Book: 1 Kings Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text has Jezebel say "if you are Elijah, I am Jezebel," while the Septuagint reads "if you are Elijah, myself, [I am] Jezebel." Reason: The Septuagint translator may have had a different Hebrew source text, or it may be a corruption in one of the versions.

42. Omission of "and all the people answered, Amen" (Nehemiah 8:6) Book: Nehemiah Original Date: Nehemiah written around 445-424 BCE. Edit Date: Added to later manuscripts. Reason: Likely added to reflect liturgical practice in the synagogue, where the congregation would respond "Amen.".

43. Change from "pierced" to "like a lion" in Psalm 22:16 Book: Psalms Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text has "like a lion" while the Septuagint and some Dead Sea Scrolls have "pierced." Reason: The change in the Masoretic Text may have been a scribal error (a single letter was changed), making the verse less explicitly messianic.

44. Omission of Psalm 151 Book: Psalms Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text omits Psalm 151, which is found in the Septuagint. Reason: The Masoretic Text standardized a shorter Hebrew version, while the Septuagint was a Greek translation with a different approach to canon.

45. Addition of an entire section in Proverbs Book: Proverbs Original Date: The text is ancient. Edit Date: The Septuagint version of Proverbs is in a different order and has additions that are not in the Masoretic Text. Reason: The Septuagint translators reinterpreted the book of Proverbs for its own Greek context.

46. Change in the description of Isaiah 9:6 Book: Isaiah Original Date: Isaiah written in the 8th century BCE. Edit Date: The Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls version reads "Messenger of Great Counsel," while the Masoretic Text reads "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God". Reason: The Greek translator, who often translates freely, was likely struggling to make sense of a difficult Hebrew text and made an interpretive translation.

47. Addition of a phrase in Isaiah 9:6 Book: Isaiah Original Date: Isaiah written in the 8th century BCE. Edit Date: The Septuagint adds the phrase "for I will bring peace upon the rulers, peace and health to him" in a later manuscript. Reason: The extra phrase may have been added by the translator for some reason, or it could have been a Hebrew reading known to him.

48. Change from "people" to "men" in Isaiah 36:11 Book: Isaiah Original Date: Isaiah written in the 8th century BCE. Edit Date: The Septuagint uses the word "men" where the Masoretic Text reads "people". Reason: The Dead Sea Scroll 1QIsa-a agrees with the Septuagint, suggesting that the Septuagint was translated from a different, older Hebrew source text.

49. Change in the number of words in Isaiah 40:7-8 Book: Isaiah Original Date: Isaiah written in the 8th century BCE. Edit Date: The Septuagint has a shorter version of the text than the Masoretic Text. The Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa-a) also has a shorter text. Reason: The Septuagint and 1QIsa-a may represent the shorter original, and the Masoretic Text may have been expanded by intentional scribal additions.

50. Addition of a longer reading in Jeremiah 33:14-26 Book: Jeremiah Original Date: Jeremiah written between 627-586 BCE. Edit Date: The Septuagint version, translated in the 3rd-2nd centuries BCE, is shorter and omits a section on the Davidic kingdom. Reason: The Septuagint likely represents an earlier, shorter version of the text, while the Masoretic Text contains later additions.

51. Change in Ezekiel 10:1 Book: Ezekiel Original Date: Ezekiel written between 593-571 BCE. Edit Date: A verb occurs in the Masoretic Text that is omitted by the Septuagint and the Peshitta. Reason: The Septuagint and Peshitta may represent a shorter, older version of the text, or the Masoretic Text may have an addition.

52. Change in Ezekiel 23:3 Book: Ezekiel Original Date: Ezekiel written between 593-571 BCE. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text has a repeated verb, while the Septuagint and Peshitta have only one verb. Reason: The Septuagint and Peshitta may represent a shorter, older version of the text, or the Masoretic Text may have a stylistic change.

53. Change in Ezekiel 23:43 Book: Ezekiel Original Date: Ezekiel written between 593-571 BCE. Edit Date: The Masoretic Text is considered corrupt, while the Septuagint and Peshitta have a reading that makes more sense. Reason: The Septuagint and Peshitta may represent a different Vorlage, or the Masoretic Text may be a scribal error.

54. The change in Ezekiel 28:11-19 Book: Ezekiel Original Date: Ezekiel written between 593-571 BCE. Edit Date: The Septuagint translation, translated in the 3rd-2nd centuries BCE, distinguishes the king from the cherub. Reason: A theological modification by the Greek translator to suppress hints of the king's divinity.

55. The doxology in the Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:13) Book: Matthew Original Date: Gospel of Matthew written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: Added to manuscripts as early as the 2nd or 3rd century. Reason: A later addition believed to have come from liturgical practices used in early Christian worship services.

56. The change from "the kingdom of God" to "the kingdom of the heavens" (Matthew 19:24) Book: Matthew Original Date: Gospel of Matthew written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: This variant is present in some manuscripts. Reason: A scribal change to avoid using the word "God" directly, a common practice in some Jewish traditions.

57. Omission of "nor the Son" (Matthew 24:36) Book: Matthew Original Date: Gospel of Matthew written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: Omitted in some later manuscripts, including the Textus Receptus, sometime after the 4th century. Reason: A "pious correction" by scribes to protect the doctrine of Christ’s omniscience, as the phrase implies a limitation to

58. Jesus' divine knowledge.
    The change in the word "covenant" (Matthew 26:28) Book: Matthew Original Date: Gospel of Matthew written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts of Matthew read "my blood of the new covenant," while others omit the word "new." The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal clarification to match the wording of other gospels.

59. The change in the word "covenant" (Matthew 26:28) Book: Matthew Original Date: Gospel of Matthew written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts of Matthew read "my blood of the new covenant," while others omit the word "new." The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal clarification to match the wording of other gospels.

60. The addition of "and he was with the wild animals" (Mark 1:13) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is absent in some manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal addition to add more detail to the narrative.

61. The change in Jesus’s response to a leper (Mark 1:41) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: The change from Jesus "being angry" to "moved with compassion" occurred sometime after the 5th century CE. Reason: A scribal change to remove a potentially "unsuitable" emotion, anger, from Jesus’s character to protect his image.

62. The omission of "and his disciples" (Mark 2:23) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is absent in some manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal error or a deliberate omission.

63. The omission of "and he cried out with a loud voice" (Mark 5:7) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is absent in some manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal error or a deliberate omission.

64. The omission of "and the unclean spirits came out" (Mark 5:13) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is absent in some manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal error or a deliberate omission.

65. Addition of "and he said to them" (Mark 6:30) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is added in some manuscripts but not in the earliest ones. Reason: A scribal addition to make the flow of the narrative more explicit.

66. The omission of a phrase in Mark 7:16 Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: The verse "If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear" is absent from the earliest manuscripts. It was added in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization with other similar passages in the Gospels.

67. The addition of "in your name" in Mark 9:41. Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is absent in the earliest manuscripts. Added in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization with other passages in the Gospels.

68. The omission of phrases in Mark 9:44, 46 Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: The verses "where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched" are absent from the earliest manuscripts. Added in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization with Mark 9:48 and a desire for emphasis.

69. The change from "the Son" to "the Son of Man" (Mark 13:32) Book: Mark Original Date: Gospel of Mark written around 60-70 CE. Edit Date: This variant is found in some later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization with other passages in the Gospels.

70. The omission of "in the synagogue" (Luke 4:16) Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is absent in some manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal error or a deliberate omission.

71. Change from "man" to "air" (Luke 6:22) Book: Luke Original Date: Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: An 8th-century manuscript accidentally skipped a letter while copying the Greek word for "man," changing it to "air." Reason: An unintentional scribal error.

72. The doxology in the Lord’s Prayer (Luke 11:2) Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: Added in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization to make Luke's version of the prayer match Matthew's.

73. Change of "sinners" to "the tax collectors" (Luke 15:1) Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: The change is found in some later manuscripts. Reason: A scribe's effort to be more specific in their description of Jesus's audience.

74. The change from "a man" to "a certain rich man" (Luke 16:19) Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: This minor addition is found in some manuscripts but not in the earliest ones. Reason: A scribal clarification to make the parable's character more explicit.

75. Change from "a certain man" to "a certain rich man" (Luke 16:19) Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: This minor addition is found in some manuscripts but not in the earliest ones. Reason: A scribal clarification to make the parable's character more explicit.

76. The omission of a verse in Luke 17:36 Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: The verse "Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left" is absent from the earliest manuscripts. This verse was added in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization with the parallel passage in Matthew 24:40.

77. The change in the word "covenant" (Luke 22:20) Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts of Luke read "This cup is the new covenant in my blood," while others omit the word "new." The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization to match the wording of other gospels.

78. Change in the word "covenant" (Luke 22:20) Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts of Luke read "This cup is the new covenant in my blood," while others omit the word "new." The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal harmonization to match the wording of other gospels.

79. The omission of an entire verse in Luke 23:17 Book: Luke Original Date: Gospel of Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: The verse "For it was necessary for him to release one to them at the feast" is missing from the earliest manuscripts. Added to later manuscripts. Reason: An interpolation to harmonize with the parallel accounts in Matthew and Mark.

80. Addition of a phrase (Luke 24:53) Book: Luke Original Date: Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: The original reading was either "continually in the temple blessing God" or "praising God." Later scribes combined these into "praising and blessing God." This conflation appeared in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal conflation to combine two known readings into one.

[continued in part 4]

[part 4]

81. The addition of a phrase (Luke 24:53) Book: Luke Original Date: Luke written around 70-80 CE. Edit Date: The original reading was either "continually in the temple blessing God" or "praising God." Later scribes combined these into "praising and blessing God." This conflation appeared in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal conflation to combine two known readings into one.

82. The change from "only begotten God" to "only begotten Son" (John 1:18) Book: John Original Date: Gospel of John written around 80-90 CE. Edit Date: The change to "only begotten Son" appears in manuscripts from later centuries. Reason: A scribe may have changed the text to clarify the relationship between the Father and the Son and reinforce a specific Christological belief.

83. Change in the description of the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:3-4) Book: John Original Date: Gospel of John written around 80-90 CE. Edit Date: An entire passage describing an angel stirring the water is absent from the earliest manuscripts of John. Added sometime after the 4th century. Reason: Added by a scribe to clarify why the waters of the pool were believed to have healing properties.

84. Addition of the phrase "For there are three that testify in heaven..." (1 John 5:7-8) Book: 1 John Original Date: 1 John written around 90-100 CE. Edit Date: The phrase is conspicuously absent from all earliest and most reliable Greek manuscripts. It first appeared in Latin manuscripts, likely as a marginal note or "gloss," that was added by a scribe for theological clarification. Reason: It was added to provide a more explicit and direct biblical statement in support of the doctrine of the Trinity.

85. Omission of "and they were filled with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 4:31) Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: This phrase is absent in some of the earliest manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribe may have omitted the phrase by accident or through homoioteleuton.

86. Omission of a verse in Acts 8:37 Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: The verse "And Philip said, 'If you believe with all your heart, you may.' And he answered and said, 'I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God'" is absent from the earliest manuscripts. Added to later manuscripts. Reason: A scribe may have added this as a clarifying note for the baptism narrative.

87. Addition of a clause (Acts 15:34) Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: The verse "However, it seemed good to Silas to remain there" is absent from the earliest manuscripts of Acts. Added to later manuscripts. Reason: A scribe may have been aware of a historical fact and added it to complement Luke's account.

88. Change from "the church of the Lord" to "the church of God" (Acts 20:28) Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: This change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal change to explicitly state the divinity of Christ.

89. Change from "the blood of his son" to "the blood of the Messiah" (Acts 20:28) Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: This variant is found in some manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal clarification to make the text more explicitly Christ-centered.

90. Change from "the blood of his son" to "the blood of the Messiah" (Acts 20:28) Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: This variant is found in some manuscripts. The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal clarification to make the text more explicitly Christ-centered.

91. Addition of a phrase in Acts 20:28 to explicitly state the divinity of Christ Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts of Acts 20:28 read "the church of the Lord," while others read "the church of God." The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal change to explicitly state the divinity of Christ.

92. Addition of a phrase in Acts 20:28 to explicitly state the divinity of Christ Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts of Acts 20:28 read "the church of the Lord," while others read "the church of God." The change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal change to explicitly state the divinity of Christ.

93. Omission of an entire verse in Acts 24:7 Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: The verse "But Lysias the commander came and with great violence took him out of our hands" is absent from the earliest manuscripts. Added to later manuscripts. Reason: A scribe may have been adding an explanatory detail from memory to clarify the narrative.

94. Omission of an entire verse in Acts 28:29 Book: Acts Original Date: Acts written around 62 CE. Edit Date: The verse "And when he had said these words, the Jews departed and had a great dispute among themselves" is missing from the earliest manuscripts. Added to later manuscripts. Reason: A scribe likely added this detail to provide a more dramatic conclusion to the chapter.

95. Change of a preposition in Romans 5:1 Book: Romans Original Date: Romans written around 57 CE. Edit Date: The Greek words for "in" and "from" were sometimes confused, leading to variations in the text. This variant appeared in manuscripts from early centuries. Reason: A scribal mistake.

96. Change of a preposition in Romans 5:1 Book: Romans Original Date: Romans written around 57 CE. Edit Date: The Greek words for "in" and "from" were sometimes confused, leading to variations in the text. This variant appeared in manuscripts from early centuries. Reason: A scribal mistake.

97. Change of a preposition in Romans 5:1 Book: Romans Original Date: Romans written around 57 CE. Edit Date: The Greek words for "in" and "from" were sometimes confused, leading to variations in the text. This variant appeared in manuscripts from early centuries. Reason: A scribal mistake.

98. Change of a conjunction in Romans 5:1 Book: Romans Original Date: Romans written around 57 CE. Edit Date: The Greek words for "because" and "therefore" were sometimes confused, leading to variations in the text. This variant appeared in manuscripts from early centuries. Reason: A scribal mistake.

99. Change of a conjunction in Romans 5:1 Book: Romans Original Date: Romans written around 57 CE. Edit Date: The Greek words for "because" and "therefore" were sometimes confused, leading to variations in the text. This variant appeared in manuscripts from early centuries. Reason: A scribal mistake.

100. Change of a conjunction in Romans 5:1 Book: Romans Original Date: Romans written around 57 CE. Edit Date: The Greek words for "because" and "therefore" were sometimes confused, leading to variations in the text. This variant appeared in manuscripts from early centuries. Reason: A scribal mistake.

101. Addition of a phrase (Romans 8:1) Book: Romans Original Date: Composed around 57-58 CE. Edit Date: Added in later manuscripts sometime after the 4th century. Reason: A later scribal expansion intended to clarify the ethical behavior expected of believers, harmonizing it with other parts of Paul's letters.

102. Change in word order (1 Corinthians 1:1) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: The change between "Christ Jesus" and "Jesus Christ" appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A minor stylistic variation that does not change the meaning of the text.

103. Change in the description of God (1 Corinthians 1:4) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: The change between "my God," "our God," and "God" appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A minor scribal correction that does not change the meaning of the text.

104. Change in the description of Jesus (1 Corinthians 1:8) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: The change between "Jesus Christ" and "Jesus" appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A minor stylistic variation that does not change the meaning of the text.

105. Addition of the word "and" (1 Corinthians 1:28) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts add the word "and" in 1 Corinthians 1:28. Reason: A minor stylistic change that does not change the meaning of the text.

106. Change in the word "mystery" (1 Corinthians 2:1) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: The change between "mystery" and "testimony" appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal error where a similar word was substituted, changing the meaning of the verse.

107. Change in the word "wisdom" (1 Corinthians 2:4) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts have "persuasive human wisdom," while others have "persuasive wisdom" or "plausible wisdom." Reason: A scribal change to conform the text to what was perceived as a higher literary standard.

108. Addition of a conjunction (1 Corinthians 2:10) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: The word "for/since" is added in some manuscripts. Reason: A scribal addition to make the flow of the narrative more explicit.

109. Change from "Spirit Holy" to "Spirit of God" (1 Corinthians 2:14) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. Edit Date: This change appears in some manuscripts. Reason: A scribal clarification to make the text more explicit.

110. Change of the word "boast" to "be burned" (1 Corinthians 13:3) Book: 1 Corinthians Original Date: 1 Corinthians written around 55 CE. The "boast" reading is considered the original. Edit Date: The change to "be burned" appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal error where a single letter was changed, making the verse more dramatic.

111. The phrase "God was manifested" vs. "He was manifested" (1 Timothy 3:16) Book: 1 Timothy Original Date: 1 Timothy written around 62-64 CE. The "He" reading is found in earlier manuscripts. Edit Date: The addition of "God" appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A deliberate change to make the divinity of Christ more explicit in the text.

112. Addition of a phrase in Revelation 22:18-19 Book: Revelation Original Date: Revelation written around 90-100 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts add the phrase "and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy" to the text. This change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal addition to reinforce the authority and finality of the book of Revelation.

113. Addition of a phrase in Revelation 22:18-19 Book: Revelation Original Date: Revelation written around 90-100 CE. Edit Date: Some manuscripts add the phrase "and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy" to the text. This change appears in later manuscripts. Reason: A scribal addition to reinforce the authority and finality of the book of Revelation.

[continued in part 5]

[part 5]

This is interesting here.. it's like what's going on with "why" they'd go, oh, something's fishy here, let's weed it out.

47 Books Referenced or Once Considered But Omitted, from the bible

1. Book of the Wars of Yahweh

What it's about: This book is a lost historical text that is referenced in the Book of Numbers. It is believed to have been a collection of poems or songs describing the victories of God over the enemies of Israel. No known copies of this work have been found, so its exact content is unknown beyond the single reference.

Original Date: The date is not specified, but it would have been written before the book of Numbers.

Reason for exclusion: It was never considered part of the canonical texts and has been completely lost to history, so there was no material to include in the canonization process.

2. The Book of Jasher

What it's about: This was likely a collection of ancient Hebrew songs and poems that celebrated the heroes of Israel and their exploits in battle. It is referenced in the Book of Joshua as a source for the account of the sun standing still and in 2 Samuel for David's lament for Saul and Jonathan. The original text is lost, but modern forgeries with this title exist.

Original Date: Referenced in Joshua and 2 Samuel, so it would have predated those books.

Reason for exclusion: The original book has been lost to history. While its name appears in the canonical books, this was because the biblical authors used it as a known extra-biblical source, not because it was considered part of the sacred, inspired canon.

3. The Book of the Covenant

What it's about: This is a lost book that is referenced in the Book of Exodus, where Moses reads from it to the people of Israel. It is believed to have contained laws and instructions given to the Israelites at Mount Sinai.

Original Date: Written during the time of Moses, around 1400 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text has been lost, so its specific contents are unknown. There was no material to be considered for inclusion in the canon.

4. The Annals of the Kings of Judah

What it's about: This was a historical record referenced multiple times in the Book of Kings. It is believed to have contained detailed accounts of the reigns of the kings of Judah, including their wars, political actions, and other events not fully covered in the canonical books.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reigns of the kings it documented.

Reason for exclusion: Like many other historical records referenced in the Bible, this book has been completely lost to history and was not part of the inspired canon.

5. The Annals of the Kings of Israel

What it's about: This was another historical record referenced in the Book of Kings. It contained detailed information about the reigns of the kings of Israel, similar to the annals of Judah.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reigns of the kings it documented.

Reason for exclusion: This book has been completely lost and was not considered part of the inspired canon.

6. The Acts of Solomon

What it's about: Referenced in 1 Kings, this book chronicled the full scope of Solomon's reign, including his deeds and wisdom. The canonical book of Kings refers to this larger record for more details.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Solomon, around 970-931 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: This historical record has been completely lost, and as such, was not considered for the canon.

7. The Book of Samuel the Seer

What it's about: This book, along with the writings of Nathan and Gad, contained records of the reign of King David. It is possible that some of its content is preserved in the canonical books of Samuel.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reigns of David and Samuel, likely around 1050-970 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: While parts of this work may have been incorporated into the biblical books, the complete text has been lost to history.

8. The Book of Nathan the Prophet

What it's about: This work is mentioned as a historical source for the reign of King David and King Solomon. It would have contained prophetic words and accounts of historical events.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reigns of David and Solomon, likely around 1050-931 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: This text, along with other prophetic and historical records, has been lost.

9. The Book of Gad the Seer

What it's about: This book is referenced as a source for the events of King David's reign. It contained prophetic visions and historical records.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of David, likely around 1010-970 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is lost, so it was not included in the canon.

10. The Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite

What it's about: This book is mentioned as a source for the history of King Solomon's reign. It likely contained prophecies and historical narratives related to the prophet Ahijah and the kingdom of Israel.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Solomon, around 970-931 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: This historical record has been lost to history.

11. The Visions of Iddo the Seer

What it's about: This book is mentioned as a source for the reigns of Kings Solomon and Rehoboam. It would have contained prophetic visions and historical accounts.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reigns of Solomon and Rehoboam, likely around 970-913 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is lost.

12. The Acts of Shemaiah the Prophet

What it's about: This work is referenced as a source for the events of King Rehoboam's reign. It would have contained prophetic words and historical records.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Rehoboam, around 931-913 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: This historical record has been completely lost.

13. The Acts of Jehu Son of Hanani

What it's about: This book is mentioned as a source for the reign of King Jehoshaphat. It contained prophetic words and historical accounts.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Jehoshaphat, around 870-845 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is lost.

14. The Midrash of Prophet Iddo

What it's about: This text is referenced as a source for the history of King Abijah. It was a midrash, or interpretive commentary, on biblical events.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Abijah, around 913-911 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is lost.

15. The Midrash on the Book of Kings

What it's about: This book is mentioned as a source for the reign of King Joash. It was a commentary on the Book of Kings.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Joash, around 835-796 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is lost.

16. The Annals of Uziah

What it's about: This book is referenced as a source for the reign of King Uzziah. It likely contained historical records and prophetic visions.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Uzziah, around 792-740 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is lost.

17. The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and Judah

What it's about: This book is referenced in multiple places in the Books of Kings and Chronicles. It was a comprehensive historical record of the kings of both kingdoms.

Original Date: This would have been a continuous chronicle covering the history of both kingdoms.

Reason for exclusion: This extensive work has been completely lost.

18. The Lamentations for Josiah

What it's about: This book is referenced in 2 Chronicles 35:25 as a collection of laments for the death of King Josiah. It may have been a poem or song.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the death of Josiah, around 609 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is lost to history.

19. Wisdom of Solomon

What it's about: This is a philosophical and theological text, not a prophetic one, that praises wisdom as a divine gift. It blends Jewish beliefs with Hellenistic philosophy and addresses themes like the immortality of the soul and divine retribution.

Original Date: Written in Greek around the 1st century BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The book was written in Greek and its authorship is attributed to Solomon, but it was composed much later than his time. Its philosophical nature and late composition led to its exclusion from the Protestant canon.

20. Sirach (also known as Ecclesiasticus)

What it's about: This is a book of wisdom literature that offers insights into life in ancient Judea. It incorporates traditional Near Eastern wisdom teachings on topics like friendship, wealth, and fear of the Lord.

Original Date: Written in Greek around the 2nd century BCE.

Reason for exclusion: It was considered a later composition and written in Greek, with concerns about its authorship. Its wisdom teachings, while valuable, were not viewed as having the same level of inspired authority as other biblical texts.

[continued in part 6]

[part 6]

21. Baruch

What it's about: This book is presented as the work of the secretary of the prophet Jeremiah. It contains prayers, reflections on the Babylonian exile, and exhortations for the people of Israel to return to God.

Original Date: Written in Greek around the 2nd-1st centuries BCE.

Reason for exclusion: It was written in Greek, and its authorship was disputed. It was not considered to have a clear Hebrew original.

22. Tobit

What it's about: This is a religious folktale about a pious Jew who goes blind and sends his son on a journey to retrieve a family debt. With the help of the archangel Raphael, his son finds a wife and heals his father's blindness. The book contains historical inaccuracies and confused geographic references.

Original Date: Written in Greek around the 2nd century BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The book is a religious novel, not a historical document, containing historical inaccuracies and confused geographic references. Its later composition in Greek and its legendary nature led to its exclusion from the Protestant canon.

23. Judith

What it's about: This is a fictional historical narrative about a Jewish widow who saves her people by assassinating an enemy general. The story emphasizes faith, courage, and divine intervention.

Original Date: Written in Greek around the 2nd century BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The book is generally accepted as historical fiction, with numerous historical and chronological errors. The brash and seductive character of Judith may have also been a point of contention for its inclusion.

24. First and Second Maccabees

What it's about: These books provide historical accounts of the Jewish revolt against the Seleucid Empire. First Maccabees focuses on military history, while Second Maccabees is more theological, emphasizing martyrdom and divine justice.

Original Date: Written in the 2nd-1st centuries BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The primary reason for their exclusion from the Protestant canon is that they were not originally written in Hebrew.

25. The Letter to Laodiceans

What it's about: A letter from Paul to the church in Laodicea that is mentioned in the canonical book of Colossians. A text with this name exists, but it is considered a later forgery.

Original Date: The original letter is lost, but the forgery was written sometime after the original.

Reason for exclusion: The original letter has been completely lost to history.

26. Book of Enoch

What it's about: This book, while referenced in Jude, contains fantastical stories about fallen angels mating with human women to produce giants 450 feet tall. Its content includes strange cosmology and end-times ideas that were popular in some ancient Jewish and Christian circles but were not considered consistent with mainstream biblical theology.

Original Date: Written in the 1st century BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The book was rejected by most early Jewish and Christian communities for its late composition, its speculative and fantastical elements, and its theological teachings that were seen as contradictory to other biblical texts, such as Jesus's teaching on angels not being sexual beings.

27. Gospel of Thomas

What it's about: This is a collection of 114 esoteric sayings attributed to Jesus, with no narrative of his life, death, or resurrection. It suggests that salvation is found through secret knowledge and individual spiritual enlightenment, a Gnostic view that conflicts with orthodox Christian doctrine.

Original Date: Composed in the mid-to-late 2nd century CE, though some scholars suggest an earlier date of 60 AD.

Reason for exclusion: It was rejected because it lacked apostolic authority (written too late), its Gnostic teachings were considered heretical, and it omitted the core Christian narrative of Jesus's passion and resurrection.

28. Gospel of Judas

What it's about: This is a Gnostic text that portrays Judas Iscariot as a hero who betrayed Jesus at his request to free him from his physical body. It presents the death of Jesus not as a sacrifice for sin, but as a necessary act for spiritual liberation.

Original Date: Composed in the 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: The book's Gnostic theology was considered heretical, and it was rejected due to its late composition and its radical reinterpretation of Jesus's mission and Judas's role.

29. Gospel of Mary (Magdalene)

What it's about: This text presents Mary Magdalene as a leader among the disciples, to whom Jesus gave secret, spiritual knowledge. It records a dispute among the disciples where Peter is jealous of Mary's special status.

Original Date: Composed in the 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: This text was rejected for its Gnostic cosmology and for its unconventional portrayal of Mary Magdalene's authority, which contradicted the traditional male-dominated hierarchy of the early church.

30. Infancy Gospel of Thomas

What it's about: This text contains a series of stories about Jesus's childhood from ages five to twelve. It portrays a young Jesus as mischievous and sometimes spiteful, using his divine powers to perform miracles, but also to strike other children dead and then resurrect them.

Original Date: Composed in the mid-to-late 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: This book was rejected by the early church because of its disturbing and heretical characterization of Jesus as a petulant and powerful child. It was seen as a fictional work that contradicted the traditional biblical portrayal of Jesus's holy nature.

31. The Epistle of Barnabas

What it's about: This early Christian writing is stridently anti-Jewish, claiming that the Jews misunderstood God's covenant and that they were never truly his people. It also contains some factual inaccuracies, such as the claim that weasels conceive through their mouths.

Original Date: Composed in the late 1st or early 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: It was not considered apostolic in origin, and its extreme anti-Jewish sentiments were seen as problematic and out of line with the rest of the New Testament.

32. The Gospel of Peter

What it's about: A 2nd-century Gospel that gives a unique and dramatic account of Jesus's trial and resurrection. It contains pronounced anti-Judaism, a theme common in some early Christian writings, and was used by Docetists, who believed Jesus only appeared to be human.

Original Date: Composed in the 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: It was labeled heretical by early church fathers due to its theological views, especially its association with Docetism.

33. The Didache

What it's about: Also known as The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, this is one of the earliest Christian writings. It functions as a manual of instruction for church life, covering ethics, baptism, and eucharistic practices.

Original Date: Composed in the late 1st or early 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: It was considered a valuable and orthodox text but was not included in the canon because it was not believed to have been written by an apostle.

34. The Apocalypse of Peter

What it's about: This popular early Christian writing describes a vision of heaven and hell. It was widely read in the early church and was even considered canonical by some communities.

Original Date: Composed in the 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: It was rejected due to concerns about its specific theological views, such as Christian universalism, and its lack of clear apostolic origin.

35. The Gospel According to Hebrews

What it's about: A non-canonical text from the early centuries that has been lost. Fragments quoted by early church fathers suggest it was a Jewish-Christian gospel with a unique portrayal of Jesus and his family.

Original Date: Composed in the 1st or 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text has been lost, and the book was not widely accepted by the early church.

36. The Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres

What it's about: Referenced in 2 Timothy 3:8, this was a text about two Egyptian magicians who opposed Moses.

Original Date: The date is not specified, but it was known to the author of 2 Timothy.

Reason for exclusion: Considered a later writing and not part of the canon.

37. A lost letter to the Corinthians before 1 Corinthians

What it's about: Referenced in 1 Corinthians 5:9, this was a letter from Paul to the church at Corinth.

Original Date: Composed sometime before 1 Corinthians (c. 55 CE).

Reason for exclusion: This is a "lost book" that has been completely lost to history.

38. The lost section of the Assumption of Moses

What it's about: Referenced in Jude 9, this was a text that contained a dispute between the archangel Michael and Satan over the body of Moses.

Original Date: The date is not specified, but it was known to the author of Jude.

Reason for exclusion: The original text has been lost to history.

39. The Ascension of Isaiah

What it's about: Referenced in Hebrews 11:37, this book is an apocalyptic text that describes the martyrdom of Isaiah and a vision of heaven.

Original Date: The date is not specified, but it was known to the author of Hebrews.

Reason for exclusion: Considered a later writing and not part of the canon.

40. The Gospel of Marcion

What it's about: Used by the heretic Marcion in the 2nd century, this was a heavily edited version of the Gospel of Luke. It omitted passages that showed Jesus as the fulfillment of the Old Testament.

Original Date: Composed in the mid-2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: It was a deliberate, heretical re-writing of a canonical gospel and was rejected by the early church fathers.

41. The Gospel of Basilides

What it's about: This was a text from an early Gnostic teacher that is now lost. It was used by followers of Basilides, an early Gnostic teacher in Alexandria.

Original Date: Composed in the mid-2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: It was rejected as a heretical writing that promoted Gnostic teachings.

42. The Sayings of the Seers

What it's about: Referenced in 2 Chronicles 33:19, the original text is now lost.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of Manasseh, around 697-643 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text has been lost to history.

43. The Manner of the Kingdom (also called The Book of Statutes)

What it's about: Referenced in 1 Samuel 10:25, this was a document written by the prophet Samuel that outlined the laws and principles of the kingdom for the people of Israel.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the time of Samuel, around 1050 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is now lost to history.

44. The Annals of King David

What it's about: Referenced in 1 Chronicles 27:24, this was a historical record of King David's reign.

Original Date: The dates would have corresponded to the reign of David, around 1010-970 BCE.

Reason for exclusion: The original text is now lost to history.

45. The Epistle to the Hebrews

What it's about: This is a canonical book of the New Testament, but it was once considered non-canonical due to questions about its authorship and date of composition.

Original Date: Written around 60-70 CE.

Reason for exclusion: While some early Christian leaders accepted it, its anonymous nature led to some debate, and some lists of canonical books from the early church do not include it. It was eventually accepted as part of the canon.

46. First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians

What it's about: These are early Christian letters that were highly respected but were not included in the canon.

Original Date: Composed in the late 1st or early 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: They were considered valuable but were not included in the canon due to a lack of apostolic origin.

47. The Shepherd of Hermas

What it's about: A popular early Christian writing that describes a series of visions given to a man named Hermas. It was widely read in the early church.

Original Date: Composed in the 2nd century CE.

Reason for exclusion: It was not considered to be of apostolic origin and was therefore not included in the canon.

[continued in part 7]

Edit/edere - "to give out", hence ADD IT...a being cannot add anything nature not already provides. It's ignoring natural (perception) for artificial (suggestion) which permits writers; editors; publishers; censors; advertisers etc.

This is good evidence, NewFun.

There's a categorical answer that covers most cases.

Every edit we see is an ordinary human process by which the particular version that was inspired, inerrant, and infallible was arrived at by God working through (fallible) human means; they are not evidence against inspiration of the originals.

Every book mentioned by the inspired text, or every book considered as possibly inspired that didn't rise to the level of being received (recognized) as inspired by the covenant people, are ordinary human books that don't have the same degree of inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility, even if they may be what humans would call relatively inspired. This is also not evidence against inspiration.

Many more could be added. The AI omits the first draft of Jeremiah, which was burned up by King Zedekiah (see Jeremiah 36 in the second draft). There's also evidence that Matthew wrote two drafts, first in Aramaic and second in Greek, with the Greek one being inspired but with some Aramaic copies being taken as a translation rather than an earlier draft. The fact that God allowed Scripture writers to draft their works before they achieved a final inspired form shows that he used human processes instead of performing some magic upon a particular manuscript. Rather, in every case centuries of godly people recognized the particular manuscripts as God-breathed by a continuous testing process.

Read an article about LLM training data distillation and token generation.

Even if it has processes and workload templates available to perform your task, it's getting filtered through a garbage brain in a game of digital Telephone.

Your middleman (Gemini) is functionally retarded.

Cussing ruins your comments. Bunch of useless and unnecessary slop. Hold up while i get my barf bag.