No, it doesn't actually. You were wrong about the nephilim being omitted just as you were wrong about the apple thing. It's OK - I wasn't expecting you to actually admit you were wrong. You just keep bluffing it out then.
Even though the site says it was changed. "The Nefilim were upon the Earth in those days and thereafter too. Those sons of the gods who cohabited with the daughters of the Adam, and they bore children into them. They were the Mighty Ones of Eternity, the People of the Shem." - Genesis 6:4 "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they; bare children unto them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." - Genesis 6:4 (King Jame's version) It is both the same verse. How can you say that it is wrong when both passages are from the same source?
Well that wasn't exactly my question - I wanted historical info, but never mind. What point are you actually trying to make? Why is it so important whether they are translated as nephilim or giants? Bible translations try to make things understandable to the people who are going to be reading it - why is this issue (and the apple / banana thing) so significant? Anyway, I won't have internet access for a while as I'm moving house, but maybe you can post a reply and I'll see it in a week or so.
It takes me to my original question: Why read something when it has been changed out of all recognition from the original that you still consider it to be the true teachings. It has been warped so much it is hard to say if what you are worshipping is the true faith or someone's ideal. For al lthe prophets that existed in the Mediterranean area, all have the same characters as Jesus yet you still cling on to the fact that what you are reading is the true word. In 5AD they decided to reform the bible and took out all the references from other prophets at the time, and also took out the writings of Magdeline [sp] as she was female in inferior. If you ever get to read all the prophets writings you will see that there is a different version and a different learning. And it wasn't until the Romans set the precedence for persecution that allowed witches to be burned at the stake and bring in totalitarian rule for the likes of the Conquistadors, Spanish Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials, Witch hunting (of which one witch hunter was a bizarre sado masochist who has his advances denied by a woman and tortured her under the powers of the church for a week by doing many things including taking the top flesh off of her breasts and other insane ideas until she confessed and burned at the stake) and the Reformation and the suppression if ideology. Compared to today, the Church and it's teachings have created many wars under the flag of God. Somehow I think He would just leave us all to fight it out as we are not deserving enough to even take care of ourselves.
How does that even make sense? Canuck is, if I remember correctly, Jewish. Why would he (he right?) even care about the developement of theology in the Christian church?
Yes I have. And I read any such book assuming a bias. Even more so if they are translated. But you are complaining about the changing text of your Bible over time. The Xtian Bible has always been translated to further Xtian ideology at the time. Even my translations of Torah read differently from one another. They reflect the time. However, when studying Torah, upon coming to an ambiguous phrase, we always go back to the original text.
He is correct. I actually have a much better understanding of Xtian theology than most Xtians have of Juwish theology. Comes from both living in a Xtian dominated culture, and also because I did not grow up Orthodox. I grew up in Montreal in the sixties. My parents sent me to French language public school, which in that time and place meant Catholic. It was, to say the least, interesting. Easter was always very uncomfortable. And it got tiresome to always point out that it should read 'Thou shall not murder', not 'kill'.
