• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️
    link
    41 year ago

    Fun fact, the King James version (which wingnuts love to swear adherence to, maybe because of all the flowery language) was supposed to be the edit that fixed many of these worldbuilding gaffes. Obviously, it categorically failed to do so – it even still includes both mildly contradictory accounts of the creation of the world in Genesis, which another poster here already mentioned.

    • @killeronthecorner
      link
      English
      31 year ago

      It also includes contradictions on pretty much every part of the gospels in relation to each other but, to be fair, that’s the case in all of them.

      Does beg the question of why they didn’t align them when they had the chance. Some times the word of God is more malleable than others I guess.

      • 1024_Kibibytes
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        The original King James version included the apocrypha, which are found in the Catholic versions, but booksellers realized they could sell more copies if they left out the apocrypha. That’s why most copies today don’t have the apocrypha.

      • @afraid_of_zombies
        link
        21 year ago

        They did try to align them. Mark original ends at the Tomb, eventually scribes started adding details post-tomb to Mark. Which is why the Mark Gospel we have now reads like it has three separate endings.

    • @afraid_of_zombies
      link
      21 year ago

      No one reads the KJV except people seeking a doctrine in biblical studies. Everyone reads the revised KJV. The original version was plagiarized off an earlier English Bible instead of going directly to the source material. So even when it was first published it sounded like an old time way of speaking. Also it contained non-canon books that publishers would later take out to save on costs.