DON’T KNOW MUCH ABOUT HISTORY
One of the country’s leading historians, Ambeth Ocampo, is in the crosshairs of “influencers and pages supportive of the Marcos administration” when he commented how “(h)istory may have bias but it is based on fact, not opinion. Real History is about Truth, not lies, not fiction.”
This was in reaction to an actress’ statement how “(h)istory is like chismis. It is filtered and dagdag na rin. So we don’t know what is the real history. The idea is there, but there are really biases.” Scholars and historians have come in defense of the Order of Lakandula recipient.
And then I came across this comment of a netizen, the “Bible, has been translated many times over and over and over and there various versions o f it..More like than not, the ‘ exact wording’ was fabricated and added after it was translated for mass production..Same as our modern history books which if not all but most of them was written in partisan(s)..They cherry-picked the stories that were available and made an interesting story just to sell their books..In short, most history books some of it are true and some are not..” (Sic for all.)
I am no historian but as a trained theologian, I have to address what the netizen raised. It’s not the first, and definitely won’t be the last that people will question the inerrancy of Scriptures, but first about history books.
“History books are products of intensive research. They have footnotes, indices, bibliographies showing the sources of their stories. These include original records, testimonies by witnesses, maps, photos, even archeological evidence.
There may be glossaries to guide the reader as to the meaning of uncommon terms. Every date and place must be verified, every quotation exact, every citation precise down to the comma or period.
They also undergo peer review - i.e., by fellow historians of equal or superior standing. History is not yesterday's happening as told by two women conversing across the fence, of which different versions might evolve as the story is passed on from mouth to mouth, chismis.”
Any book that claims to be writing about history must meet those pre-requisites before it will be considered as legitimate. That said, let’s go back to the netizen’s comment about the Bible.
Yes, she was right to say that the “Bible, has been translated many times over and over and over and there various versions o f it” but there has been no fabrication in the “exact wording” as the scribes back then were very circumspect about copying. They considered it as a sacred duty where no mistake was tolerated.
I don’t know what the netizen meant exactly by “added after it was translated for mass production…” but if she’s referring to the various translations and versions that might compromise the message, yes, I concur. However, it is the same myriad of translations and versions that can be helpful in weeding out the faulty as we compare them using a parallel bible.
Notation margins and the availability of ancient text like the Dead Sea Scrolls are also there to verify if what we have in our hands or phone is accurate. There are also hundreds of biblical scholars whom we can interview now like how we can still talk to Martial Law survivors and EDSA 1986 participants decades after the events. You can even talk to atheist and agnostic biblical scholars. Yes, there’s such a thing.
Although the Bible is not a history book, it contains historical data that are also found in secular history books. (The father-and-son McDowells have written an excellent book about it.)
“All Scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Tim. 3:16), and not written by maritesses. If we can trust God for our daily care and eternal life, we can trust Him to make sure the Word we read now is the very Word He breathed out thousands of years ago.
One of the country’s leading historians, Ambeth Ocampo, is in the crosshairs of “influencers and pages supportive of the Marcos administration” when he commented how “(h)istory may have bias but it is based on fact, not opinion. Real History is about Truth, not lies, not fiction.”
This was in reaction to an actress’ statement how “(h)istory is like chismis. It is filtered and dagdag na rin. So we don’t know what is the real history. The idea is there, but there are really biases.” Scholars and historians have come in defense of the Order of Lakandula recipient.
And then I came across this comment of a netizen, the “Bible, has been translated many times over and over and over and there various versions o f it..More like than not, the ‘ exact wording’ was fabricated and added after it was translated for mass production..Same as our modern history books which if not all but most of them was written in partisan(s)..They cherry-picked the stories that were available and made an interesting story just to sell their books..In short, most history books some of it are true and some are not..” (Sic for all.)
I am no historian but as a trained theologian, I have to address what the netizen raised. It’s not the first, and definitely won’t be the last that people will question the inerrancy of Scriptures, but first about history books.
“History books are products of intensive research. They have footnotes, indices, bibliographies showing the sources of their stories. These include original records, testimonies by witnesses, maps, photos, even archeological evidence.
There may be glossaries to guide the reader as to the meaning of uncommon terms. Every date and place must be verified, every quotation exact, every citation precise down to the comma or period.
They also undergo peer review - i.e., by fellow historians of equal or superior standing. History is not yesterday's happening as told by two women conversing across the fence, of which different versions might evolve as the story is passed on from mouth to mouth, chismis.”
Any book that claims to be writing about history must meet those pre-requisites before it will be considered as legitimate. That said, let’s go back to the netizen’s comment about the Bible.
Yes, she was right to say that the “Bible, has been translated many times over and over and over and there various versions o f it” but there has been no fabrication in the “exact wording” as the scribes back then were very circumspect about copying. They considered it as a sacred duty where no mistake was tolerated.
I don’t know what the netizen meant exactly by “added after it was translated for mass production…” but if she’s referring to the various translations and versions that might compromise the message, yes, I concur. However, it is the same myriad of translations and versions that can be helpful in weeding out the faulty as we compare them using a parallel bible.
Notation margins and the availability of ancient text like the Dead Sea Scrolls are also there to verify if what we have in our hands or phone is accurate. There are also hundreds of biblical scholars whom we can interview now like how we can still talk to Martial Law survivors and EDSA 1986 participants decades after the events. You can even talk to atheist and agnostic biblical scholars. Yes, there’s such a thing.
Although the Bible is not a history book, it contains historical data that are also found in secular history books. (The father-and-son McDowells have written an excellent book about it.)
“All Scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Tim. 3:16), and not written by maritesses. If we can trust God for our daily care and eternal life, we can trust Him to make sure the Word we read now is the very Word He breathed out thousands of years ago.