Man's general history is soaked in blood, so what's your point? maybe some people.. some people like to use anything they can to influence others, or get their way, or fulfill their own agenda.. including religion.. does that make religion bad? no.. take Islam and these terror groups, perfect comparison. people using their God's name, to get what they want.
there was no "Bible" before it was compiled. just the old jewish scriptures which were considdered to be from prophets, kings, etc. and a bunch of letters from the apostles, and ppl giving accounts of God etc.. .. these councils were comprised of various priests, and religious leaders etc back then. Not just some officials. some books left out directly conflicted with what was considered inspired (such as saying Jesus wasn't on the cross but a lookalike), the copies they had weren't old enough to be from the authors (Epistle of Barnabas), or didn't match up with previous authors, some didn't even claim to be inspired by God or involve Him (I don't know why Esther was left in).. no easy task to consolidate all of this.
there's definite proof it's been rewritten.. as in copied, and translated obviously, but changed? no.. the earliest copies we have, and the current translations match up pretty darn close.
oh yes i acknowledge the bloody history of my faith, doesn't invalidate it's worth... there was even a reformation, where the church was teaching things that werent even in the Bible.. and some broke away and got more into the bible than what was being taught to them.. not that they didn't have witch hunts, etc later on. Rome was always a bloody nation, when they had the pantheon of Gods, and when they took Christendom, and up untill their fall. why blame Christianity for Rome's agenda?
I look to Christ who speaks to my heart, not some fanatics who abused God's name for conquest and riches.
