After reading Elaine Pagels book “The Gnostic Gospels,” I’ve wondered if there’s ever been a statement made by the WTBS regarding the origins of the NWT, besides the painstaking efforts made to keep the translation “accurate” despite how the rest of the world translated the Bible. As JW’s we were taught to follow the example set forth for and by the first century Christians, however no doubt many of those first century Christians were or became “Catholic” as at the time that was the first “legitimate,” or universal, Christian church established in spite of opposition and persecution from the Romans. In essence the Great Harlot herself defined many things that modern day JW’s still see as fact. The Catholic church is also responsible for determining the final Bible canon that the NWT is based off of. I always scratched my head when we were told that surely in the dark ages there were faithful Christians to carry on the good news and remain faithful to Jehovah despite not having an organization to be associated with. So then with that argument, it would also apply to the first century Christians, who based on environment and political climate disseminated into the church that was established throughout the first and second centuries: The Catholic Church. Does anyone know of statements made in publications addressing these facts?
NWT based off a Catholic chosen canon, WTBS ever comment on?
by feenx 9 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Meeting Junkie No More
This is precisely what got the wheels finally turning in my head...in the All Scripture Is Inspired book (woefully out of date - last updated 1990, I believe) in one of the chapters towards the end of the book which deal with the 'Greek Scriptures' (otherwise known as the New Testament) they make a statement to the effect that, and I am paraphrasing here without the book in front of me:
"the Catholic Church 'claims credit' for fixing the Bible canon, but in reality it was Jehovah God who did so because the early followers of Christ themselves more or less decided on which books were viewed as authentic and restricted themselves to using only those..."
Absolutely amazing how, in that one sentence, they are able to discredit the Catholic Church's role in fixing the Canon. END OF STORY!
-
Satanus
Very good observation. It was the rc church which decided the nt canon, descended from one of the 1st century christianties, and evangelized the world. The wt attempts to detach christianity and the settling of the bible canon by claiming that some of the apostles decided on the nt canon at jamnia. I don't remember the exact yr that they claim. Another thing, the church invented the name that the wt claims for it's unique god.
S -
bigmouth
Thanxs feenx.
This has been a relatively new realisation for me regarding the setting of the Bible canon.
Can anyone else point me toward any 'readable' literature on this subject?
Ta very much. -
Wordly Andre
Bibmouth, most history books! No matter how the ORG trys to "clean up" history it was the Catholic church, in fact if you want to find out about the "early Christians" just wiki Catholic, find out when the early christians change their name to Catholic which means Universal church. Oh how the Protestants, and those religions who broke off from protestants like to call the Catholic church the Whore of babylon, or the harlet, but if you read any thing printed outside of Bethel NY, you will find the truth.
-
feenx
However I believe just like in the borg, "the truth" has different layers. Yes, the Catholic church is responsible for the bible canon, and yes since it's inception it has changed before coming to it's now "final" version. However, there are also things the Catholic church usually stays from discussing (though they don't seem to be quite as deceitful as JW's are) in reference to what we know as the Bible. Such as the many texts that were not included in the canon, why they were not included and why they were suppressed.
I suggest reading The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels. Regardless of ones personal feelings on the gnostic gospels (all the texts not in the bible canon) Elaine Pagels gives a very good and concise history of the development of Christianity.
Also the wiki articles on the history of the canon is a good source of timelines and who the players were at the conferences determining the canon. -
jaguarbass
I think history shows the whole bible Jesus thing came to us from the Catholics, after they knicked it off the pagans.
In order to be a cult you have to deviate from the main stream.
-
Burger Time
I was talking to my brother about this, how the WBTS never wants to give any recognition to any church outside of their own. I specifically brought up how without the Catholic church the bible could very well have a important book like 1 Timothy missing for something like the gospel of Thomas. He agreed but said that God used individuals in those days and now he is using the org. You just can't get around it with these people.
-
Jankyn
Couple of book suggestions:
Karen Armstrong's The Bible: A Biography
Richard Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible?
Bart D. Ehrmann's Misquoting Jesus
These are all very accessible introductions to biblical studies--the Armstrong just came out last fall. She's got a gift for writing for the non-scholar. I'm really fond of her introduction to Islam.
Jankyn
-
GermanXJW
*** si p. 302 par. 17 Study Number 4—The Bible and Its Canon ***
The Roman Catholic Church claims responsibility for the decision as to which books should be included in the Bible canon, and reference is made to the Council of Carthage (397 C.E.), where a catalog of books was formulated. The opposite is true, however, because the canon, including the list of books making up the Christian Greek Scriptures, was already settled by then, that is, not by the decree of any council, but by the direction of God’s holy spirit—the same spirit that inspired the writing of those books in the first place. The testimony of later noninspired catalogers is valuable only as an acknowledgment of the Bible canon, which God’s spirit had authorized.