False Christians chose the modern Bible books

by lifeisgood 29 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Black Man

  Wow! Great thread! And the rabbit holes gets deeper! I knew there had been excluded bible books. Didn't know they numbered 600. I've always felt that its was IRONIC that the Catholic Church chose which books would make up the bible, but JWs regard them as part of Babylon the Great. Great irony, indeed!

  I guess my only thing with these other books is this - I contend that the bible is made up of fictional stories. Do these lost books continue to perpetuate the fictional stories? Are any of them grounded in real history and historical records?

  Wonderful thread and this goes UP! Hope some more of the top minds here on JWN chime in on this one!
• 

  Awen

  If I recall there is a discussion in the "All Scripture is Inspired" Book about how the Bible was canonized. I don't have a copy so perhaps someone who does could link it or paste it. I think it mentions certain key factors which have to be taken into consideration (some of which the Apocryphal Books do meet) in order to be canonized.

  Also it must be noted that the WTS has said in times past that by the time the last Apostle had died and up to the Third Century C.E. the church had fallen into apostsacy (around the time the Bible was canonized at Nicea).

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Apostasy

  So with that in mind all modern Bibles were put together by apostates and the JW's use such Bibles in their ministry or they use the books that were translated from copies of apostate texts.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I don't see in such dark, Machiavelllian terms. Constantine imposed uniformity for political reasons. It was a later Emperor that ordered the canon. There were pluses and minuses to a set orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is much like life in general, some good things and some bad things. Reading Augustine's bio, local areas had their own scriptures. Augustine's only gospel was the Gospel of John. He never had a chance to read Mark, Matthew or Luke.

  Yes, creativity was hampered. Random persecuted stopped. The essence of Christianity spread like wildfire. Certainly, a price was paid. I view it as very nuanced. Black and white thinking may feel empowering but it is rarely accurate.

  Today, we have easy access to almost all these documents. Reading the omitted documents, it is easy to see that the writings that had the most mass appeal were chosen. Perhaps the process was ruthless. Being a persecuted religion was ruthless, too, however.

  They were limited by their technology. Nothing stops anyone today from reading Gnostic and other "found" gospels. Take what you like and leave the rest. Many of these documents are great supplements to the orthodox canon. We live in a free society. If anyting, we are drowning under the weight of books concerning NT history. It is a growth industry. Much crap is written along with wonderful scholarship.
• 

  Black Man

  I always framed a lot of the decisions made at the Council of Nicea regarding the bible books as akin to a looooong extended JWs elders meeting, where decisions are arbitrary and random as hell and rife with a lotta personal politics and agendas.
• 

  Band on the Run

  It was an overtly political process. The American Const'n was drafted in a very politcla process. Proceedings were kept secret because they knew if the public ever found about the backroom deals and geographical compromises, the Const'n would have no legitimacy.It doesn't mean it was mean or evil. Reality is much more likely than God writing from heaven.

  There was no Bible so we can't talk about a Bible. Scriptures we can discuss. If the Witnesses claim apostasy by canonization, then they should justify their choice of scripture. Maybe we need something akin to a Book of Mormon. The WT is great at imparting pseudo info. or partially revealed facts without ever applying the lessons to themselves.

  Great presidents are also great politicians. Humanitarians emerge from the fray. Mandela was a terrorist, as were Begin and Sadat. Geo. Washington was a terrorist. If the British ever came upon him, there would be no Washington, DC.

  History is wirtten by the winners,not the losers.

  When I was young, the WT;s way of revealing things such as canonization appealed to me. Bible literary was very hard to find before the Interent. It may not be a great academic source but wikipedia has enriched my life. This mixture of truth vs. falsehood was potent. It crashed when I started doing my own research.
• 

  garyneal

  Modern Christianity as supported by the current books of the Bible is nothing like early Christianity that was supported by over 600 books. Most "Christians" are totally unaware of this fact.

  Heck, let's take this one step further and say that most Christians are totally unaware of everything that is said in their current Bibles. It is mostly, "What the pastor said," or what the Watchtower says.

  The rabbit hole does indeed get deep for anyone doing serious research on all manners of truth, I certainly got more than what I bargained for.
• 

  still thinking

  I asked why most religious people don't know about them and he replied, "most don't ask nor do they care, for those that do, the information has always been here".

  When we didn't have the internet I think it was difficult for people to find out this information. Religions controlled the information we did get by giving their followers what THEY decided people needed.

  If you don't ask....it could be because you don't even know what to ask. I mean, if you don't know you don't know..how do you begin?

  Yes the information has always been there...but it hasn't exactly been publicized has it?

  The internet has put informaton at our fingertips...ask ONE question and hey presto! It leads to another...then another.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I did my term paper on the historical Jesus and the scholarship started around the late 1800s and picked up in the 1920s. When I was in college, no prof gave me a bibliography for research. This rule was broken for New Testament. Bible literacy is very low. I don't understand why b/c most educated Jews no the Bible better than Christians for literary, art, and cultural reasons.

  The Gnostic gospels were hidden in the desert. I was surprised of the recent finds of Gnostic gospels. It seems as we travel ahead, we find more ancient manuscripts. Archaeology may play a role.

  I am a good example. Before the Internet, the only time I found organized JW dissidents was on the Regis Philbin show when it was local NY and he had more character driven pieces than today. The New York Times reporter covering them put me in touch. I had a short phone conversation and that was that. A few months ago I clicked on a link within a link in wikipedia and landed here. Voila.

  Besides the Internet, the DaVinci Code and other works shows the great popularity of information about Bible history. It seems the History Channel specializes in this matter. I purchased Gnostics for Dummies, unbelieveable when I first exposed in the 1970s.

  People are astounded when I repeat what I have read. I send people to do their own research on their favorite areas. We don't need a major university library to find these documents. They are no longer the preserve of the elite. I still feel you need advanced study to place them in context but regular people can easily read them.

  Once you read the Gnostics or the Last Temptation of Christ, you might read the canonical Bible for the first time.
• 

  botchtowersociety

  It was a later Emperor that ordered the canon.

  A canon was not ordered by an Emperor. It was defined by a church council convened in North Africa at the end of the 4th C.

  I always framed a lot of the decisions made at the Council of Nicea regarding the bible books as akin to a looooong extended JWs elders meeting, where decisions are arbitrary and random as hell and rife with a lotta personal politics and agendas.

  The canon wasn't selected at the Council of Nicea.
• 

  botchtowersociety

  How do you disprove that?

  You don't. It happened. The Watchtower uses this argument to reject the Apocrypha. But look at the dates for these Jewish councils--90 and 118 CE

  It was after the death of Jesus. Christianity had been established, according to the Watchtower's understanding. Some Apostles were still alive in 90AD.

  The Watchtower is actually arguing that the Jewish judgement of what is or isn't Scripture is still valid 60 years after the death of Jesus.

  What they don't mention is that part of the reason why these writings were removed by the Jews (yes, removed, they are all in the Septuagint, for example) is because the Christians used them a lot.