by gumby 36 Replies latest watchtower bible
When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered it was again hid from the rest of the world by the Catholic hierarchy. Only they were privy to it's findings. It wasnt until the last twenty years that these writing have been brought to light hence exposing Christianity as really not being all that it is cracked out to be.
Uh? Could you supply the specifics to the comments in bold type? Was this in the INQUIRER?
It is not the Catholic church which is keeping the dead sea scrolls from being published. It is the territorial claims of the scholars involved, each wanting to keep the others from having access.
It is true that the scholors were being territorial, but they were also being heavily influenced from the Vatican to keep the research on a 'slow pace'. Hence this was a huge concern from many scholors throughout the world, leaving everyone to wonder what is taking so long. Also, many of the papers coming out from their research initially dealt with issues that were not controversial and widely accepted. They were avoiding many of the scrolls that had to deal with the Essenes and their view of Christianity.
Double Edge,
Even though the majority of the research done was in Jerusalem, for the most part Israel did not have any representation on the research team. This was one of the biggest complaints from them. The book The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception by Michael Beigant and Richard Leigh has a very comprehensive discussion on this.
Undisfellowshipped,
In what sense did Paul call himself father? That is the sense priests use the title (1 Cor. 4:15
In regards to Rabbi, Jesus accepted the title to himself. See John 1:38, 49; John 3:2, 26; John 6:25). Apparently that also was not a blanket condemnation.
Your question about Mary doesn't diminish the angel Gabriel's greeting to Mary at Luke 1:28: "Good day, highly favored one, Jehovah is with you." Nor is Mary's prophecy at Luke 1:48: "From this day all generations will call be blessed." And Catholics do call her the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Mary is referred to in Gal. 4:4, although not by name. Also in Rev. 12:4-5
On calling a priest "father." The title "father" for priests was a result of the Church's shared life. This is shown clearly in Scripture itself, in 1 John 2:1: "My little children, I am writing you these things that you may not commit a sin." It is obvious that, if a male elder in the Church refers to his flock as "my little children," his relationship to his flock is that of spiritual "father." Paul who called himself "father" in 1 Cor. 4:15 we know was not married. Yet he referred to Timothy as "my own true child in the faith." See 1 Tim. 1:2, 18 And he referred to Titus in the same fashion (Titus 1:4) Respect for early Christian elders was very common in the early church and was not seen by the early Christians as a contradiction of Jesus' words in Matt. 23:9. The point of Matt. 23:9 is not to condemn certainl labels given to pastors or Christian leaders. Jesus' point, rather, is that Christian elders must not take on the pompous, self-important atitudes of some of the rabbis of His day.
Salud,
So the Israeli government and the Vatican are in cohoots? As far as I know ISRAEL is controling the translation and release of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Kenneson,
Thank you for your thoughtful responses in defense of Catholic Doctrine.
To the others who attack the Catholic faith,
There is no argument that the Catholic church has had some bad times and has driftied from its mission during its history. Some parts of its history cannot be defended and can only be called horrible. The wonder of the Catholic Church is that it has always returned to its roots for the past two thousand years. Even more so now.
It is also very diverse. The Catholic Church in America is very differnet from the Cathoic Church in Mexico. It is also a very tolerant Church of other religions, unlike those that attack it.
As for Mary, you can be a Catholic and not believe everything the Church says about Mary. However, I find their devotion to her very comforting. She is seen as the mother of the Church and someone who shows mercy and comfort to those in need, just llike your mother on earth. Jesus revered her even at his death when he instructed others to take care of her. He listened to her at Caanan when she asked him to help at the wedding even though he said it wasn't his time and performed his first miracle.
As for Catholic tradition, this concept is very misunderstood. Tradition cannot contradict anything in the scriptures. It must be supported in the scriptrues and most have their roots in the very early church.
The Catholic church is a truly apostolic church that trace its roots back to the very time after Christ. And even though it has wandered at times and engaged in horrible acts at times, it has been the caretaker of the faith and of Chrisitianity for close to 2000 years. Well over one billion people belong to the church worldwide and it continues to grow.
God Bless
RWC,
So then my friend. Would all people be better off if they re-formed to Catholicism?
Would ALL people have a better chance of Salvation?
Would the world be a better place?
Do any others outside that church.......have a chance of living productive lives that God would be pleased with.....even if they never became Catholic?
Yawn again! Anyone know how much it cost to purchase a bible in those times?
HINT HINT: It was cheaper to buy a house.
Rembember paper was not an easily and cheaply obtained commodity and the monks were making Bible copies by hand. They were embroidered with gold trim. There were many costly illustrations. And they were bound in leather which wasn't cheap. It wasn't like it is today where you can walk into any motel room and there's a cheap New Testament in the drawer. Bibles were very valuable. They were so valuable in fact that churches had to chain them so that they wouldn't be stolen. The Scriptures were available to be read by the laity but they had to use the copy that was in the Church. And keep in mind that most of the laity didn't know how to read so all they really could do was look at the illustrations created by the monks.
The Bible has always been read daily in Mass. If a person attended Mass even just on Sundays, they would cover the entire Bible many times over in their lifetimes. That was valuable just by itself since, again, most people COULD NOT READ!!! Not Latin, not English, not French, not ANYTHING!
As far as the Church not wanting people to translate it into English. They were against an unauthorized translation. Like someone already said, look at what the Watchtower did to the Bible. That was the fear of the Church.
Despite the previous facts that add another dimension to the debate, was the Church also afraid of losing its authority? Of course. After all, it was only by their authority that there existed a canon to begin with. The process of canonizing the scriptures was a long and tedious one that lasted 400 years. Do you think the Church viewed those scriptures in a flimsy way after all their effort? Their behavior shows that they valued the Scriptures and wanted to protect them from adulteration. If they hadn't valued the scriptures, they would have let any joe blow make a translation and teach his own interpretation - just like Russell the wacko who taught that the Bible coincided with the pyramid of Gizeh.
Anyway, I'm curious why bible-thumping Christians who criticize the Catholic Church bother to use the Bible. Why don't they go about making their own bible and their own canon? Why do they accept the authority of the Catholic Church with regard to some of the canon, but not the interpretations of that same authority?
Blue,
I've gained a new appreciation of you in your concise understanding on these issues. Thanks.
Mike (aka Yeru)
Hey Blue, Quote
I'm curious why bible-thumping Christians who criticize the Catholic Church bother to use the Bible. Why don't they go about making their own bible and their own canon? Why do they accept the authority of the Catholic Church with regard to some of the canon, but not the interpretations of that same authority?
So the Catholics should get a little more credit for the writing/keeping, of the Bible than they do eh?
Who put forth the effort for the reformation? Thank Gawd.
Catholics have done much work.....so have others. Catholics have benifited from Protestant efforts too.
Edited by - Gumby on 10 October 2002 14:25:6
