The Scriptures

by KGB 39 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  donkey

  Pity it only comes in single ply...and it isn't in a convenient roll.
• 

  pinoy

  Speaking of time.....don't you find it strange that up until the printing and mass distribution of the bible, there was basically one 'universal' christian religion (catholic)? All of sudden any Russell, Rutherford, Franz, could come along and invent their own religion........stange how that all worked isn't it?

  You are so right, before the bible was translated and printed into different languages there was only one 'universal' christian religion - catholic.

  There was no way common people could read it.

  And the Popes did a good job in keeping the bible in the language that the common people could not understand. I wonder why.

  Then came the likes of William Tyndale, Martin Luther, etc. They risked their lives to translate the bible to the language that common people would understand.

  And they were persecuted, excommunicated by the catholic church.

  People were burned for owning a bible. The burnings were led by the catholic church. (Inquisition)

  Nevertheless, the Bible still fluorished in different languages.

  Now why would the catholic church hinder the translation of the Bible to the common language?

  Were they hiding something?

  • Are they afraid that people would know that the name of God is Jehovah?
  • Are they afraid that people would know that it is wrong to use idols?
  • Are they afraid that people would know that early christians never celebrated their birthdays?
  • Are they afraid that people would know that shepherds were tending their flocks when Jesus was born, and therefore it could not happen on a winter?
• 

  Frannie Banannie

  Now I wonder why a book that supposedly is nothing more than a lie or uninspired as some of you put it would survive that long. I wonder how Christianity has lasted as long as it has if it is all just a lie.

  >>>>>AMEN ! I don't believe it's totally lies, nor uninspired, but I've examined it enough to realize that there *are* definitely fallacies in it's contents and that the inspiration is more than likely human greed for power and dominance(IMHO)..... I think that people have learned to believe what they've been taught for generations, instead of exploring for what is good for them....and applying what is good in their lives....(again...IMHO) Frannie B
• 

  KGB

  To whom ever it was that said what dates in the bible, well person you must not have read much of it. On the first page of every book there is a writing date for instance in Matthew the date of writing is A.D 50, the book of Joshua date of writing is 14th centry B.C and so on.

  As far as other books mentioned in this post those books were written after the scriptures were written and not before, most of those books mention were written from the scriptures. Notice here thatI have said scriptures and not bible. The bible was formed much later than the scriptures themselves of course.

  I wished some of you would slow down and read what you are looking at and sometimes I may miss a word in my post that I can understand how it maybe mis leading so you know it would favor me well if you just ask me if maybe I meant the thread in this way or that way if it seems that there are something misssing. If you can understand what I am meaning here. I take some pretty serious pain medications and they can get to me sometimes and I will forget what I am saying and miss a word or two here. Hell sometimes I forget what the hell I was talking about all together. LOL.
• 

  logansrun

  To whom ever it was that said what dates in the bible, well person you must not have read much of it. On the first page of every book there is a writing date for instance in Matthew the date of writing is A.D 50, the book of Joshua date of writing is 14th centry B.C and so on.

  KGB you numbskill -- those dates are not part of the actual text. They are supplied by the publishers of the Bible you happen to be holding. All the dates you read "on the first page of every book" are open to debate as well -- most scholars would not date Matthew at AD 50 nor Joshua at the 14th century BC.

  Bradley
• 

  KGB

  logansrun,

  You dipshit that is your own opinion and you have no proof of that at all..You are so closed minded and so against God of course your going to say and believe and do and act just in the manner that you do. OH and don't take dipshit personal I figure it only fair for the numskull...JERK
• 

  logansrun

  ROFLMAO....just where did you people find this KGB guy? He has all the finesse of a professional wrestler or a Bazooka Joe comic strip.

  Bradley
• 

  KGB

  logan,

  and you sir have the finesse of an ass
• 

  DannyBear

  pinoy,

  ****People were burned for owning a bible. The burnings were led by the catholic church. (Inquisition)****

  Although the bible was considered to be the domain of 'authorized' readers (priests, scribes, or assigned copiers) to say that those burned at the stake were convicted because of owning a bible, is a little over the top.

  The persecution of 'heretics' was promulgated by much more sinster motives than you describe. Often those persecuted were just a little to outspoken, or politicaly incorrect. Or just didn't kiss ass according to the proscribed way of the day.

  As for the reasons you suggest;

• Are they afraid that people would know that the name of God is Jehovah?
• Are they afraid that people would know that it is wrong to use idols?
• Are they afraid that people would know that early christians never celebrated their birthdays?
• Are they afraid that people would know that shepherds were tending their flocks when Jesus was born, and therefore it could not happen on a winter?

I hardly think those issues were of any concern, as respects the withholding of easy access to the bible.

No I tend to think it was simply a matter of power and control. Knowledge is always the enemy of those who try and dictate policy. Most of the points you make above, do not hold up under scrutiny. No where in the bible does God forbid the celebration of birthdays (Rutherford invented this doctrine), Jesus virgin birth is up for review and by no means a solid fact of history. Christians have used symbols for centuries, to ascribe scriptural condemnation to the Catholics for statues of saints, is again one of those jw inspired hangups. God's name a whole discussion in itself.

Catholics are notorious for trying to dictate(so are the jdubs)......they are getting more adept in their old age though,Catholics that is.

Danny