metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Only likely because they never came to power anywhere.The gnostics killed no one.
Also, you miss the point in that you only cite the RCC but ignore the others.
Last edited:
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Only likely because they never came to power anywhere.The gnostics killed no one.
The Puritans saw the error in the CoE when they changed the Bible to appease the King (James). And became a church of "mens doctrines" over Gods. The Bible they brought to America was the original (1599) and not the reformed KJV. Since the time of Tyndale's translation, the Bible has been changed many times (to appease men). No different that it was during the 3-4 century to appease those like Constantine.Not entirely; once England started building its empire, the CoE and other protestant denominations helped carry on the tradition, which is still playing out in Africa, Asia and the Americas.
The Puritans saw the error in the CoE when they changed the Bible to appease the King (James). And became a church of "mens doctrines" over Gods. The Bible they brought to America was the original (1599) and not the reformed KJV. Since the time of Tyndale's translation, the Bible has been changed many times (to appease men). No different that it was during the 3-4 century to appease those like Constantine.
Hubert!
I use neither fallacious argument.
I use arguments like "I've explored the claims of the Bible for decades, personally, via research, etc. and conclude the Bible is truth and the Word of a superior being."
Stop tilting at windmills.
Refer to my post #48.
Ahhh I see.....hard for me to keep up with all the posts. So, may I ask, are you an agnostic Christian?
They were as big as the early rising of catholic ideology.Only likely because they never came to power anywhere.
You are correct in your thinking. Jesus taught a message, but what was the message? Ask a man and you'll get his answer. Ask a church, and you will get a group answer. So what to believe? Who is right, who is wrong?So many versions, so many interpretations, so many translators!
Unless you write your own version of the Bible which takes years I don't think anyone truly understands it. Spitting our scripture quotes just says to me a person doesn't understand what they are talking about well-enough to put it into their own words.
I'm curious about your statement, "the Bible has been changed many times (to appease men)". When has it not been men changing the Bible. I think the entire book was written by men. It may be divinely inspired but I think it is more just a case of men writing what they believe to be God's way of looking at the World. I think the words in the Bible are tightly bound to the mindset of the man who authored each line.
Or, is the "original" Marcion's version, with the Gospel of Luke and 10 epistles attributed to Paul?Which bible? The original 73-book bible? the modified 66 book bible? Luther's 62 book bible? Or do you include other texts like the Gospel of Thomas? Which books are inspired and which are not, and should you trust your judgment, the judgment of the original compilers, the judgment of most Protestant Reformationists, the judgment of Luther, the judgment of the Orthodox church, or the judgment of early Christian gnostics? See the problem......?
Good synopsis.Which bible? The original 73-book bible? the modified 66 book bible? Luther's 62 book bible? Or do you include other texts like the Gospel of Thomas? Which books are inspired and which are not, and should you trust your judgment, the judgment of the original compilers, the judgment of most Protestant Reformationists, the judgment of Luther, the judgment of the Orthodox church, or the judgment of early Christian gnostics? See the problem......?
Valentinus attributed his knowledge from Paul as well.Or, is the "original" Marcion's version, with the Gospel of Luke and 10 epistles attributed to Paul?
There is a reason socialist dictatorships like USSR, communist China, North Korea adopt atheism and oppress religion, because it does offer resistance to political might
Not Christianity:
- "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."- Romans 13:1-2
It also tells you in a variety of ways to stand down. Be meek. Be longsuffering. Love your enemy. If he smites you, offer him the other cheek.
- "Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient" - Titus 3:1
Yet as above, explicitly limiting government powers in the US was central to the founding of a predominantly Christian country at the time
Many Christians believe that the Bible is the literal word of God. I believe that I already addressed the common and obviously fallacious circular argument used to defend this claim (the bible says it is god's word, therefore it must be god's word). However, there is another argument than many Christians use. They quote Jesus as stating "My sheep hear my voice...." in John 10:27, and argue that Christians can differentiate between what is God's word and what is not God's word because they have the holy spirit living in them. Therefore, they argue, when the bible was assembled in AD 325 by the Council of Nicaea, it was assembled correctly, since the individuals gathered there presumably had the holy spirit of God in them.
However, there is a serious logical problem with this argument, and that is as follows: Not all Christians agree on what books should be included in the Bible. Catholics use a Bible with 73 books, while Protestants use a Bible with 66 books, since many of them were removed during the Reformation, primarily by Martin Luther. If this split between Catholicism and Protestantism were not enough, Protestants need to bear in mind that Luther wanted to also remove the books of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation, and he explicitly stated that he believed that they were NOT inspired by God.
So, Christians who believe in divine inspiration of the bible have a serious problem. Do you believe the original compilers of the Bible, who assembled the Bible as 73 books? Do you believe the Protestants who removed 7 books from the Bible? Do you believe Martin Luther, who wanted another four books removed from the Bible? Or do you believe that some of the gnostic gospels should be included, even though they were excluded from the original canon? Furthermore, if you believe that you can recognize God's word for yourself, and you also believe that Martin Luther was a Christian, you have a serious problem. If Luther could be wrong (in your opinion) about Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation, even though he was "saved," then you must admit that you could be wrong about what is and is not God's word also. In the end, Christians are faced with a serious conundrum about deciding if the Bible is the word of God, and if one is honest, one has to admit that deciding what is and is not "the word of God" is entirely subject to personal preference, and nothing more.
Why should I listen to a faithless atheist?
If that's the best you've got, then evidently I've stumped you.
I just put a link out of a study of mine. It relates to this so-called problem you speak of. These claims of centuries later compilation of the Bible is strictly not true, though, it may be the time when the body of books recognized by a single church authority gathered this into one such recognized volume. The facts, however, show us that the Christians who had survived these intermediary centuries already possessed what was to them the body of sacred texts both in the OT and the NT.So, Christians who believe in divine inspiration of the bible have a serious problem. Do you believe the original compilers of the Bible, who assembled the Bible as 73 books? Do you believe the Protestants who removed 7 books from the Bible? Do you believe Martin Luther, who wanted another four books removed from the Bible? Or do you believe that some of the gnostic gospels should be included, even though they were excluded from the original canon? Furthermore, if you believe that you can recognize God's word for yourself, and you also believe that Martin Luther was a Christian, you have a serious problem.
See the difference in agnostic and atheist.Why should I listen to a faithless atheist?