• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Let’s talk about the Bible

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Also, it is being warned that a believer not be putting his trust in men. Psalms 146:3 But, they say that to be a Jehovah's Witnesses means to trust the men of the governing body of them.

There is much more, but most of what I disagree with is personal and can not be proved Biblically.
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
Unless this was interfaith, of course. ;)
Actually, I made a mistake on that post. The quotation looked so much like the one from chapter 5 was it. In which case it was a quote cut off in mid-sentence, so to say.

My bad. Some things if brought up - may be used for deeper discussions. This website seems to have little religious banter. In either case, I find religious conversations as limited as the atheistic ones.

Thank you for bringing it up.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
I'm not sure to what extent the Jehovah Witnesses remedy that problem or aggravate it.
We certainly don’t want to cause contention between individual members, but we do want to get people to think about how much of what they’re taught actually agrees w/ the Bible. It’s not their fault, really.... it’s their religious leaders!

Just like Jesus. He didn’t malign the common people; rather, He taught them. He did, however, blast their Scribes and Pharisees!


I don't find the bible too difficult to understand......

I see you mentioned that you don’t believe the Bible teaches the trinity. Do you think the Bible teaches hellfire? Just curious.
(What do you consider Holy Writings for the Baha’i?)
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
The most important one, in my opinion, is that I believe Revelation 6:2 shows the antichrist, but they call that one "Jesus Christ".

The book of revelation is arguably the most difficult book in the entire bible to make sense of. The four horsemen of the apocalypse are an ominous sign of the travail that will cover the earth.

My understanding for what its worth is the white horse is corrupted theology, disguised with the colour of purity but bent upon conquering the minds of men. Its rider is the worldly church, who holds in his hands the bow of propaganda. The crown given him is spiritual authority.

So there you go, three different opinions! Admittedly my thoughts are closer to yours. Jesus Christ? No. The institutions that represents the corrupted theology of Jesus Christ. Yes.
 

Oeste

Well-Known Member
That's a rather uncharitable criticism of your fellow Christians. The JWs are part of your Faith, not mine.

I don't see it as uncharitable but as historically accurate.

On the other hand I've had a few supposedly more mainstream Christians warn me of the error of my ways.

We are all subject to error, even me. :)

How about your biblically correct version of Christianity? Is it only the Christians who are saved? ....or perhaps only certain Christians with correct Christian belief?

It is Christ who does the saving, not Christians, and it is the angels who separate wheat from tare, again not a job for Christians.

Even so, this does not mean we can abandon sound doctrine or approach scripture in a Berean like manner. Unfortunately, I see a lot of "proof texting" on this forum with little regard for context or reconciliation with other biblical passages.

In any event, to answer your question, only Jesus can say who is saved and who is not. I believe in order to be saved your name must be written in the book of life. If you want an assurance of salvation, then you should be born again.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Also, it is being warned that a believer not be putting his trust in men. Psalms 146:3 But, they say that to be a Jehovah's Witnesses means to trust the men of the governing body of them.

There is much more, but most of what I disagree with is personal and can not be proved Biblically.

If we don't have a degree of trust and confidence in those that govern are faith community, whether they are elected or appointed, then what are we about? Blind obedience is another story.

Corruption to some extent in religious leadership is common place, and not unique to the Jehovah witnesses, or Christianity.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
We certainly don’t want to cause contention between individual members, but we do want to get people to think about how much of what they’re taught actually agrees w/ the Bible. It’s not their fault, really.... it’s their religious leaders!

Just like Jesus. He didn’t malign the common people; rather, He taught them. He did, however, blast their Scribes and Pharisees!

Getting people to consider more deeply what the bible means is a good thing.

The fall of the stars of the heaven of understanding to earth as exemplified by the Pharisees was a sign of the times that accompanied Christ's advent. Similar signs can be discerned in religious leadership today.

I see you mentioned that you don’t believe the Bible teaches the trinity. Do you think the Bible teaches hellfire? Just curious.
(What do you consider Holy Writings for the Baha’i?)

Hellfire is separation from God, and heaven is nearness to God.

Baha'is believe in the same God, Jesus, and bible as the Christians.

Baha'i have sacred writings based on the Teachings of our founder Baha'u'llah (Glory of God).
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
It is Christ who does the saving, not Christians, and it is the angels who separate wheat from tare, again not a job for Christians.

It isn't for the Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists.

Even so, this does not mean we can abandon sound doctrine or approach scripture in a Berean like manner. Unfortunately, I see a lot of "proof texting" on this forum with little regard for context or reconciliation with other biblical passages.

Exactly, I'm all for sound doctrine. What Faith group makes a claim for unsound doctrine?

In any event, to answer your question, only Jesus can say who is saved and who is not. I believe in order to be saved your name must be written in the book of life. If you want an assurance of salvation, then you should be born again.

What God requires of humanity changes from age to age. Moses brought the law for the Hebrew people to prepare them to take over the land of Canaan and eventually to create a nation based on Gods law. Christ enabled these reworked teachings along with new ones to be spread throughout the world which was achieved in the nineteenth century. Baha'u'llah brought new Teachings for this day that are applicable to the age we live in now. Moses, Christ, and Baha'u'llah all brought salvation to Their people.

My purpose on entering this thread however was to acknowledge an excellent OP that brings attention to one of the most outstanding and influential compositions of sacred writings in history.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
That's a rather uncharitable criticism of your fellow Christians. The JWs are part of your Faith, not mine.



I've usually had friendly discussions with the JWs who come knocking at my door. I suppose they haven't had the heart to tell me that my religion is false as yet.

On the other hand I've had a few supposedly more mainstream Christians warn me of the error of my ways.

How about your biblically correct version of Christianity? Is it only the Christians who are saved? ....or perhaps only certain Christians with correct Christian belief?

Just to winnow and clarify what Oeste stated.....he said that we teach 'all adherents (of false religion) will be destroyed'. That is a strawman. We don't teach that, only the organizations themselves, and possibly some leaders, will be eliminated, by the governments.

In a discussion of Zechariah 13:4, it was stated:

In that day each of the prophets will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies; and they will not wear an official garment of hair in order to deceive.—Zech. 13:4.

Will the destruction of the religions of Babylon the Great result in the death of all the former members of those religions? Apparently not. Some of the clergy will abandon their religious course and deny that they were ever part of those false religions. (
Zech. 13:5, 6) How will God’s people fare at that time? Jesus explains: “In fact, unless those days were cut short, no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short.” (Matt. 24:22) In 66 C.E., the tribulation was “cut short.” This allowed “the chosen ones,” anointed Christians, to flee the city and its environs. Likewise, the initial part of the future great tribulation will be “cut short” because of “the chosen ones.” The political “ten horns” will not be allowed to annihilate God’s people. (Rev. 17:16)
--
Excerpt taken from WT '15 7/15 2:5, 6.....also found online at August — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

So if some of the former leaders will survive the destruction of the harlot, certainly the 'fleeced sheep' will live through it! What matters at Armageddon, is how a person reacts to Jehovah God's Sovereignty, i.e., His Rulership by means of the Kingdom in the hands of Jesus.

And all those who have died without knowing God or His purposes -- much less knowing about His government rule -- will be resurrected back to life on Earth (John 5:28-29; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 11:6-9), being given a chance to live forever (Revelation 21:3-4) by accepting God's Sovereignty! -- 1 Corinthians 15:28; Ephesians 1:9-10.

Take care, my cousin.
 
Last edited:

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Just to winnow and clarify what Oeste stated.....he said that we teach 'all adherents (of false religion) will be destroyed'. That is a strawman. We don't teach that, only the organizations themselves will be eliminated, by the governments.

In a discussion of Zechariah 13:4, it was stated:

In that day each of the prophets will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies; and they will not wear an official garment of hair in order to deceive.—Zech. 13:4.

Will the destruction of the religions of Babylon the Great result in the death of all the former members of those religions? Apparently not. Some of the clergy will abandon their religious course and deny that they were ever part of those false religions. (
Zech. 13:5, 6) How will God’s people fare at that time? Jesus explains: “In fact, unless those days were cut short, no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short.” (Matt. 24:22) In 66 C.E., the tribulation was “cut short.” This allowed “the chosen ones,” anointed Christians, to flee the city and its environs. Likewise, the initial part of the future great tribulation will be “cut short” because of “the chosen ones.” The political “ten horns” will not be allowed to annihilate God’s people. (Rev. 17:16)
--
Excerpt taken from WT '15 7/15 2:5, 6.....also found online at August — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

So if some of the former leaders will survive the destruction of the harlot, certainly the 'fleeced sheep' will live through it! What matters at Armageddon, is how a person reacts to Jehovah God's Sovereignty, i.e., His Rulership by means of the Kingdom in the hands of Jesus.

And all those who have died without knowing God or His purposes -- much less knowing about His government rule -- will be resurrected back to life on Earth (John 5:28-29; Isaiah 45:18; Isaiah 11:6-9), being given a chance to live forever (Revelation 21:3-4) by accepting God's Sovereignty! -- 1 Corinthians 15:28; Ephesians 1:9-10.

Take care, my cousin.

Cousins respect each others faith and don't undermine others by suggesting they follow a false prophet.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The book of revelation is arguably the most difficult book in the entire bible to make sense of. The four horsemen of the apocalypse are an ominous sign of the travail that will cover the earth.

My understanding for what its worth is the white horse is corrupted theology, disguised with the colour of purity but bent upon conquering the minds of men. Its rider is the worldly church, who holds in his hands the bow of propaganda. The crown given him is spiritual authority.

So there you go, three different opinions! Admittedly my thoughts are closer to yours. Jesus Christ? No. The institutions that represents the corrupted theology of Jesus Christ. Yes.
No! Two different opinions. I think you are right
What you have described can be called "anti-christ".
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
If we don't have a degree of trust and confidence in those that govern are faith community, whether they are elected or appointed, then what are we about? Blind obedience is another story.

Corruption to some extent in religious leadership is common place, and not unique to the Jehovah witnesses, or Christianity.
Why trust AND confidence?
If you are trusting someone other than God and he says "go this way", but God does not say, "don't" you will go the way of the one in whom you trust.
Confidence, on the other hand, is to respect a person for the way he goes just like you want to be respected for your way. It doesn't have to lead to being led by him. It might. Trust should always induce a person to be led.

Trust is giving power to the one who is being trusted.

Trust is firm. Confidence can be easily shaken.

If people would just put confidence in those taking the lead, the bad ones who want to lead instead of God would be defeated.

Because they want the honor of real trust. So, they can get what they want.

Confidence in others just makes peace.

It's just like the difference between like and love. Like is something that can easily wane. Real love should be forever.

If you put your trust in someone who proves to be untrustworthy, then you were wrong.
If you put your confidence in someone who proves disloyal, then you did the best you could. You weren't wrong.

So, I believe I should, and I have, put my confidence in other humans.
I see it as respectful and a helper.

Trust, on the other hand, does not help because it puts weight on the one trusted.

I don't want weight on me.

Do you want weight put on you?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
They could do their best with the knowledge they had, and all of them died and paid in full the wages of sin.
And can you please explain how you say you believe in Jesus, who said "judge ye not", and yet we see you doing just that above? Even Paul was unwilling to judge himself, and yet you believe you have the power to judge others.
 

Vee

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
My questions would be:



The Bible is popular
Millions of people know it
It has a lot of history, mythology, analogy, and parables
The children's bible is actually a good read

but then



Although it's an incredible story, what I wonder more is:

1. If the bible disappeared, would Christ? Christ is the son of God. The Bible says he was the first creation. He existed long before the Bible was written and if the Bible disappeared he would continue to exist.

2. Which is the Word: Christ or Scripture? The scriptures are the word or the written message from God. However sometimes Jesus too is identified as "the word". That means Jesus was God’s Word of communication, or Spokesman, for conveying information and instructions.

3. What is the difference between seeing the bible as sacred and Christ as sacred? Can you live without one in favor of the other? If not, why? They are both sacred. The Bible as God's words and Jesus as God's son. But they are not the same thing. A book and a person are not the same and can't really be put on the same level, for lack of a better word.

The Dharma has influenced millions of people, people have been imprisoned for spreading the Dharma. Others it has changed their life and none have not heard of the bible. On top of that, there are over a thousands of suttas and each one not neglected from being part of The Dharma.

Buddhist cosmology has many to say about gods and Bodhisattva. A lot of which you can experience their "presence" in temples and like places.

Sacred? Yes

Dependent on physical Dharma? No.

4. My question is why is the physical bible so important? For us Christians, the Bible is God's message and a source of knowledge, guidance and hope.
Many many Buddhist see practice as sacred and suttas secondary to our practice.

I know people who can't live without their physical bible with them. Jesus didn't walk around with the physical torah. It was all oral.
I have a digital version on my phone now but we are encouraged to study the bible and be familiar with what it says. It is not always possible to have a physical copy but the knowledge is personal and says with the individual.

5. If he can practice without the physical jewish scripture, why not Christians? When Jesus was on earth the Bible wasn't completed yet. He was familiar with the old testament but he came here to teach humans. I can't imagine being capable of committing to memory everything the bible contains. It is very helpful to have access to the book.

You say that many Buddhists see practice as sacred and suttas secondary to your practice. Can you tell me more about what you practice and why? I studied a little years ago but can't remember much.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
1. If the bible disappeared, would Christ? Christ is the son of God. The Bible says he was the first creation. He existed long before the Bible was written and if the Bible disappeared he would continue to exist.
Thank you

2. Which is the Word: Christ or Scripture? The scriptures are the word or the written message from God. However sometimes Jesus too is identified as "the word". That means Jesus was God’s Word of communication, or Spokesman, for conveying information and instructions.
Thank you. This is the first I head this from a christian. Id say Jesus has oral traditions. The written word isnt the spoken Word incarnate as the son.

3. What is the difference between seeing the bible as sacred and Christ as sacred? Can you live without one in favor of the other? If not, why? They are both sacred. The Bible as God's words and Jesus as God's son. But they are not the same thing. A book and a person are not the same and can't really be put on the same level, for lack of a better word.
Above, you answered it as Christ. Many people like to answer yes and no questions as both. If the bible wa sacred, it would always exist. Since it does not need to stay in existenxe for christ to exist, it would be the latter.

I know people who can't live without their physical bible with them. Jesus didn't walk around with the physical torah. It was all oral.
I have a digital version on my phone now but we are encouraged to study the bible and be familiar with what it says. It is not always possible to have a physical copy but the knowledge is personal and says with the individual.

They use it as idols rather than study guides.

5. If he can practice without the physical jewish scripture, why not Christians? When Jesus was on earth the Bible wasn't completed yet. He was familiar with the old testament but he came here to teach humans. I can't imagine being capable of committing to memory everything the bible contains. It is very helpful to have access to the book.

Id assume he would speak to you directly?

You say that many Buddhists see practice as sacred and suttas secondary to your practice. Can you tell me more about what you practice and why? I studied a little years ago but can't
remember much.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Very nicely done. Interesting point that it was Tyndale that actually translated the bible in common language, not Martin Luther as they like to give credit to. Probably some sort of conspiracy there. They burned Tyndale at the stake and presented Martin Luther to try to control the fire Tyndale started.

1. I do not know if he was first or not but Luther did translate the bible from Latin into German and it spread like wildfire throughout other languages.
2. It is primarily Huss that was used to try and shut Martin Luther up by pointing out his fate, not Tyndale.
 

Kemosloby

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
1. I do not know if he was first or not but Luther did translate the bible from Latin into German and it spread like wildfire throughout other languages.
2. It is primarily Huss that was used to try and shut Martin Luther up by pointing out his fate, not Tyndale.

I was saying the opposite. Once Tyndale opened "pandora's box" it couldn't be shut. So they burned him at the stake. Then I'm wondering if it's possible that Martin Luther a planted leader, tasked with taking the lead of what Tyndale started. Sort of like masquerading as a protestant to gather the flock and steer it back to conformity with Rome, which is why you hear his name so much, never anything about Tyndale.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
“HEAVEN AND EARTH WILL PASS AWAY, BUT MY WORDS WILL BY NO

MEANS PASS AWAY.” Matthew 24:35 NKJV

Independently of people’s individual beliefs, it is undeniable that the Bible has an incredible story.

It was written over a period of at least 1,600 years by more than 40 writers from all walks of life. Some were fishermen; some were politicians. Others were generals or kings, shepherds or historians. They were from three different continents, and wrote in three different languages. They wrote on hundreds of controversial subjects yet they wrote with agreement and harmony.

But the most amazing fact about the bible is the way it survived. Most of our ancient literature has been lost due to the corrosion or destruction of the materials on which they were preserved. The Bible however, exists not only in its entirety, but in a well-preserved form, despite many efforts to destroy it.


- About 600 B.C. Jehoiakim, attempted to destroy the Word of God, but miserably failed. (Jeremiah. 36:21-32).

- In 175 BC the king of Syria, Antiochus Epiphanes, ordered the Jews, on pain of death, to destroy their Scriptures and worship the Greek gods. But Judas Maccabaeus saved the books and led a revolt that won independence for the Jewish nation. (Today, Jews celebrate this event at Hanukkah.)

- In 64 A.D. Emperor Nero not only tried to wipe out the Bible, but anyone who professed Christ. He blamed them for the burning of Rome (which, he did himself) and ordered their mass execution.

- In 303 A.D. the Roman Emperor, Diocletian waged a horrible onslaught against the Bible. Every manuscript that could be found was destroyed. Thousands, including entire families who owned any of these were martyred.

- Jerome, in 405 A.D. completed a Latin translation of the Bible. In spite of being persecuted, Jerome’s translation lived through the Dark Ages. Anglo-Saxon translations of parts of Scripture, particularly the Gospel accounts appeared in England in the 7th & 8th centuries. In 1379 John Wycliffe along with chosen scholars translated the Latin Bible into English. By 1383, thousands of copies of the Wycliffe Bible were in the hands of the English. People who owned these Bibles were hunted down and killed.

- In 1524 William Tyndale resolved to put the Bible into the English of his time and distribute it throughout the nation. But, this being contrary to English law, Tyndale had to leave England for Europe. Printing began in Cologne. Tyndale was apprehended and imprisoned. In 1536 he was strangled and burned at the stake.

- In 1546 the Roman Catholic Council of Trent placed any printing of religious literature, including translations of the Bible, under the control of the church. Any who wanted to read the Bible were told to obtain written permission from bishops or inquisitors—not an appealing prospect for those who wanted to remain above suspicion of heresy. People who dared to possess or distribute Bibles in the common languages of their region had to contend with the ire of the Catholic Church. Many were arrested, burned at the stake, roasted on spits, sentenced to life in prison, or sent to the galleys. Confiscated Bibles were burned

- French humanist, Voltaire, (1700) boastfully proclaimed, "one hundred years from now the world will hear no more of the Bible." Yet, in the year of his boast, the British museum purchased a manuscript of the Greek New Testament for $500,000 while the first edition of Voltaire's new book sold for eight cents a copy! Furthermore, fifty years after the death of Voltaire, Bibles were being printed by the Geneva Bible Society in the very house where Voltaire lived and on his own printing press!

- Even after the Reformation commenced and Bible societies were formed the Catholic Church classified them with Socialism and Communism. On December 8, 1866, Pope Pius IX made this amazing statement: "Socialism, Communism, clandestine societies, Bible societies....pests of this sort must be destroyed by all means."

Despite so much opposition, the Bible not only survived, it thrived.

The Bible has been translated into over 2000 languages. No other book even comes close.

With estimated total sales of over 5 billion copies, the Bible is widely considered to be the best-selling book of all time. It sells approximately 100 million copies annually, and has been a major influence on literature and history.


Some references:
25 Fascinating Facts About the Dead Sea Scrolls @ Century One Bookstore
The Write Journey: How Has the Bible Survived?
The Evidence Bible
The Preservation of the Bible
Miracle Of Survival Of The Bible
Manuscripts of the Bible — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
Bible - Wikipedia
That was a great post and I would love to discuss it with you but it covers so much ground I do not know where to start. The bible's textual history is even more miraculous than you described. Would you like to discuss the specific accuracy and integrity of the bible's NT textual tradition?
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
The book of revelation is arguably the most difficult book in the entire bible to make sense of. The four horsemen of the apocalypse are an ominous sign of the travail that will cover the earth.

My understanding for what its worth is the white horse is corrupted theology, disguised with the colour of purity but bent upon conquering the minds of men. Its rider is the worldly church, who holds in his hands the bow of propaganda. The crown given him is spiritual authority.

So there you go, three different opinions! Admittedly my thoughts are closer to yours. Jesus Christ? No. The institutions that represents the corrupted theology of Jesus Christ. Yes.
Hello Adrian, you are right to suggest that revelations is hard to get a handle on. Eschatology contains so much cryptic language and apocalyptic imagery that it is hard to know what to make out of it.

However the most consistent, logical, and encompassing interpretation I have ever heard is that of a man named Wallid Shoebat. He is a former Muslim and PLO terrorist turned Christian eschatology expert. I strongly advise you to read him or watch one of his presentations on UTUBE.
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
I was saying the opposite. Once Tyndale opened "pandora's box" it couldn't be shut. So they burned him at the stake. Then I'm wondering if it's possible that Martin Luther a planted leader, tasked with taking the lead of what Tyndale started.
I do not really see anything above to disagree with except for maybe your claim that Luther's roll was specifically as Tyndale's successor. However can you show that either of the two claims I made has a flaw?



Sort of like masquerading as a protestant to gather the flock and steer it back to conformity with Rome, which is why you hear his name so much, never anything about Tyndale.
Here I don't agree with you.

1. I think Luther was sincere when he challenged the Catholic church and his actions are completely consistent with that. I also consider his body of work comparable with any in the protestant movement.
2. I and most laymen theologians and apologists have heard of William Tyndale.
 
Top