Talking to God

Tonks said:
Show me an unbiased version of the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures. I think you will be hard pressed to do so...

All the major translations such as the NEB, KJ, GNB, NITV etc are all sponsored, endorsed and translated by religious individuals and committees who will be biased towards their own particular brand of the way they perceive Christianity, so to level that warning just solely at the JW's translation of the original languages is unwarranted unless you extend that warning to ALL translations.
Whilst you raise a valid point re source materials my understanding is that the JW version of the bible differs by more than simple translation choices.

The consistancy of the OT or more accuratley the Torah was validated by the Dead Sea Scrolls IIRC. Whereas NT accuracy has long been a problem. Bishops were complaining in 2/3rd centuries about dodgy copies hence ultimately The Council of Nicea.
 
There seems to be a lot of confusion of fact in this thread.

Firstly the bible does not differ from the bible 2000 years ago. We have many ancent manuscrips to prove this. Sure there are different translations but they all carry the same message.

However the catholic church added stuff in later years to the bible - stuff that was rejected by Jews and the early church as being Herisay and unreliable. Catholics even burned people at the stake at the time that told them it was wrong to add to the bible! A lot of what is in the catholic bible without offending anyone is ridiculous... its clearly folklore, myths and tales. Anyway the Pope is a man made idea - he is not Gods annointed. The idea of the Pop goes against ALL bible teachings and infact is what the bible warns as "anti christ"

Infact the bible warns in last days the "church" would be anti christ - turning people against God. This is whats happening today.

On to other religions... The bible was writen by 40 people all talking about the same thing...

however, religions like Islam, Jehovours Wittnesses, Mormans etc - all come from just one person.... In a court of law, is it reliable to take witness from just one person? But if 40 people talk about same thing then the evidance is there...

Both islam and mormanism are VERY similar - both thought that the bible had been corrupted by man and they had had a vison from an angel giving them true version.

eg islam often referes back to bible -The koran makes the basis of Muhamard being the last great prophet by quoting the Gospel of John

14:16 "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever;
17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.

The Koran states that the Helper is Muhamard!

Yet the bible in the same passage goes on to state...

14: 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.

So the Helper is the Holy Spirit, which is also God...

Muhamard cannot be the Holy Spirit as he is Just a prophet. Islam believes that no one on earth can be God or have the power of God - thus rejecting Jesus claim. So Muhamard in islamic law cannot be the holy spirit/God. This makes Muhamards claim as last prophet untrue and false using teachings quran gives!

If then islam states in their defence that the bible is corupted then why use John 14 is the basis of their faith??

Also quran states that when Jesus was a youth He was tought the Torah (old testerment) and the Gospels! Man! someone should tell islam that the Gospels are about Jesus's life and works... Quran states Adam was 90 feet tall - and Jesus was made in image of Adam? Was Jesus also 90 feet tall? Adams shrine to God - the black rock in mecca where people circle... why is there no history of this rock till like 600 years AD! hmmm

Im NOT attacking islamic or catholic people - I have many friends who I love who are islamic and catholic. There are just big flaws in the religuous books they use.
 
Uh, Veg, the Bible isn't exactly clear in its references, it may say that it is the words of 40 people, but without clear and seperate accounts originating independantly and found seperately, they could have all been written by the same person.

The fact that only 40 people could account for such an important figure in history hardly lends itself much weight.

The bible is also > 2000 years old. It is in of itself, a single reference to the christian god, it stands alone, and wouldn't stand in a court in the same way you have discussed about the other religions.
 
Vegetarian said:
Also quran states that when Jesus was a youth He was tought the Torah (old testerment) and the Gospels! Man! someone should tell islam that the Gospels are about Jesus's life and works... Quran states Adam was 90 feet tall - and Jesus was made in image of Adam? Was Jesus also 90 feet tall? Adams shrine to God - the black rock in mecca where people circle... why is there no history of this rock till like 600 years AD! hmmm

Im NOT attacking islamic or catholic people - I have many friends who I love who are islamic and catholic. There are just big flaws in the religuous books they use.

You are being way too literal here. The bible states the we are made in Gods image. Do you think that God looks exactly like us?

90ft? I'd say that's about right for someone that lived 930 years. Or don't you believe that either?
 
Shoseki said:
Uh, Veg, the Bible isn't exactly clear in its references, it may say that it is the words of 40 people, but without clear and seperate accounts originating independantly and found seperately, they could have all been written by the same person.

The fact that only 40 people could account for such an important figure in history hardly lends itself much weight.

The bible is also > 2000 years old. It is in of itself, a single reference to the christian god, it stands alone, and wouldn't stand in a court in the same way you have discussed about the other religions.

The bible was writen over many hundreds of years from Kings to tentmakers! Not one person lol The bible is the greatest historical book also!
 
Sleepy said:
Bishops were complaining in 2/3rd centuries about dodgy copies hence ultimately The Council of Nicea.
The Council of Nicea (553AD) also provided an opportunity to remove all the references to reincarnation from the Bible too. Politics, as was said earlier.
 
Treefrog said:
The Council of Nicea (553AD) also provided an opportunity to remove all the references to reincarnation from the Bible too. Politics, as was said earlier.

I will agree that politics was an influential reason for Nicea but where does the scriptures make reference to reincarnation and just how does Nicea come into it?
 
Amleto said:
For me, it would all depend on this:

nicene creed


So they (JWs) believe that Christ is the Son of God, but do they believe in the trinity - that three parts are God? I could not find an answer to that on their site.


You didn't look very far, it's on the very next page and clicking on the trinity link farther on down that page brings up a lot more info into why they don't believe the Trinity.

:)
 
I dont want to get drawn in too much to this conversation, but it was always my understanding that all Christians believe in the Holy Trinity, as this is one of the fundamentals of Christianity. The Father (God) the Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit are one. Kind of like the Triangle of Fire! lol. Take one element away and it will not function.

As for talking to God, imo it is a question of faith. Your not going to be able prove whether or not the Pope (or anyone else for that matter) is able to talk to God.

Being Cathloic myself, I do believe that in a way, the Pope is able to communicate God...whether that is directly or indirectly I don't know.

The Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed are also foundations for Catholicism.
 
Tonks said:
I will agree that politics was an influential reason for Nicea but where does the scriptures make reference to reincarnation and just how does Nicea come into it?
The only reference that is still there is when Jesus says to his Disciples "Who do people say I am?"
And one replies "Some say Elijah, some say Moses, some say one of the prophets." (can't give you the reference - I've misplaced my Bible)

Reincarnation was a more widespread belief then.
 
panthro said:
I dont want to get drawn in too much to this conversation, but it was always my understanding that all Christians believe in the Holy Trinity, as this is one of the fundamentals of Christianity. The Father (God) the Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit are one. Kind of like the Triangle of Fire! lol. Take one element away and it will not function.

The Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed are also foundations for Catholicism.

And therein lies the problem, too many people believe that the doctrine of the Trinity is a scriptural teaching straight from the first century and therefore it is a given cert that that teaching is the way it was from the Apostles time onwards, and this just isn't so.

History tells us how the doctrine developed over at least 300 years and has been continually refined ever since until around about the 15th century we get the doctrine as it is held today.

I had a quick look around the web for some quick quotes from 'Orthodox' religious teachers who are a bit more honest regarding the development of the trinity. Heres a partial quote from from the first page I found;

No – the Trinity is not a biblical concept. The doctrine first emerged in Christian liturgy, and after some 250 years of oppression. “Christians sang hymns of praise to Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit alongside God. Calling Christ divine in this way entailed an act of political resistance. Until the “conversion” of Constantine Christianity was an illegal religion. Then the Emperor Constantine faced a political crisis in the early fourth century. His empire was in chaos because the church was divided, with various theologians and bishops vying for power, trying to maintain authority over as much of the church as possible.” The conflict in the church centered on the teachings of Arius, a theologian who held that God created the Son, that the Son is not eternal, and is of a similar but not the same substance as the Creator. Arius’ position had some real popularity; there was dissention in the churches and riots in the streets...

In June 325, Constantine opened the Council of Nicaea in Asia Minor to bring calm and stability and closure. Present were 300 bishops, mostly from the East because Constantine had wanted to exclude the western church members and so he called the council in the east, for a date so close that the westerners didn’t arrive until it was over. The council went a long way to securing the monarchical church, but the creed they developed had flaws, and did not resolve the political and theological crisis. In 381 Emperor Theodosius, therefore, called the Council of Constantinople, which reiterated the stand championed by the theologian Athanasius, that Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier are not of similar but the very same substance and nature. The resulting Niceno – Constantinopolitan Creed (known to us as the Nicene Creed) is the foundation of our doctrine of the Trinity. The controversy died down, the Arian position faded, and it was another 300 years, with the advent of Islam, before the next political challenge to the religious notion that “God is three.” [Living Pulpit, pp. 0-1.]

I'm not interested in discussing the rights and wrongs of the doctrine of the Trinity itself, been there, done that and it just ends up going around in circles. People will believe in whatever they want to believe.

I would however like people to be aware that the trinity doctrine has not always been regarded as 'Orthodox' and nothing regarding the trinity is as straightforward as some would have you believe. The doctrine of the Trinity was not taught in the first century...

:)
 
Vegetarian said:
There seems to be a lot of confusion of fact in this thread.
Which is ironic given the confusion revealed in your post.
Firstly the bible does not differ from the bible 2000 years ago.
The bible wasn't even written 2000 years ago. The OT part was, but the NT parts are upto 200 years younger.
We have many ancent manuscrips to prove this. Sure there are different translations but they all carry the same message.
The earliest NT fragments date from the 2nd century, and there are discrepancies between them and what was later written. As to the differing translations all carrying the same message contrast the commandemnt 'Though shalt not kill' as most know it, yet the hebrew word used translates to murder. 'Though shalt not murder' has a completely different meaning, it allows for just wars, self defence, legeal executions etc. Another passage which has different meanings depending on the translators is the Parable of the Talents. Some add extra sentances to overcome the stark reality that Jesus says "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." Luke 19:27 (King Jimmy)
However the catholic church added stuff in later years to the bible - stuff that was rejected by Jews and the early church as being Herisay and unreliable. Catholics even burned people at the stake at the time that told them it was wrong to add to the bible! A lot of what is in the catholic bible without offending anyone is ridiculous... its clearly folklore, myths and tales. Anyway the Pope is a man made idea - he is not Gods annointed. The idea of the Pop goes against ALL bible teachings and infact is what the bible warns as "anti christ"
You do know that the early church was the catholic church, they are one and the same thing. So when the contents of the bible were being decided it was by the catholic church. And as for its conyents being folkloe and myth pot meet kettle. So the pope is the anti christ, are you Ian Paisly by any chance?
On to other religions... The bible was writen by 40 people all talking about the same thing...
Yeah cos the genocidal angry god of the Flood is the same as the God who encourages murder and rape (Ezekiel) and is the same as pacifistic god who tells us to turn the other cheek. They are clearly all descibing the same god and moral code ... NOT.
however, religions like Islam, Jehovours Wittnesses, Mormans etc - all come from just one person.... In a court of law, is it reliable to take witness from just one person? But if 40 people talk about same thing then the evidance is there...
If the 40 people all purport to be members of the same cult, one that endorses the Big Lie then it doesn't matter how many you parade through the court. They are all equally unreliable. BTW the quaran wasn't written by one person, thats a myth that Islam likes to propagate.
Im NOT attacking ... catholic people - I have many friends who I love who are ... catholic. There are just big flaws in the religuous [book] they use.
Yet you use a shorter version of that same flawed book.
 
Vegetarian said:
The bible was writen over many hundreds of years from Kings to tentmakers! Not one person lol The bible is the greatest historical book also!
I don't know what the phrase "greatest historical book" means to you but to me it means a book that accurately tells the history of a place/people. Not one that makes stuff up, places historical figures in the wrong time frame, exagerates real events, gets the geography wrong, gets the religious rites of its purported authors wrong, gives multiple yet contradictory accounts of the same events, gives multiple yet contradictory durations of the same events etc etc.
 
Sleepy said:
it amazes me, all this death from a book

It always amazes me that there are plenty of people who call themselves followers of Christ and yet will fight, kill and murder fellow so called believers and still believe themselves to be Christians. How would Jesus regard these in light of what he had to say:

MATTHEW 22:39 NKJ
39 "And the second is like it: `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'

(NIV, John 13:34-35)
"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

So just because some people say they are Christians their actions often show that this is not the case...
 
There is also a verse that says "there is a time for peace and a time for war" Look for that one, i cant remember where it is. In the bible it says there will be wars and it will be necessary to fight them
 
Back
Top Bottom