View Full Version : Scripture corruption
klaatu
08-21-2006, 08:19 AM
I put this thread here instead of What Ever Goes because I believe it is worthy of a Current Event discussion. With the Da vinci Code still in heavy discussion on Cable TV.. it has inspired several offspring documentaries centering around the Judeo/Christian Scriptures. My discussion here is not intended to debate whether or not the Scriptures are an inspired text..but whether or not they have been corrupted or are now being corrupted. By this I mean ... given the new exposure of the Lost Texts ..i.e. Old Testament works such as The Book of Jubilee, The Book of Enoch, both of which are included in the Bible's of different sects around the World ...i.e. Ethiopian Christianity.., The Gnostic Texts.., The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Judas.. it begs me to ask this question …
Did the corruption take place back in the days when the scribes of the second and third centuries were ordered to keep certain texts out of the Bible … in effect sanitizing it to the ways of the Church? Or is the corruption now taking place … by bringing these rejected volumes to the forefront…and questioning the motives of the early church scribes?
Did the Church have the right to keep certain Texts out and on what authority? Interesting that these texts were often found buried as if the Monks one day knew that someone would stumble upon them and bring them back to the table of discussion… as they have been.
No it doesn't mean corruption, it just shows the neverending debate of religion and the nature of God.
AnyOldIron
08-21-2006, 08:31 AM
The canonised gospels were decided upon by Irenaeus of Lyons in 125AD.
Which gospels were included, and the edits of the gospels were conducted for political purposes in the newly founded church.
If you are interested in a good source on this, check out Edward Gibbon's 'The Christians and the Fall of Rome'
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0143036246/
klaatu
08-21-2006, 08:33 AM
Well if they intentionally kept them out... aka sanitizing it to the ways of the Church .. I tend to think there was the heavy hand of corruption involved.
The content in these books are very interesting... i.e. The Book of Enochs statements on the nature and deeds of the fallen angels and The Book of Thomas and the stories of Jesus adolesence.
uscitizen
08-21-2006, 08:35 AM
According to Brent is is all done by the control of god and we should not question it :)
I like the texts that say for slaves to obey their earthly masters as they would god himself :)
klaatu
08-21-2006, 08:39 AM
The canonised gospels were decided upon by Irenaeus of Lyons in 125AD.
Which gospels were included, and the edits of the gospels were conducted for political purposes in the newly founded church.
If you are interested in a good source on this, check out Edward Gibbon's 'The Christians and the Fall of Rome'
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0143036246/
You can take this statement .... "The primitive Christians perpetually trod on mystic ground, and their minds were exercised by the habits of believing the most extraordinary events. They felt, or they fancied, that on every side they were incessantly assaulted by daemons, comforted by visions, instructed by prophecy, and surprisingly delivered from danger, sickness, and from death itself, by the supplications of the church"
And now replace it with ... "The Extreme Muslims perpetually trod on mystic ground, and their minds are exercised by the habits of believing the most extraordinary events. They feel, or they fancy, that on every side they are incessantly assaulted by daemons, comforted by visions, instructed by prophecy, and surprisingly delivered from danger, sickness, and from death itself, by the supplications of the church"
Many of these books are contrary to the general theme of the other books, so it is not suprising they were not included. They don't fit.
klaatu
08-21-2006, 08:50 AM
The Torah is also guilty of Omittance.. ie. The Book of Jubilees and Enoch.
uscitizen
08-21-2006, 08:53 AM
Hmm how about the fools worshipping a piece of chocolate with the image of Mary in it ?
Some christians have changed little.
klaatu
08-21-2006, 08:55 AM
Many of these books are contrary to the general theme of the other books, so it is not suprising they were not included. They don't fit.
Not true ... Jubilees fits very well into the Old Testament ... as a matter of fact it answers many questions one may have after reading Genesis....
Of all the Old Testament....The Book of Enoch would be one of the most interesting reads ... and it would make a Great Movie too!
AnyOldIron
08-21-2006, 08:55 AM
Many of these books are contrary to the general theme of the other books, so it is not suprising they were not included. They don't fit.
Didn't fit the political machinations of early church leaders...
Klaatu why should they be included? Does every word written have to be included?
No Any, more like they didn't fit the religious machinations.
Damocles
08-21-2006, 09:03 AM
The Torah is also guilty of Omittance.. ie. The Book of Jubilees and Enoch.
As far as I understand it, the Torah is only the first five books of the Bible, they are not guilty of not including this text... It doesn't fit in that definition.
Damocles
08-21-2006, 09:04 AM
No Any, more like they didn't fit the religious machinations.
Not true. Read the books before judging...
uscitizen
08-21-2006, 09:05 AM
The book of Judas has already been dissed from the pulpit of the local church.
AnyOldIron
08-21-2006, 09:10 AM
No Any, more like they didn't fit the religious machinations.
Oh, these people consider themselves fit to edit the 'word of god' do they?
Not true. Read the books before judging...
I have done, Christianity is one of my favourite mythologies.
That doesn't alter the fact that the scriptures were manipulated by early church leaders for political reasons.
Read Edward Gibbon.
Damocles
08-21-2006, 09:10 AM
The book of Judas has already been dissed from the pulpit of the local church.
I was about 9 when I got into an argument with the Youth Pastor and then later with the Pastor of our church (he sent me to him when he was at a loss with my questions)...
My argument was that Judas couldn't have betrayed Jesus when he was ordered to leave and do what he "must"... It was clear to me that had this conversation actually taken place then Jesus and Judas planned this together and Judas was doing something he didn't want to do.
klaatu
08-21-2006, 09:15 AM
As far as I understand it, the Torah is only the first five books of the Bible, they are not guilty of not including this text... It doesn't fit in that definition.
Maybe Im wrong... and I'll stand corrected... but I believe Jubilees and Enoch were part of the original scriptures ....maybe not ... or they were uncovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls.... thats what it is ....
Damocles
08-21-2006, 09:19 AM
They were, but the Bible and The Torah are two separate things. The Jewish Bible still includes the text of Enoch...
it is a silly argument, a church chooses its way. Nothing wrong with that, support them or not, that is up to you. To say the bible is wrong for not including this writing or that one is just without merit.
AnyOldIron
08-21-2006, 09:24 AM
the Torah is only the first five books of the Bible,
No, that is the Pentatuach. According to tradition, written by Moses, though most scholars consider there to have been at least four seperate authors.
AnyOldIron
08-21-2006, 09:25 AM
To say the bible is wrong for not including this writing or that one is just without merit.
Unless bible advocates claim that it is the undisputable 'word of god'...
Some Christians do use these books. I think the Coptic in Africa use Enoch.
Then don't believe them Any. Get over it.
Damocles
08-21-2006, 09:28 AM
the Torah is only the first five books of the Bible,
No, that is the Pentatuach. According to tradition, written by Moses, though most scholars consider there to have been at least four seperate authors.
The Torah is the first five books of Jewish and Christian scripture:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/torah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah
the term is sometimes used to include Oral Tradition as well, but it is not the most accurate definition. The Torah is the pentatuech...
AnyOldIron
08-21-2006, 09:31 AM
Then don't believe them Any. Get over it.
I don't believe them. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss them.
Should only anglers read angling books and then discuss them?
Sigh...
klaatu
08-21-2006, 09:31 AM
Klaatu why should they be included? Does every word written have to be included?
Thats the intent of this discusion. If these scriptures were in the hands of the scribes ... who made the decision to include and disclude...and for what reason? Wasnt it there Job to interpret the scriptures?
Why not include them all...if all were considered Holy? And why did the Monks feel a need to bury them? It appears they were upset with the orders given and they had the forsight to bury them in hopes one day someone will stumble upon them... as as a farmer named Ali did stumbling upon the Gosples of Thomas and Judas ...
...
AnyOldIron
08-21-2006, 09:36 AM
The Torah is the pentatuech...
The Pentateuch is the first five books of the old testament...
"Pentateuch ("implementation of five books") is a Greek word that is derived from two words: penta meaning "five", and teukhos which means "implement" which refers to the Hebrew Bible's books of:
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
These books are found in the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentateuch
Damocles
08-21-2006, 09:37 AM
The Torah is the pentatuech...
[B] The Pentateuch is the first five books of the old testament...
"Pentateuch ("implementation of five books") is a Greek word that is derived from two words: penta meaning "five", and teukhos which means "implement" which refers to the Hebrew Bible's books of:
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
These books are found in the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentateuch
And the Torah is the same. Do you understand that there may be two words that mean the same thing?
klaatu
08-21-2006, 09:57 AM
They were, but the Bible and The Torah are two separate things. The Jewish Bible still includes the text of Enoch...
What texts are included in the Jewish Bible .. maybe this is where Im getting confused .. I always assumed the Jewish Bible was a name given by Christians in referance to the Torah .....
Damocles
08-21-2006, 10:09 AM
It pretty much includes all of the Old Testament with a couple extra texts.
uscitizen
08-21-2006, 10:13 AM
I believe the book of armaments is one of those extra books.
Damocles
08-21-2006, 10:16 AM
I believe the book of armaments is one of those extra books.
LOL. I wish...
they do need the prophets in the end of the OT to figure out who the Messiah is. The rest is historical as well as lessons...
The point is there have always been opposing views and debate. What to believe and what not to believe. Which writing to include and which to exclude. Decisions are made. it is that simple.
klaatu
08-21-2006, 10:53 AM
LOL. I wish...
they do need the prophets in the end of the OT to figure out who the Messiah is. The rest is historical as well as lessons...
I do think the most fascinating ones are..:
Isaiah7:14 "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.'
and this
Micah 5:2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."
and this
Psalms 41:9 "Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me."
Brent
08-21-2006, 12:20 PM
I put this thread here instead of What Ever Goes because I believe it is worthy of a Current Event discussion. With the Da vinci Code still in heavy discussion on Cable TV.. it has inspired several offspring documentaries centering around the Judeo/Christian Scriptures. My discussion here is not intended to debate whether or not the Scriptures are an inspired text..but whether or not they have been corrupted or are now being corrupted. By this I mean ... given the new exposure of the Lost Texts ..i.e. Old Testament works such as The Book of Jubilee, The Book of Enoch, both of which are included in the Bible's of different sects around the World ...i.e. Ethiopian Christianity.., The Gnostic Texts.., The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Judas.. it begs me to ask this question …
Did the corruption take place back in the days when the scribes of the second and third centuries were ordered to keep certain texts out of the Bible … in effect sanitizing it to the ways of the Church? Or is the corruption now taking place … by bringing these rejected volumes to the forefront…and questioning the motives of the early church scribes?
Did the Church have the right to keep certain Texts out and on what authority? Interesting that these texts were often found buried as if the Monks one day knew that someone would stumble upon them and bring them back to the table of discussion… as they have been.
The Bible is not corrupt. Simply because there may be inspired texts not included in Canon does not mean it is corrupted. Whatever is included in the Bible, is inspired of God.
There is a great wealth of knowledge in the Book of Enoch. About the pre-Adamites, about fallen angels, the sons of God, demons, extraterrestrials, other worlds, etc. Perhaps the Church simply isn't ready for this book to go "mainstream."
uscitizen
08-21-2006, 12:37 PM
And Jesus is/was ruler over Israel ? Hmm seems to me thay had him Crucified, funny way to treat a leader/ruler.
OrnotBitwise
08-21-2006, 12:39 PM
And Jesus is/was ruler over Israel ? Hmm seems to me thay had him Crucified, funny way to treat a leader/ruler.
I don't know: I see some posibilities there.
uscitizen
08-21-2006, 12:49 PM
Well I do too with some current "leaders" :)
But this is a biblical thing, that propehcy was either false or was not referring to Jesus.
klaatu
08-21-2006, 01:55 PM
The Bible is not corrupt. Simply because there may be inspired texts not included in Canon does not mean it is corrupted. Whatever is included in the Bible, is inspired of God.
There is a great wealth of knowledge in the Book of Enoch. About the pre-Adamites, about fallen angels, the sons of God, demons, extraterrestrials, other worlds, etc. Perhaps the Church simply isn't ready for this book to go "mainstream."
And who made that decision Brent? Who made the decision as to what was inspired and what wasnt?
klaatu
08-21-2006, 01:58 PM
Well I do too with some current "leaders" :)
But this is a biblical thing, that propehcy was either false or was not referring to Jesus.
read and go on ... learn
Isaiah 53:5 "But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed."
uscitizen
08-21-2006, 02:05 PM
He was crushed ? umm I seem to have forgotten that part.
Pick and choose use of the bible. If devinely inspired as some think then it is all correct, not a pick and choose thing.
AnyOldIron
08-22-2006, 01:34 AM
And who made that decision Brent? Who made the decision as to what was inspired and what wasnt?
Irenaeus of Lyon in 125AD
Brent
08-23-2006, 01:45 AM
And who made that decision Brent? Who made the decision as to what was inspired and what wasnt?
God
AnyOldIron
08-23-2006, 01:49 AM
God
Is that what you are calling long-dead priests these days? Bit of a post-humous promotion there...
Brent
08-23-2006, 01:50 AM
AnyoldIron,
God could reveal Himself in the sky for everyone to see, and you would yet deny the existence of God. That is because faith in God requires an altering of the heart, which comes only by the Holy Spirit. Evidence does not produce genuine faith.
Brent
08-23-2006, 01:50 AM
God
Is that what you are calling long-dead priests these days? Bit of a post-humous promotion there...
God worked through the circumstances to ensure His word would be preserved.
AnyOldIron
08-23-2006, 01:56 AM
God could reveal Himself in the sky for everyone to see, and you would yet deny the existence of God. That is because faith in God requires an altering of the heart, which comes only by the Holy Spirit. Evidence does not produce genuine faith.
Oh, no, if you could arrange for him to do that it would go a considerable way to convince me....
God worked through the circumstances to ensure His word would be preserved.
Ha! Ha! Ha! And how do you know that? How do you know it was God working and not the political machinations of early church leaders that is so blatantly shown in the church's early history.
Do you have a hot-line to God, and he keeps you informed of of how he is working?
How does it work Brent?
Brent
08-23-2006, 01:59 AM
Do you have a hot-line to God, and he keeps you informed of of how he is working?
As a Christian, I have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ provides the way to overcome sin, make me right before God, and to know the will and nature of God. I know enough about God to know He has preserved His word. :)
AnyOldIron
08-23-2006, 02:05 AM
As a Christian, I have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ.
What kind of relationship is that then? Is it mutual? Do you communicate with him and he with you? How does he communicate with you?
Does he communicate through sound or through subliminal messages in nature? Is he an internal voice, part of an internal dialogue?
Try to avoid obscurum per obscurius arguments in your explanation....
Jesus Christ provides the way to overcome sin, make me right before God, and to know the will and nature of God.
So it is your god in the form of Jesus that communicates with you? The above question as to the medium of communication stands...
I know enough about God to know He has preserved His word.
Where do you derive this knowledge from? This is part of the above question... How does this communication occur?
AnyOldIron
08-23-2006, 02:59 AM
Have you disappeared Brent?
uscitizen
08-23-2006, 07:38 AM
He is in conference with God ?
I am relieved that Brents footnote says the wicked shall burn in hell. I am not wicked :) Unless the wicked are all those who do not believe as he does ?
Damocles
08-23-2006, 07:42 AM
He is in conference with God ?
I am relieved that Brents footnote says the wicked shall burn in hell. I am not wicked :) Unless the wicked are all those who do not believe as he does ?
Shhhh.... Wicked man. There can be no other way to believe... It says so in that book that the priest selected way back in the ice age...
uscitizen
08-23-2006, 08:36 AM
Yes the church's attitude mirrors that of the Bushites. You are either for us or against us. Saved or wicked devil worshipping sinner. LOL. I don't believe in the devil either :)
Threatening me with hell is like threatening me with sdreferdestry.
Damocles
08-23-2006, 09:16 AM
Yes the church's attitude mirrors that of the Bushites. You are either for us or against us. Saved or wicked devil worshipping sinner. LOL. I don't believe in the devil either :)
Threatening me with hell is like threatening me with sdreferdestry.
Sreferdestry? That is so much worse than hell.... You can tell because it is hard to pronounce!
uscitizen
08-23-2006, 09:19 AM
Yep, I have no idea what Sreferdestry is and believe in it about the same amount as I do believe in Hell.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.