Comments on WHERE DO WE GET OUR VISION OF RELIGION-THE UNIVERSE, ETC.???

Go to BUILDING A NEW RELIGION FROM THE GROUND UPAdd a commentGo to WHERE DO WE GET OUR VISION OF RELIGION-THE UNIVERSE, ETC.???

Westwend

What gets me is that this "picture" is not even close to being complete. The bible is a severely edited book with many many missing pages and "books". From what I have read there are a lot of "chapters" missing, because the Catholic hierarchy long ago thought some of these writings to be "too confusing" for the layman to understand, or completely at odds with things in the Bible that they wanted in there and kept in there over the ones they didn't like, and took out, or never even put in. These writings languish in hermetically sealed vaults in the vatican. Hidden away and too "controversial" to see the light of day. It's too bad we couldn't force the church like the government to turn these papers over to the rest of us who would like to see the complete book, and judge for ourselves. And yes, a lot of the translations are wrong, distorted, and subjective. The bible is a wonderful historical paper. Many archeologists have used it to try to find ancient cities and ruins, and have actually done so. It's a great read and an important body of work. But at best it is an incomplete book, filled with translation flaws both deliberate (subjective) and indeliberate (mistakes). So those basing their total faith on a strict interpretation of the bible are being obtuse, and even a bit silly really as well. I really wish we had a document written by the Christ himself. I've always wondered why He never wrote down his thoughts, parables, and words himself. It would have been much better and easier for his "apostles" to go and spread the word if he had written it all down for them before he was crucified, instead of leaving to them and their memories, and others to do. I imagine, like all of us, he didn't know when his time would come, and left things off for a later date that needed or wanted to be done. After all, he was only human.

Cent 

posted by Cent on November 17, 2004 at 5:35 PM | link to this | reply

my point is
we don't have the accurate and direct testimony -- it's been adulterated in the interim between the actual testimony and what we attempt to perceive today.

posted by Xeno-x on November 11, 2004 at 2:25 PM | link to this | reply

It's the testimony.
Your critique of the bible and the translators makes me think you missed the most basic point of the Gospel. You see, the bible is a reporting of what people testified that they saw. The bible is a story about witnesses and people testifying of what they saw. In the case of the Apostle Paul, it is a testimony of what happened to him (the road to Dimascus experience). And finally, the testimony of at least some of the ones known as Christians. Not all Christians can testify, since many have not had any experience with God nor with the Holy Spirit.

posted by circuitpreacher on November 11, 2004 at 10:23 AM | link to this | reply

here's a link to some information on the King James

 http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/kjv.htm

very interesting that we don't have the original King James Translation even.

posted by Xeno-x on November 10, 2004 at 10:27 AM | link to this | reply

Phoning the elephant, and I don't mean the Republican one.

posted by Ariala on November 10, 2004 at 10:03 AM | link to this | reply