Why did Jehovah give the job of writing the BIBLE to the Catholics?

by gumby 39 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Evanescence

  Jehovahs Witnesses claim that since Pentecost of 33 c.e., there has been a Faithful and Discreet Slave Class that was appointed by Jesus himself and that this Slave Class was "entrusted" with ALL of Jesus belongings ( dispensing spiritual food to his followers and the rest of mankind).

  Oddly, when it came to Gods own word to mankind being compiled ( the bible), ......Jehovah CHOSE the Catholic church to dispense, audit, compile his message! Imagine that! This wayward, apostae, heathen church representing Babylon the Great...or a big part of it, is given the privledge of recording gods message to all of mankind!

  The question is......" WHY did Jehovah not use his entrusted "Faithful Slave Class" to compile the Bible?

  Anyone?

  I guess "Jehovah" would have to give the job to the Catholic Church eversince Jehovah's Witnesses didn't exist until 1874

  Evanescence
• 

  gumby

  I guess "Jehovah" would have to give the job to the Catholic Church eversince Jehovah's Witnesses didn't exist until 1874

  I never said it should have been given to Jehovah Witnesses.....I said through the "Faithfull Slave Class"

  The fact is....if there WAS a Slave Class exising during the writing of the bible, it only seems true to the Witness teaching that Jesus would have "entrusted all his belongings" to the Slave Class.

  Kapush?

  Gumby
• 

  Evanescence

  The fact is....if there WAS a Slave Class exising during the writing of the bible, it only seems true to the Witness teaching that Jesus would have "entrusted all his belongings" to the Slave Class.

  I guess thats the problem with "new faiths" with history that doesn't date back far.

  Evanescence
• 

  gumby

  I guess thats the problem with "new faiths" with history that doesn't date back far.

  Yeah, that's their "scapegoat". They CLAIM god had a small group of people whom he used to spread the word and to continue jesus work he started yet they can point to no source even clear up to Russels day to prove their point. Russell himself was not fed by any pre-existing Slave Class the witnesses CLAIMS existed BEFORE he started his religion.

  Gumby
• 

  Qcmbr

  I don't believe that the bible contains all that God ever said, nor that it is translated or interpreted correctly. I think it contains a fair amount of Catholic censorship and is a very flawed 'book' in regards teaching plain and understandable doctrine that we don't all disagree on. I don't think God chose anyone to collate it - I'm fairly certain politically minded men made up the council. However, I do believe that God does inspire people who read it with a desire to believe and it has brought many people closer to God and Jesus.
  
  Funny enough the Book Of Mormon does mention a future day when the bible would be used but comes to a surprising conclusion:
  
  2 Ne 29:4
  3 And because my words shall hiss forth--many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible.
  4 But thus saith the Lord God: O fools, they shall have a Bible; and it shall proceed forth from the Jews, mine ancient covenant people. And what thank they the Jews for the Bible which they receive from them? Yea, what do the Gentiles mean? Do they remember the travails, and the labors, and the pains of the Jews, and their diligence unto me, in bringing forth salvation unto the Gentiles?
  5 O ye Gentiles, have ye remembered the Jews, mine ancient covenant people? Nay; but ye have cursed them, and have hated them, and have not sought to recover them. But behold, I will return all these things upon your own heads; for I the Lord have not forgotten my people.
  6 Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews?
  7 Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth?
  8 Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall run together also.
  
  The Jews get the credit - not the Catholics.
• 

  dorayakii

  *** si p. 302 Study Number 4—The Bible and Its Canon ***

  17 The Roman Catholic Church claims responsibility for the decision as to which books should be included in the Bible canon, and reference is made to the Council of Carthage (397 C.E.), where a catalog of books was formulated. The opposite is true, however, because the canon, including the list of books making up the Christian Greek Scriptures, was already settled by then, that is, not by the decree of any council, but by the direction of God’s holy spirit—the same spirit that inspired the writing of those books in the first place.

  Well i'm sorry but this statement is just stupid. A simple question to the WTS: Did the Council of Carthage actually compile the Bible canon? If the answer is yes, then they must have done it through "Holy Spirit". If the answer is no, then whoever DID compile it must've done so through "Holy Spirit". The next question is, who did it?

  In one breath they say the Council of Carthage DID comile the canon (Reference is made to the Council of Carthage where a catalog of books was formulated)... Then in the next breath it seems as if the WTS is denying that the Council actually compiled the Bible. (The cannon was already settled by then by God's Holy Spirit). You could go round and round in circles trying to figure out who did what and then dismissing ideas which don't conform to what you "believe"...

  The whole paragraph is paradoxical because it just assumes that mentionning the word "Holy Spirit" will settle all questions that the reader will have. (How did they do that?... oh, it was by Holy Spirit... oh i seeee, silly me). A convenient solution to the circular reasoning... All questions stopped...

  They should reason like this: Who was it that recieved the "Holy Spirit" in order to know which books were canonical? Well it wasn't the *Catholic* Council of Carthage, so it must've been someone faithful before them. Who it actually was we really don't know. So how can we have faith, that that *mysterious* person actually had "Holy Spirit"? They answer is, we can't, it could have been a *wicked misleading antichrist* who wished to decieve God's people. But it couldn't have been, because God is stong enough to protect his Word against the Devil. So he could have usd the *apostate Catholic* Council of Carthage to protect the Word by forming the canon...

  If we reject the Council we're f****d, if we accept the Council we're f****d.

  The problem for them, is that the so-called "Faithful and Discreet Slave" wasn't a line of faithful followers of Christ who protected the Bible up until Charles T Russell... all the people who protected the "Word" belonged to *evil, apostate, pagan-influenced, false religious Churches*, but they can't compliment them on bringing the Bible to them, so they have to fabricate stories about a *ephmeral but temporally ubiquitous FDS* and equally ephemeral *Holy Spirit* guiding them throughout the ages... a pathetic, pitiful attempt at salvaging a concept...
• 

  gumby

  
  
  Dorayakii,

  Hooray for you! You seem to be the first one who's on the same page as me on this. This is actually a good argument to put before a dub to help them see the fact that the Watchtowers claim of their being a "Slave Class" on earth ( at ALL times) feeding each generation of slaves........is a bunch of shit. Had they existed it would have been these ones that Jesus entrusted his belongings to (see Matt.24:45-47), his 'belongings' being the N.T.

  Qcmbr,

  I don't believe that the bible is translated or interpreted correctly. I think it contains a fair amount of Catholic censorship and is a very flawed 'book' in regards teaching plain and understandable doctrine that we don't all disagree on. I don't think God chose anyone to collate it - I'm fairly certain politically minded men made up the council.

  However, I do believe thatGod does inspire people who read it with a desire to believe and it has brought many people closer to God and Jesus.

  Why would god use a book that is flawed, censored, wasn't inspired by him, was made up of politically motivated men, to draw people to him and his son?

  Gumby
• 

  oldflame

  A lot of fundamentalist Baptists that believe in using the KJV only think that all of the other translations have been "corrupted" by the Catholic Church.

  This is a very untrue statement here. I attend a Baptist church and many members use different bibles and the pastor qoutes many scriptures from them. I use a NIV bible and I asked him what his impression was of this bible. He said it was a good bible and that he also uses it.

  I also believe that there were many other books to the bible that were not used in the bible as we know it today. Who decided not to use them ? Was that also the Catholics decission ?
• 

  Terry

  But was the early church, Roman catholic or Greek Orthodox. I thought that pre Constantine, they were one united church, quite close in doctrine to the first century christians.

  That is the impression Jehovah's Witnesses (and half of Christendom) intend to impress you with and it is entirely a fabrication!!

  Read the early histories. It is very clear.

  There was NEVER one united anything!

  Judaism was never one united religon. It was factions from beginning to end.

  The first appearance of "the law" in a written form (used as Holy Writ) was the attempt to unite a fraction into a whole. When the Jews who had been carried away in the Diaspora returned to rebuild the temple they met with what was left of the old factions of Jews. To produce Holy Scripture it was necessary to try and blend wildly divergent stories. The legends and myths were not the same.

  When the Catholic Church attempted to canonize holy writings (once again to unite a fraction into a whole) there was a myriad of stories to sift and filter through an ideology in order to produce some document that could serve the purpose of Uniting Christianity. The Church itself WAS SPLIT MANY WAYS FROM THE VERY OUTSET.

  Read the accounts of the Nicene Council if you don't believe it. Nobody agreed on anything. What you believed was a function of who you knew and where you lived. The legend of Jesus and the mythology of Judaism had morphed and mutated all over the place.

  Even since the Nicene Council there was one ideological battle after another that continues to this very day.

  Christianity is a hodge-podge of pure opinion (which is anything but pure).

  I talk to Seminary students all the time at the bookstore where I work. These students study the early history of the church and many of them are shaken by it. They are confronted with the truth that there never was any ONE thing called pure Christianity. The thought that the entire structure of their faith might have gone any number of directions from the outset is horrifying to many of them. There is no "there" there and they must face it.

  So, what happens?

  People simply shrug their shoulders. They refuse to throw out their tainted world-view. They cling to the parts they like and reject the rest willy-nilly.

  Christianity (as is true of religon in general) is more a reflection of your personal tastes and preferences than a conforming to a pure standard wrought by history.

  Petty men with petty arguments blown into huge doctrinal mandates cause trusting innocents to shed their blood to conform. And they call it faith!
• 

  Kaput

  
  From the May 15, 1995 Watchtower, pg. 16, which quotes from the book, God's Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached, pg. 344:

  As to just how the "faithful and discreet slave" class existed and served down through the centuries after the death of the apostles of the Master Jesus Christ, we do not have a distinct historical picture. Apparently one generation of the "slave" class fed the next succeeding generation thereof. (2 Timothy 2:2)

  (Red highlighting mine)

  There's that proverbial "leap of faith" required of the R&F in order to remain in lock-step with the Borg. Jehovah's holy spirit has directed his "faithful and discreet slave" (WBTS) to paint a hazy picture of the form of the slave's existence for almost 2,000 years. Gets 'em off the hook of identifying who the FDS was in the interim from the first century down to the nineteenth.