WHO wrote the BIBLE? History channel documentary

by Terry 35 Replies latest members politics

• 

  Dogpatch

  Burn the Ships says,

  All I am saying is that History channel documentaries, on any subject, need to be taken with a grain of salt.

  yes, but not the thousands of sources that all point to the same conclusion!

  This is basic stuff taught in most traditional seminaries! Anyone who is serious about becoming a theologian or pastor or Christian church leader has to face these facts. The best read in my opinion is "The Canon of the New Testament" by Dr. Bruce Metzger of Oxford University, who is a Christian.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

  Pastors who eventuallly learn all of this have to sweep it under the rug to prevent doubt in their parishioners, as the "book" we call the Bible is a collection of stories, myths and facts collected over a couple thousand years by disparate individuals, all with different agendas and preferences, and with overseers who examine the "potential results" of their findings. To dispute the many errors of belief about the canonization of the NT is like putting your head in the sand and playing Metallica to drown out the dissonance.

  If you were shocked that the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses "vote" on "new light" every Wednesday as revealed in Crisis of Conscience, you should be more shocked that millions of Christians worship the BIBLE as God-given, when in reality most of the content was voted on by old men in high positions who all have their own agendas, and virtually none of them were originally in unity on what should be included into it. The basis of determination is sound, but is easily corrupted along the way.

  Thne Watchtower only did that for a few decades. Think what nonsense could have happened in 2000 years and longer? Do you really believe that the world will end like Revelation says? Then you have an amazing amount of trust in men. If you say that God guided the selection of the books, why all the unfulfilled prophecies?

  Randy
• 

  Dogpatch

  In other words, Christendom had a multitude of "governing bodies" complete with power-hungry men over the last 2000 years that don't really differ a lot from the Watchtower's methodology. They may have been more loving and sincere and in some cases inspired, but that book in your hand is a mixed bag. Might as well carry around the Babylonian Talmud.

  The German theologians are actually the most honest, as they are less prone to letting their pre-conditioned fantasies control their interpretation.

  Books by evangelical writers who had no special training and want to sell books and become famous should be tossed in the waste basket.

  Randy
• 

  Pistoff

  What Dogpatch said.
• 

  Dogpatch

  Too bad Hal Lindsey isn't reading this.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Lindsey

  His frentic energy drove me towards the JWs in the end. I almost became an Adventist.

  But I burned Ellen G. White's books and took the plunge into mediocrity. What a big %^^&&***( mistake.

  Witnesses are really kooky.

  Dogz
• 

  garyneal

  marked
• 

  glenster

  The History Channel received the nickname "The Hitler
  Channel" for its extensive coverage of World War II,
  though much military-themed programming has now been
  shifted to its sister network, the Military History
  Channel, and the network's programming now covers a
  diverse range of topics on history and hypothetical
  future events. The U.S.-based network has also been
  criticized for devoting most of its coverage to his-
  torical topics concerning the Western world and the
  United States in particular. The network has also
  received criticism for emphasizing the history of rel-
  atively recent times, as opposed to ancient or medieval
  eras.

  The network was also criticized by Stanley Kutner for
  airing the controversial series The Men Who Killed
  Kennedy in 2003; Kutner was one of three historians
  commissioned to review the documentary, which the
  channel disavowed and never aired again. On the
  other hand, programs such as Modern Marvels have been
  praised for their presentation of detailed information
  in an entertaining format.

  Also, the network's Ice Road Truckers series garnered
  record ratings in the U.S., despite the series' non-
  historical nature and the vulgar language consistently
  used on the show.

  History is continuing the apocalyptic trend mentioned
  above with a highly interpretive new series, Nostra-
  damus Effect, which premiered on September 9, 2009,
  and involves a supposed "Third Antichrist" and a "Da
  Vinci Armageddon."

  Despite these criticisms about History's not-as-his-
  torical subject matter, examples of programs that more
  appropriately suit the channel are Ancient Discoveries,
  Engineering an Empire, and Cities of the Underworld.

  The historical programming has also been criticized for
  frequently deviating from mainstream, scientifically-
  accepted explanations and theories, as well as a number
  of factual errors.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_channel#Criticism_and_evaluation
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Here's part one of a different WHO WROTE THE BIBLE for those who want something not from The History Channel:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suseKsLEWKo&feature=related
• 

  Dogpatch

  Glenster,

  All news media are biased one way or another. We are humans who believe in causes. And as for TV, the more sensational is better for rating. Child molestation is sensational. It is also real.

  But you gave no example, which casts suspicion on your motives. What part of the show did you see as biased and inaccurate or wrong? What wisdom do you have to correct us on the history of the church? This is so common knowledge! Is this an attempt to discredit the contents because "Fox News" said it? I don't like Fox News, but it doesn't mean I discount everything they said, unless I just WANT to and show how brilliant I am to imprerss others. A little "ad hominem" attack?

  Let's hear some specific refutations. Then we'll go around and correct all the seminaries and Bible colleges that already know all these things and have for decades. Why do you think the Catholic church believes in evolution, and most Protestants are busy reshuffling their stand on evolution?

  I've had the experience in this diverse world of churches, and was a pastor myself, and spoke in numerous Bible Colleges, seminaries, and churches all over the world. Let's compare notes, why don't we?

  Randy
• 

  Terry

  I know it came as a huge shock and a real body blow when I discovered the Bible was what it had always been to me; BEDROCK!

  It is like fining out Darth Vader is really your father!!

  I went into overdrive reading, reading, reading......

  Once you learn who the apologists are with an agenda you get to the purified layer of honest theologians who tell the truth WHILE MAKING tepid excuses.

  Underneath that is the layer of scholars who seem to be neutral and just tell it like it is and let the chips fall.

  Once all that sinks in (like a knife in your back) you go away and think about it and think about it and finally get pretty angry!

  For me, that is when I went back to the Apologists to see if they were deliberately LYING or not.

  For the most part, they aren't lying per se. They are covering up and twisting the facts by creating straw man arguments and diversionary tactics.

  It becomes rather glaring once you have some reading under your belt.

  Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel are the two biggest diversionary apologists followed by the ever talented Dinesh D'Sousa.

  They should be writing for the Watchtower!!
• 

  designs

  Remember the evangelicals and JW wed site, 2 Groups who believed the Bible as true to their souls and ten years on still bash each other with it.