The Bible - Which books get to stay or go decided my men - cut & paste old school

by HarryMac 42 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  rip van winkle

  Harry Mac- did you notice that no one mentioned that men decided which books became the bible!!??

  Just saying...
• 

  HarryMac

  Fine... councils then.

  It doesn't specifically say that these councils didn't have hermaphrodites either.
• 

  Band on the Run

  Indeed, the Bible was canonized long after the last apostle died and Jehoover had no dealings with any humans until the formation of the WTBTS. Russell's keen appreciation of pyrmaid worship must have led Jehoover to come out and toy with humans again. So there is no Bible if you follow Witness thought. Apostates canonized the Bible. The cannoization debates show great controversy over which books became orthodox scripture. Bearing this in mind, I am suprrised that the Witnesses do not assert that the WT is the literal word of God. The Mormons have the wacky Book of Mormon with ideas that are outrageous.

  Men, not women, canonized the Bible. They may have represented a small portion of Christianities that flourished. Constantine's secular power put the final stamp of approval. He wanted to unify his empire to attack Eastern states and rival claimants to the Roman Emperor position. All this Christian debate and diversity interfered with his policy of conquest and unification.
• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  BOTR: Bearing this in mind, I am suprrised that the Witnesses do not assert that the WT is the literal word of God.

  --

  While the GB has not been so bold (as of yet) to come right out and say directly the WT is the word of god, their frequent statements as noted below will lead a JW to come to that conclusion over time. In fact, most JWs consider the WT as unerring and just as inspired as the Bible itself.

  --

  "We will also increase our joy if we prayerfully and diligently study God's spirit - inspired Word and Christian publications prepared under the spirit's guidance." Watchtower1992 Mar 15 pp.21-22

  13 Jehovah particularly teaches his people by means of a weekly study of the Bible, using TheWatchtower as a teaching aid. Do you view this meeting as a place where you can be taught by Jehovah? W 8-1-95, p.17
• 

  JWB

  Extracts from Church historian Eusebius in book 7, part 25 of his 'History of the Church', quoting one Dionysius regarding the book of Revelation:
  
  "Some of our predecessors rejected the book and pulled it entirely to pieces, criticizing it chapter by chapter, pronouncing it unintelligible and illogical and the title false. They say it is not John's and is not a revelation at all, since it is heavily veiled by a thick curtain of incomprehensibility, so far from being one of the apostles, the author of the book was not even one of the saints, or a member of the Church, but Cerinthus, the founder of the sect called Cerinthian after him, who wished to attach a name commanding respect to his own creation. This, they say, was the doctrine he taught - that Christ's kingdom would be on earth; and the things he lusted after himself, being the slave of his body and sensual through and through, filled the heaven of his dreams - unlimited indulgence in gluttony and lechery at banquets, drinking-bouts, and wedding feasts, or (to call these things by what he thought more respectable names) festivals, sacrifices, and the immolation of victims. But I myself would never reject the book, of which many good Christians have a very high opinion, but realizing that my mental powers are inadequate to judge it properly, I take the view that the interpretation of the various sections is largely a mystery, something too wonderful for our comprehension. I do not understand it, but I suspect that some deeper meaning is concealed in the words; I do not measure and judge these things by my own reason, but put more reliance on faith, and so I have concluded that they are too high to be grasped by me; I do not condemn as valueless what I have not taken in at a glance, but rather am puzzled that I have not taken it in."
  
  ...
  
  "By the phraseology also we can measure the difference between the Gospel and Epistle and the Revelation. The first two are written not only without any blunders in the use of Greek, but with remarkable skill as regards diction, logical thought, and orderly expression. It is impossible to find in them one barbarous word or solecism, or any kind of vulgarism. For by the grace of the Lord, it seems their author possessed both things, the gift of knowledge and the gift of speech. That the other saw revelations and received knowledge and prophecy I will not deny; but I observe that his language and style are not really Greek; he uses barbarous idioms, and is sometimes guilty of solecisms*. There is no need to pick these out now; for I have not said these things in order to pour scorn on him - do not imagine that - but solely to prove the dissimilarity between these books."
  
  *solecism = blunder in grammar, idiom
  
  From the Penguin Classics series of books, "Eusebius, The History of the Church", pages 240 and 243.
• 

  LoisLane looking for Superman

  Band On The Run...You are too funny! lol

  Just Lois
• 

  Quendi

  I want to thank HarryMac for the table he inserted at the beginning of this thread.

  Quendi
• 

  *lost*

  I'm a believer ( in something )

  This is excellent Harry, thank you.

  JWB that was excellent too, thank you.

  There is definitely something gone wrong somewhere. It's like watching a film play out. Surreal
• 

  Splash

  Since 'men' wrote the Bible, why shouldn't they define its canon?

  Splash
• 

  Tameria2001

  I have often wondered why they only have 66 different books in the bible. To me that makes it very suspicious.