It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Council of Nicea did not chose the books of the bible

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by CAELENIUM
The Council of Nicea ... took place in 321 AD


Actually 325.



Originally posted by CAELENIUM
At that time the Holy Bible, as we know it today, was still non-existant. Thus the Council of Nicea would have had access only to the regular Jewish scriptures of the Jewish Torah [Pentatuch] plus the paganism of the day.


Dear me, that is completely untrue.
The other books of the OT, and the various books of the NT obviously WERE available to the CoN, because they had been available for centuries before then.

You seem to be arguing that the books did not even EXIST at that time, just because the NT canon was not completed. At least, that's what I THINK you are arguing.

The CoN had access to all the books of the OT and the NT.
Bu they did NOT discuss the subject of what books should be in the NT at all.




Originally posted by CAELENIUM
The compilation of the Holy Bible [gospels] came a good century later.


Wrong.
The COMPILATION of NT books had begun centuries before, and was finalised into our modern NT a few decades after Nicea.

Which has nothing to do with whether those books were available - of course they were, the Gospels had been circulating since 2nd century.



Originally posted by CAELENIUM
According to the Gospels we read that Jesus could not possibly have been a Jew. Nor even a man. According to the Gospels Mary the mother of Jesus was a virgin never touched by a man. She concieved Jesus by Immaculate Conception. Parthenogenesis. Virgin Birth.


Whoops.

You have confused the Virgin Birth with the Immaculate Conception - but they are different things.

The Immaculate Conception refers to the conception OF Mary BY her mother Anne - this dogma is only 150 years old or so.

But many people, even believers, wrongly lump these two different things together.


K.




posted on May, 26 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Gday,

Another bump for yet ANOTHER person who made this false claim...


K.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by stephsc
 



Never heard of the archko volume.....what were you hoping to find in it?

Besides,

I never heard of the Targums either, but I found some great stuff in there....surprises are good!

If you haven't looked at them, please do!



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Gday,

Well, yet again here's a bump for yet another person who believes this false claim.

Please check the facts queenannie.
The CoN had NOTHING to do with choosing the books of the bible.

It's just a false claim that is endlessly repeated, and endlessly believed, on the 'net.


Kap



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
*sigh*

New day, same failed arguments. People really need to understand Dan Brown books are in the "Fiction" section of Barnes and Noble.

Nicea Myths



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by NOTurTypical
New day, same failed arguments. People really need to understand Dan Brown books are in the "Fiction" section of Barnes and Noble.
Nicea Myths


Yah,
He put a section labelled "facts" at the start, and people BELIEVED it.

Another things that annoys me :
his calling Leonardo by the short name "Da Vinci".

"Leonardo Da Vinci" means
Leonardo of Vinci, or
Leonardo from the town of Vinci.

Calling him Da Vinci is just plain WRONG - it is like referring to :
the person "Of Arabia"
You know - "Of Arabia" - otherwise known as Lawrence of Arabia.

or
the "Of Turin".
That is the "Of Turin" - the famous shroud.


Like -
Have you seen the "Of Turin"?
Yah, but the "Of Turin" is a forgery.
Oh no, I believe the "Of Turin" is real!
Well, the "Of Turin" is sure famous....


Kap



new topics

top topics
 
7
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join