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.

 

Why don't Christians learn to read the bible?

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 09:13 AM
link   
What the OP also fails to tell people, is that 2000 years ago, only scribes, priests and pharisees could read and write. Common folk weren't taught how to read and write unless they were going into ministry.

Something to which Jesus addressed when he said this:

Matthew 23:1-3

Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.

That and not all the Apostles could read and write, thats why scribes were needed, some of which their disciples were. So apparently learning to read and write wasn't that important as long as they learned from those who knew the truth. Ofcourse the pharisees also had a penchant for erecting fence laws around the Torah which caused the people to become confused to the point they were trying so hard to keep the fence laws, they ended up putting ceremonial law above moral law and by the time Jesus had arrived everything had become backwards.

edit on 5-6-2013 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 

And now that he's left, it's STILL backwards.

star for you wolf.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by MadMax7
The Spirit. Its revealed by the spirit otherwise it's just words regardless whether they are Greek, English Chinese or Russian.

So how about YOU read what it says in how it's revealed to the human. Or read it in Greek (says the same thing about this).

Doh!



I love it how people try to make a statement thinking they are so wise and end up falling on their faces all the time. It's absolutely amazing ....and what makes ATS so much fun.
edit on 4-6-2013 by MadMax7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-6-2013 by MadMax7 because: (no reason given)


So... if "the spirit" revealed to me an entirely different message that it revealed to you and if neither of our messages even closely resembled the bible scholar's message down the street, they would all be okay?

Why even have a book then?



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
What the OP also fails to tell people, is that 2000 years ago, only scribes, priests and pharisees could read and write. Common folk weren't taught how to read and write unless they were going into ministry.

This may have been true of the Jewish culture of 2000 years ago. But, The Greek and Roman cultures were very literate. However, I was talking about the modern Christian should bee as devote to their religion as others. It would serve the faithful to know what Jesus really said and not what has been added or changed to suit the politics of later times. Example:

]Revelation 1:11: The phrase "Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and," (KJV) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. It is also found in the New King James Version (NKJV) and in the 21st Century King James Version (KJ21) The latter are basically re-writes of the original KJV. Modern English, is used, but the translators seem to have made little or no effort to correct errors. The Alpha Omega phrase "is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation or in Bruce Metzger's definitive 'A Textual Commentary' on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition (New York: United Bible Societies, 1994..."


www.religioustolerance.org...



posted on Jun, 6 2013 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Magister1
 


We know what he said, we have concordances translated by the best scholars in the world, checked and rechecked by rabbi's who spend their entire lives dedicated to studying those ancient languages. I use an intralinear analyzer with Strong's. One reason why we don't study those languages is because most people cannot afford it and Jesus would never have wanted it to where only the rich could glean any meanings from his teaching, because he didn't target the rich. This is why since the Dark Ages, the R.C.C. had control of the scriptures and up until the 1960's it was a mortal sin for catholics to read the scriptures, only the clergy were deemed worthy enough to interpret them and the Caesars, lords and kings etc. forbid the learning of reading and writing. How many people perished do you suppose, who could not read latin, greek or hebrew because they could not read at all and even if they could it would have been forbidden for them? What did it profit them, to have some smug priest reading to them the scriptures in latin when they couldn't understand it?
edit on 6-6-2013 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Magister1
 


We know what he said, we have concordances translated by the best scholars in the world, checked and rechecked by rabbi's who spend their entire lives dedicated to studying those ancient languages. I use an intralinear analyzer with Strong's. One reason why we don't study those languages is because most people cannot afford it and Jesus would never have wanted it to where only the rich could glean any meanings from his teaching, because he didn't target the rich. This is why since the Dark Ages, the R.C.C. had control of the scriptures and up until the 1960's it was a mortal sin for catholics to read the scriptures, only the clergy were deemed worthy enough to interpret them and the Caesars, lords and kings etc. forbid the learning of reading and writing. How many people perished do you suppose, who could not read latin, greek or hebrew because they could not read at all and even if they could it would have been forbidden for them? What did it profit them, to have some smug priest reading to them the scriptures in latin when they couldn't understand it?
edit on 6-6-2013 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)




I'll agree with you on some of the first behalf.....However you're dead wrong on it being a mortal sin for Catholics to read Scripture before the 1960's!



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Magister1
I have a few questions. The Jewish learn to read Hebrew in order to read the Torah: The word of God. Those of the Islamic faith learn Arabic to read the Quaran: The word of God. Also, please remember that most of those of Islamic faith are not native speakers of Arabic.

So, Why don't Christian take the time to learn the Greek of the new testament? Most don't even take the time to read the Latin translation. Also why are there so many versions of God's word? Does he keep changing his mind or are there problems with some of the translations? Why not seek to get the original version? Unless, Gods word is not important enough to take the time to learn.

How can someone claim to understand the religion when they cannot even understand:


ἐγένετο Ἰωάννης ὁ βαπτίζων ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ καὶ
κηρύσσων βάπτισμα μετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν.

fuit Iohannes in deserto baptizans et praedicans baptismum
paenitentiae in remissionem peccatorum.

The word βαπτίζω, most commonly translated as baptism, can be translated to mean anything from dipping a cup in wine, doing dishes, disabling, or driving a sword into a throat. There is a need to understand the language.


all true

but its even móre important to understand the CONTEXT of what is written.

because not for nothing there existed 'scribes ' ... whos lord was the egyptian pantheon - and they did nothing else but deviate the original language and context of what was written.

so yes language is important
but not 'only '



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Foreshadow
 



Until the present generation, the Roman Catholic Church forbade her people to read the Bible for themselves under pain of 'mortal sin.' That is, the Catholic who owned or read the Bible was de facto condemned to Hell.

Evidence:

The Bible was placed on Rome's Index of Forbidden Books list by the Council of Toulouse/Toledo in the year 1229. It remained there until the index was discontinued at Vatican Council II. Anyone reading or owning a 'forbidden' book was anathematized, or cursed and remanded to hell for doing so.

Cannon 14 from the Council of Toulouse says that the Roman Catholic Church:

"Forbids the laity to have in their possession any copy of the books of the Old and New Testament.... and most strictly forbids these works in the vulgar tongue."

Roman Catholic apologist Karl Keating confirms this fact when he writes that, "the bishops at Toulouse restricted the use of the Bible until the [Albigensian] heresy was ended." (Page 45, Catholicism and Fundamentalism, by Karl Keating). The peculiar thing is that the Bible remained on the Index of Forbidden Books for another 730 years! In his dance with truth, Mr. Keating takes care to omit this little fact.

Still More Evidence. This teaching was confirmed at the Council of Trent (Session IV, April 8, 1546 Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures). The Council of Trent went further, stating that anyone who dared study Scriptures on their own must "be punished with the penalties by law established." With incredible audacity, the Council of Trent went so far as to forbid even the printing of and sale of the Bible! Anyone daring to violate this decree was anathematized, or cursed and damned to Hell for it. (Dogmatic Cannons and Decrees of the Council of Trent..., pages 11-13; Copyright 1977, 1912, with Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat. Tan Books and Publishers, P.O. Box 424, Rockford, IL 61105)

Still More Evidence Liguori, the most respected of Cannon Lawyers in the Roman Catholic Church, wrote that, "The Scriptures and books of Controversy may not be permitted in the vulgar tongue, as also they cannot be read without permission."

And Yet Even More Evidence Pope Clement XI (1713), in his bull Unigenitus, wrote that "We strictly forbid them [the laity] to have the books of the Old and New Testament in the vulgar tongue."


Reading the scriptures was a mortal sin

Vulgar toungue as being non latin, and even then only clergy were allowed to read from it, which in the end leaves you at the mercy of someone else's opinion on interpretation, and you trusting that they were actually telling you the truth and not bald ass lies. Throughout the scriptures we are warned never to put trust in men, nor in governments, or princes. Then these clergy come along and send you to hell for reading the scriptures in a "vulgar" toungue so that your only choice is to disobey what is written and place your trust in men and not God if you don't want to be remanded to hell. What a crock.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 



The Bible was placed on Rome's Index of Forbidden Books list by the Council of Toulouse/Toledo in the year 1229.

Incorrect.


This looks rather damaging, but Boettner has his history completely wrong. The first thing to note is that the Index of Forbidden Books was established in 1559, so a council held in 1229 could hardly have listed a book on it.

(clip)

But there is another possibility, and that is Toulouse, France, where a council was held in 1229. And, yes, that council dealt with the Bible. It was organized in reaction to the Albigensian or Catharist heresy, which held that there are two gods and that marriage is evil because all matter (and thus physical flesh) is evil. From this the heretics concluded that fornication could be no sin, and they even encouraged suicide among their members. In order to promulgate their sect, the Albigensians published an inaccurate translation of the Bible in the vernacular language (rather like the Jehovah’s Witnesses of today publishing their severely flawed New World Translation of the Bible, which has been deliberately mistranslated to support the sect’s claims). Had it been an accurate translation, the Church would not have been concerned. Vernacular versions had been appearing for centuries. But what came from the hands of the Albigensians was an adulterated Bible. The bishops at Toulouse forbade the reading of it because it was inaccurate. In this they were caring for their flocks, just as a Protestant minister of today might tell his flock not to read the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation. (Source)

The ban was on non-church approved translations of the Bible, not on the Bible in general, and if you would agree that reading the intentionally altered Jehovah's Witnesses translation of the Bible is probably not a good idea, you're in agreement with what the church said in 1229.



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Yes The Catholic church (which was the only Christian church in Europe in the 1200's) did ban other versions and things like the book of Mary (which made it into the Quaran). However the church of England under the puritans either burned people at the stake or boiled them in oil for being a Calvinist - owning the bible. So, it is not just the Catholic church. The bible and its versions have been often banned. I would also use the example of the gospel according to Judas as an example of the banned sections of the religions works of the Christian faith. The selection which are still in the book have been edited more to fit the political agenda of the past few centuries than for their adherence to the theology of either Christ or the early church. Here are some of the early writing. These were not politically in favor and so are not part of the modern revised editions.

www.earlychristianwritings.com...

Also note that new stuff has been to the corpori creditur. Example: the American theory of the rapture was added in 1830's.

askelm.com...



posted on Jun, 8 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Do Christians actually read the bible and compare God and Satan? All through the bible God is a destructive force causing mass genocide. God kills almost everything in Genesis, He slaughters the Caananites, women and children also.

In deueteronomy God tells the Jews to kill everyone in their land except for women and children who are to be slaves, in Joshua He orders 7 cities to be destroyed, he ordered a mass Genocide because someone touched the Ark of the Covenent and another because the people were complainers.

God is described in the Old Testament as being angry, fearsome, destructive and vengeful .

God is seen as the good guy and Satan as the bad guy, Satan/Lucifer was once the highest angel but refused to bow to God and sought to gain control of heaven and was banished. Satan it seems was trying to overthrow a God who willingly killed his creations when they were out of line, maybe Satan is the good guy and was trying to protect the human race and was banished for this.

Satan is trying to make people disobey God, and, maybe for a good reason



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join