I am not a religious person. I am a skeptic and a historian. The article above rests highly on the words in the bible however do we know if they are true?
The Roman Catholic Church is but one side of history thus the bible is bias conditioning people to believe in what they believe allowing no room for personal judgement. We have not always been monotheistic society. Does no one else find it amazing that, during the fall of Rome, suddenly a single saviour is found? Or find it strange that the bible contains only white catholic males, when 'God' loves everyone equally? The bible is just one side to a historical era blown out of proportion. Even using the excuse used in the DaVinci Code, that Jesus was a prophet can be argued. If Jesus was a prophet then how do we know that prophets do not exist anymore?
Why are those claiming to be prophets mocked and ridiculed by the Vatican, when their blessed bible is based on the words of supposed prophets.
Religion is nothing but power play, with the Vatican using the same techniques used by the pharoahs, chiefs, kings and caesers throughout the ages, when every society was polythiestic, including the Romans.
The hypocrisy is astounding. Read the documents opposing the bible from the same historical era as the bible. Only then can you form an opinion, with evidence from both parties.
I find it interesting that you claim to be a historian but concede that the "bible contains only white catholic males." Anyone who knows anything about Biblical history would know that the figures and characters in the Bible are far from "white" and are definitely not Catholics (being that Catholism didn't arise until well after the last books of the Bible were written.)
Rolling the Bible, Catholism, and the Vatican into one is utter folly. One is God's inspired word while the other two are man's corruption of that word. But if you want to point out that the Catholic Church has their own version of the Bible, then we can start talking.
Lastly, the Bible's authenticity and preservation throughout hundreds and even thousands of years is unparalleled. Comparing it to some questionable skeptic that had no first hand experience and happened to write around the same time is pointless.
Your skepticism and doubt is yours to keep but please come with the facts when you want to pass judgement.
RE: truth or
by Anonymous - 11/05/06 1:06 AM
[i]"Lastly, the Bible's authenticity and preservation throughout hundreds and even thousands of years is unparalleled. Comparing it to some questionable skeptic that had no first hand experience and happened to write around the same time is pointless."[/i]
The Bible's authenticity is very much in question by theologians and textual critics. There have been many changes made to the bible over the centuries. I would refer you to Bart Ehrman's books, particularly, "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why". While the Bible, Catholicism, and the Vatican are not interchangeable, the latter have had much to do with the shaping of the Bible as we know it today, including the King James version. Unfortunately, where religion is concerned, facts often tend to be relative based upon which faith one is speaking from.
RE: truth or "TRUTH"
by sara - 12/16/08 3:24 AM
There are prophets on the Earth today. If you would like information on todays prophet visit The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. As a church we have been ridiculed by society since the keys to the Priesthood were returned to the Earth after the great apostocy. People say "Who do they think they are?" "Why would God make a prophet among that church?" The better question is "Why not?"
5 Comments for truth or "TRUTH"
Read all 124 comments »
truth or "TRUTH"
by Anonymous - 6/04/06 9:00 AM4 Replies: Post a Reply
RE: truth or
by Anonymous - 9/06/06 9:50 AMRE: truth or
by Anonymous - 9/16/06 10:13 AMRE: truth or
by Anonymous - 11/05/06 1:06 AMRE: truth or "TRUTH"
by sara - 12/16/08 3:24 AMRead all 124 comments »
Comment on truth or "TRUTH"