The Bible and the errors within - A (long) religious post.

[vonkaar]

My original intent with this thread was to discuss The Bible and the general 'feel' that many Christians have. I wanted to talk about the contradictory and splintered nature of the Christian faith. I'd like to get some viewpoints on many annoyances I have with a large portion of this faith. This thread was started 'new' instead of as a reply because the past few topics have turned from intelligent discussions to insipid replies and illogical analogies. I truly hope that this won't happen again, although I wouldn't be surprised if it does.

My general opinion of most Christians is strongly negative. I see so many Christians contradict their very doctrine by constantly judging others, spreading lies, questioning the legitimacy of ones faith and absolutely reeking of elitism. None of this was practiced or preached by the founder of their sect, yet it's conveniently ignored when it suits them. Why is it okay to label 100 million people as being 'non-Christian' simply because you disagree with their teachings? Christ taught that you should love your neighbor... love yourself... and love God. Nothing else matters. Why do so many of you spend so much effort on arguing against other Christian denominations? Show us how great YOUR religion is instead of trying to disprove another. Lead by example... be a beacon... see the glass as half-full... insert uplifting idiom... be KIND to your neighbor.

In addition, I don't feel that many Christians KNOW their religion. It's either that, or they are afraid of questioning their faith. If I pose a tough question regarding the history and foundation of their gospel, I'm immediately labeled as an anti-Christ. I grew up in a very strict church-going family. I went to church every Sunday for the first 18 years of my life. During my teenage years, I spent more than 20 hours a WEEK at church. I even DJ'd the church dances. I *knew* what I believed in. I felt quite confident in my knowledge of the Bible and would never flinch at answering (or at least researching) the toughest questions that anyone could ask me. It was common practice for the scripture teachers to CHALLENGE us with some potentially faith-shattering debates. You become STRONGER by answering the riddles yourself, or you fall away. Why weren't more Christians taught in this manner? NOTHING I ask should be too tough to answer, because ultimately your answer SHOULD be 'faith'.

That brings me to my next point. Faith. Nobody can question that. Even if I truly had 'faith' that an alien species of goatmen and homosexual sunflowers created mankind, all the 'logical' debates in the world wouldn't be able to change my opinion. I *know* that the aliens and homosexual sunflowers created the world. All of your scientific evidence and so-called 'proof' in evolution doesn't matter; I KNOW what I know. Boom... discussion over. I've argued and argued against so many Christians and I often ended my long-winded posts with, "just stick with faith, we can't argue that." Nobody ever listens. I either see COMPLETELY diametric responses, analogies that would make any English teacher (that isn't based in Arkansas) cringe or some sort of loose, circumstantial story to explain away contradictions.

One example: the famous "death of Judas" paradox (one verse says he hung himself, another that his bowels burst out) was once 'solved' on NT by saying that both descriptions were correct. Supposedly, he went into a field that he bought with his 30 pieces of silver, hung himself and because of the earthquakes that were occurring, his bowels burst out on the ground. That is a weak, circumstantial explanation of an obvious contradiction. A 'real' answer to the 'Biblical contradiction' debate is that you have faith that the real message of the Bible was delivered properly. You have faith in its validity. Cong, can't argue.

But... Faith isn't good enough for some members of NT. They have to go about disproving other religions... arguing for their own chosen faith and denouncing millions of people as sinners. This is WRONG.

Here is MY stance on Christianity. If you believe in God and Christ and Vonkaar, you know that he/she/it/we/us/himher loves you. YOU. Spend your life doing all you can to make YOUR life 'holy'. Spend all of your energy working towards the love that YOU feel from your deity. If 99% of your posts on a message board are based on religion, they shouldn't consist of hatred towards another person. They should consist ENTIRELY of why YOU love YOUR religion. Stop trying to poke holes in a religion that just might bring as much JOY to its members as your religion brings to you. Doing anything short of that is judging. It is sinning. It is misrepresenting your church. It is misrepresenting your God. It is un-Christlike.

It is WRONG.

That is how I feel about the few REAL Christians I've met. Their outlook is simple: they love Christ. Nothing else matters. They could be Baptist, Catholic, Methodist or Mormon. It doesn't matter, they love Christ. Nothing else matters.

Now, it's my turn. We'll see if you pseudo-Christians can follow my advice.

A brief history of The BibleS, by Vonkaar goatslayer.

It is *my* opinion that the Bible is as man-made as a book could possibly be. Do you realize that Revelations wasn't even 'universally' accepted until the 16th century? If most Christians knew the amount of political corruption and intrigue that was involved in the early creation of what we now see as the New Testament, I doubt they'd put as much stock in it as they do. The Bible is NOT as infallible as you think. Verses were voted on by murderous politicians. Books were 'exed' out of existence simply because of the source. Others were kept in for COMPLETELY personal reason. Can any of you come up with a reason for Song of Solomon? Inspired?

To accept The Bible as a perfect recording of the voice of God is ignorance at its finest. It's a book. It is many thousands of years old. There are no original copies, merely 'old' recordings of it.

Regardless, the history IS important.

What IS The Bible? Who has the correct version? The Samaritans have the Pentateuch. The Jews have the Tanakh. The protestants have the King James Version. The Catholics have the... Catholic Bible (Or Latin-Vulgate... or Douay-Rheims, if you care). The Mormons have their Book of Mormon, and the Bible, and the Pearl of Great Price, and their Doctrines and Covenants. The Blessed Disciples of His Most Holiness Vonkaar Goatlove have the Ku'Oryx-Libro. Who has the 'correct' version?

Let's assume that Mindia or someone has the answer. What makes THEIR Bible the correct one? Why can't the Mormon's Pearl of Great Price be more correct than the Douay-Rheims Bible? Why is the NIV 'more' correct than the Torah? Can this question be answered by anything short of "Faith?" I say, no.

If you can't say that the Douay-Rheims is 'more' correct than the NIV, you are opening the door to allow ANY changes to the Bible, including those made by the Mormons.

Where did The Bible come from?

Well... the Mormons have over 100 'books' in their Scriptures. The Catholics have seventy-three books. The Protestant bible has sixty-six. The Jews believe in a book with only thirty-nine and the Samaritans only accept the first SIX books. Why all the confusion?

The Samaritans believe that everything past Joshua (which barely receives scriptural status) was NOT written by the 'hand of God'.

The Jewish "Bible" originally contained several books that are no longer 'accepted' as gospel. Up until the Council of Jamnia, the 'accepted' books would differ depending on the location and beliefs of the spiritual leader. One town may accept the book of Daniel, another would find it sacrilegious. As you spread out, the 'list' of 'sacred' books became so different that by the time the Christian faith accepted the "Old Testament" of the Greek Jews, the Palestinian Jews were persecuted by their Greek cousins. At the Council of Jamnia, the "Jews" (loosely governed acceptance) threw out books like Ecclesiasticus and Maccabees. Proverb, Ezekiel and Ecclesiastes were voted in by an incredibly narrow margin. VOTED is the keyword here, not inspired. Some books were merely 'edited' for content... Daniel had several chapters removed. So it goes for the Tanakh. So it went for the 'first' edition of the "Catholic" Bible. Take note of the quotes...

The early Christians (note, still not 'Catholic') had a much MUCH more chaotic acceptance of their Bibles.

Clement's Bible contained the Epistle of Barnabus, Apocalypse of Peter and the book of Hermas in his Bible.

Iranaeus decided that James, 3 John, Jude and Hebrews were 'uninspired' but kept the Shepherd of Hennas in his Bible.

Tertullian threw out EVERY book in the New Testament besides 1 John, Acts, the Four Gospels and Revelations.

Each faction of Christianity had their own view on the "correct" list of books. Certain churches had more pull than others. This loosely translates into, 'more muscle'. If MY church had the biggest army, you'd be reading the Glory of the Goat, books one through 13 in the New Testament. However, I was stamped out. The churches fought to squash all forms of 'heresy' that they could. Certain churches gained more power than others... the Roman Church had more pull than those at Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandria. So it goes... (unintentional Vonnegutism)

The early Bible was clearly in disarray. But, God works in mysterious ways, right? Murder? I mean, miracles? Betrayal? I mean... divine works? We continue...

The famous councils began. MEN. MEN deciding on what is godly. The apostles had LONG since died out. Everyone that knew anyone that knew someone that walked with Christ was dead. There was ONLY temporal connections left to the Bible, yet it was a potpourri of manuscripts.

The Council of Laodicea (363) decided that Baruch should be included in the Old Testament, but Revelations was heresy.
The Council of Carthage (397) decided that Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith and Wisdom should be accepted as divine.

The Council of Nicaea (325) was the most fun of all... Constantine was the most 'holy' Roman Emperor. He was a kind, gentle Emperor... noted for being the first "Christian" emperor. Kind... Gentle... Forgiving... Trustworthy... many things said about 'other' emperors. The only 'good' thing that can be said about this 'great' ruler was that he was Christian =p. Soon after being converted to Christianity he had his 'co-emperor' Licinius and his son strangled, although he promised them their lives. He then murdered his wife. Next, he decided he needed to figure out the 'truth' of the Trinity. Council! Cong, Nicaea - birthplace of Christian Trinitarianism, voted and decided on by Man.

The Council of Nicaea also determined which sect of Christianity was 'true'. The biggest debate was between Arius and Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria(ccc name). Arius was the leader of the belief that Christ, God and The Holy Spirit© were separate entities, while Alexander of Alexandria(ccc) argued for the Trinity (still unnamed, btw). Alexander had more money and subsequently bribed the majority of the vote - Arius was excommunicated and exiled. A few years later, Constantine changed his mind and allowed Arius to return to Constantinople. The day that Arius was allowed to return to the cathedral, his stomach suddenly "poured open and his blackened bowels burst forth." This was remembered as an act of God. The followers of Arius wrote that it was murder. Oh well, cong Trinitarianism.

The murder and betrayal hardly stops here...

At the Council of Ephesus (449), Pope Dioscoros (pope of Alexandria) had the Pope of Constantinople murdered. He then 'suggested' to the bishops of Constantinople to vote as their hearts decided. In other, more famous, words... He "made them an offer they couldn't refuse." Cong pope-hood.

What about the Protestants? They simply took the Catholic Bible and 'reformed' it, right? Wrong. Luther called the Epistle of James "an epistle of straw." He voted to have Revelations and Hebrews 'exed' out of existence, although he loved 1 Maccabees. John Calvin was another reformer that considered Revelations to be a "motley group of raving lunacy." Heroes of reformation?

The protestant translation itself is even more 'holy' (read: hole-filled) than the 'creation' of the Bible. This would be another 2 pages of writing... I'll be happy to get 'further' into it if you want. For now, we'll stick with one of the most important verses in Protestant faith: 1 John 5:7.

KJV: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, The Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

The cornerstone verse behind the belief in the Trinity.

Erasmus of Rotterdam was the first publisher of the Greek New-Testament. For some reason, he left that verse out. Uh oh, panic time for the trinitarianists... Erasmus defended this omission by saying that he never saw an original Greek manuscript that contained the verse. Of course, he immediately had his nose shoved in a 'published' Greek Bible that contained it. He always suspected a fraud, but was unable to prove it... so he added the verse anyway. This book was to become the Textus Receptus: the 'official' Bible that became the 'standard' for later translation into the official English Bible. Even today, no Greek manuscript has ever been found to contain the verse. We now know that the whole verse was a Spanish invention... sometime in the late 4th century. The oldest recording of the verse appears in the manuscript of the Latin Vulgate, sometime around the year 800.

Man-Made, or divine? Who's to decide that? Who's to say that the Catholic Bible, with the seven 'extra' books is more correct than the NIV? Why couldn't the Mormon translation of the Bible be correct? The current Bible has been passed through more mouths than any piece of literature in the history of the world. Imagine if the Lord of the Rings was first published in the year 110. It was then translated, reformed and edited by 900 different organizations, then retranslated into another dead language, translated into pig-Latin, read to a deaf man by a first-year student of sign-language, transcribed by the deaf man into a journal constructed of tissue-paper, given to a barbaric leader who only cared for 75% of the books and then reformatted with the least controversial set of books possible. Do you honestly think that it would be the same book that Tolkien wrote? In all likelihood, Gollum and Gandalf would be gay-lovers, Sauron would be pimping out Frodo and Samwise and Borogornrond(the trinity of Boramir, Aragorn and Elrond) would be the bearers of the 9 great-rings of pumice. That's clearly enough to start a religion, right?

We *could* start in with the contradictions and Biblical errors...

I *could* go back into the whole, judgmental Christian bit...

It *would* be easy enough to ask for 'reason' for choosing one sect over another (remember Alexandria vs Constantinople?)...

But... why try? We've seen the 'best' arguments that the Christians of this board can drum up... and it's *quite* unsatisfying. Poke fun at another Christian sect... call me an Anti-Christ for 'daring' to ask such dreadful questions... quote from lame Christian sources ( The Holy Trinity web-ring??)... whatever. The argument is lacking... the topic is boring. Stick with faith or get the fuck out of my house.

[Spacewoman Spiff]

I think I have a crush on Vonkaar.

I read your entire post very carefully. Twice. And while you are much more educated in the history of the religion than I am, every point you made about love and faith and the bible pretty much hits the arrow on the head for what I think.

Ultimately, Christ doesn't care if you are perfect. He doesn't care if you have pride, or if you're gay or if you're a beacon of perfection. He cares that you love him and believe in him. He cares that you want to be a better person, or *are* a better person because of him. There is no "good" or "bad" Christian, and who the hell are we to put those titles on anyone?

[Langston]

Good post - you touch on a reason or two that made me leave the Catholic church.

[Zanchief]

and who the hell are we to put those titles on anyone?

The guy that rips the other guys stomach open and puts it on his head while he's laughing...bad christian.

[Spacewoman Spiff]

I can't help it... my avatar amuses me.

And I've never made any bones about the fact that I have a reserved window seat on the bus ride to Hades.

[KaiineTN]

Again, I'll say, beliefs get people killed, ideas can only help them grow.

Close minded people hold onto their beliefs, and, while they may listen to information like what Vonkaar has just shared, in the end it's pointless to them and forgotten.

Be open minded with your beliefs, don't change them for anyone but yourself, but don't let anyone or anything else create them for you. Ask yourself how you came to believe what you believe. Is it because of endless repeition in church during your childhood, which leads to now, where you wouldn't dare consider anything else? Beliefs come from ideas, so, when exactly does an idea become a belief? And who's idea was it that your beliefs are based on? They SHOULD be your own. No Bible, no stories, no scriptures, no churches, hell... no Christ.

You have free will, use it... and for yourself!

[Gaazy]

pics of homosex sunflower plz~

[brinstar]

boner

[ValanthaStormweaver]

I've always been facinated with religion. Mostly because I like many others like to learn things. I don't particularly believe in "organized religion". I don't go to church anymore. I was raised Catholic, moving on to Southern Baptist shortly there after. Some of the beliefs I have come from both churches. But I also have my own beliefs that spawned from my faith and the way I look at things in life. Not only in my own life, but in others lives as well.

I commend you Vonkaar. I think your post was very educational. I know I learned a few things that I didn't know before. I thank you for taking the time to post it.

[vonkaar]

For the record, I *am* more than a little embarrassed for saying, "get the fuck out of my house" at the end of that post.

Make fun of yourself, before the others can tease you. That's what I always told the fat-kids with low self-esteem.

[Langston]

Bah - no one read that far anyway Vonk. :P

[Narrock]

Vonk, although eloquently written (save for the self-Godly references) I will research your claims and statements and get back to you. After all... you wouldn't make the claim that you've just posted historical fact without accepting the possibility that the sources you used for your information-gathering are also based on opinion, and have also been interpreted and translated by many many people over hundreds and hundreds of years right?
Anyway, nice post. We'll talk soon.

[KaiineTN]

Damn, I was expecting something more.... juicy?

[Anonymous]

first reaction: wow
second reaction: wow

I cannot believe how much history you know on this. Heck, for all I know, you could be making this up. But I completely, totally, 100% agree with what you said about not judging people and just loving Christ. I recently had a rocky time with my faith...it just got so garbled up among tradition, ceremony, and "who's right". What you said (or wrote :D )is exactly what I realized---love Christ. Love your neighbor. Love yourself. That's all there is to it.

thank you,
Kaela

[Tacks]

Valantha I'm so surprised you don't attend church anymore...oh that's right you're a crack-whore and that's kinda frowned upon.

[brinstar]

you wouldn't make the claim that you've just posted historical fact without accepting the possibility that the sources you used for your information-gathering are also based on opinion, and have also been interpreted and translated by many many people over hundreds and hundreds of years right?

why not, you do it all the time

[Thon]

The Blessed Disciples of His Most Holiness Vonkaar Goatlove have the Ku'Oryx-Libro

it's talk like that which will get yer ass nailed to a cross 8)

[Spacewoman Spiff]

Mindia, are your children named Rod and Todd?

[Tacks]

Daddy, that girl has a picture of someone ripping someone's guts out.

I'm telling

[vonkaar]

Vonk, although eloquently written (save for the self-Godly references) I will research your claims and statements and get back to you. After all... you wouldn't make the claim that you've just posted historical fact without accepting the possibility that the sources you used for your information-gathering are also based on opinion, and have also been interpreted and translated by many many people over hundreds and hundreds of years right?
Anyway, nice post. We'll talk soon.

Research != link this to your little bitch minister for help...

I probably have access to the same 'factual history' books that he/she/it owns. If you have to actually 'research' a comeback to a post that basically says, "Faith is all you need... love God, love your neighbor and love yourself" then you are more than a little pathetic. If we assume that I made up 99% of that, would my point be any different? Stop trying to condemn other people. Stop trying to make yourself seem better than others. Stop attempting to "prove" Christianity to people. Your own religion frowns on all of the above. Your own religion teaches 'love' above all else. What you have posted in these forums sets the worst possible example of Christianity. Ask yourself if you think that a non-member would possibly be interested in Christianity by reading your anti-everyone threads. The point of my post was NOT to give a history lesson (although it was fun), it was to talk about all the *wrong* things that you and your quasi-Christian brethren have been doing.

You are wrong... in so many ways. Do all the research you need to try and prove me wrong. The best that you can do is whimper away with a, "we are all sinners... blahblah we all judge." That's not a comeback, that's a cop-out. Justify your actions to be in within the teachings of Christ, or shut the fuck up.

[Muglack]

A brief history of The BibleS, by Vonkaar goatslayer.

The Blessed Disciples of His Most Holiness Vonkaar Goatlove have the Ku'Oryx-Libro.

So which is it? Before I can fully devote myself to your religion, and more importantly you as the saviour and protector of my soul I need to know if you're a Lover or a Slayer.

[vonkaar]

I am both. I am the all-seeing duality of goathood.

[Muglack]

Well this will certainly not do, although I am faced with a serious conundrum. I am a staunch follower of a majority of your major teachings. I differ in only a few places. For instance I am 100% against goats, and now am faced with a dilema. I suppose I can do what has historically worked for other religions. I will emphasize only follow those teachings of yours which currently agree with me, and completely ignore those that do not. If I come across another religion that follows all of your teachings, or any set therein that do not COMPLETELY overlap with mine I will try my best to completely discredit them. I mean this system has worked for countless religions in the past, so it should work just fine for mine.

Oh btw, I've named myself your equal, and only through me can any of those who follow me contact you.

[labbats]

I am both. I am the all-seeing duality of goathood.

No, you are the all seeing all feeling... ah fuck I forgot how it goes in
Fight Club.

By the way, anyone who doesn't see that the bible is just a collection of stories to build morals, a la Mother Goose, is a dumbass. Take it for what it is, don't take it literally any more than you would about old mother hubbard.

[xKALECx]

Vonk, I hate that me and you hung it up and are not playing in Euphoria anymore. I'd love to sit and talk to you about some of this stuff. Very well written post I must say. You always seem to impress me with this topic.

If you have Trillian (Aim, Yahoo, ICQ, MSN, etc.), I may try to tag up with ya.