I’ve been away on business for a bit, and I’ve noticed that the Bible II thread is also missing, replaced by Bible III, praising the glories of agreement . . . HMMMM . . . . . But I had a bit more to say on that Bible II thread, and since it is nowhere to be found, with your kind permission I’ll say my bit here . . .
Unfortunately, as the niggling continues over just which words may or may not have been changed in this Book or that of the NT, the point is missed.
It is always deliberate, of course, for the self-described ‘Defenders of the Faith’ to set a rhetorical brushfire as a distraction from the actual point at hand, but our attention is not so easily diverted.
Notwithstanding what can only be described as the chronic narcissism that makes it impossible for some to see or understand anything that is not what they wish to see or believe, the history is quite clear. Odd little distractions, fits of pique aimed at deleting entire lines of thought, and sophomoric verbal tricks are the stock-in-trade of Democrats, you will notice, and won’t win the day.
I did not say that any particular bit of ‘Scripture’ was revised or rewritten “at the Council of Nicea.” As has been pointed out, the Official Agenda of that Council (though murky, nefarious, and wholly revisionist in intent) did not include the actual writing of ‘Scripture.’ That had already been done for them. Officially, they were far more concerned with marginalizing the Eastern Bishops by exclusion and physically eliminating dissenting thought. (Sound familiar?)
Constantine had his own agenda, however, and had spent ten years creating a mountain of fictitious ‘authentication’ to back it up. Having assembled the bulk of the Western ‘Bishops’ at this Council, he essentially turned the situation into a hostage crisis at the point of his sword -- here Constantine gave each a simple choice, which was to ratify his version and swear an oath, or be banished or killed outright. After the few leaders of the opposition suffered just such fates, it took no time at all for the rest of the assembly to see the light.
You see, it isn’t that Eusebius spent ten years carefully rewriting each of the ‘Books’ that were to make up the NT (though no small number of what we will charitably call ‘translation errors’ certainly occurred), but rather that he spent that time sifting through hundreds of equally credible accounts, Gospels, and ‘Divinely Inspired’ writings and decided to throw most of them away out of fear for his life if he upset the nutball Emperor by including them. ‘Authenticity’ was what Constantine decided it was. Period.
The Gospel of Thomas? (Poof.) The Gospel of Mary Magdalene? (Poof.) Hundreds of contemporaneous writings were put to the flame (Sound familiar?) Anyone found in possession of these writings was executed. This is why archeologists find the few writings that remain buried in caves and the like – wise people hide books from madmen who seek to burn not only the books but those who own them.
The revision was not done so much by editing individual sentences. It was done by forcibly eliminating entire works and killing anyone associated with them. (Sound familiar?)
Knowing this to be true, and knowing that it is equally true of certain ideological movements even today, we are forced into a difficult but hardly unique need to make a set of ethical and value decisions. Here, allow me to make a parallel – when we see a News Story, and know that a great deal was left out quite deliberately, in order to serve the political aims of the reporting parties in question, we must conclude that this act of willful omission betrays any smug, sanctimonious declarations by journalists concerning their ‘objectivity.’
Similarly, when we know that certain works were chosen, by men, to be included in the ‘Book’ while others were not, we are forced to conclude that the ‘Divine Word Of God’ is actually somewhat less than that. The wholesale burning of disagreement and the ‘justifiable’ murder of dissenters betrays any possibility that the final work might have anything to do with anything other than the agendas of men. What is included may well be, in some instances, ‘contemporaneous,’ and some bits may well represent the opinions and thoughts of actual people – but the fact remains that the works is incomplete, and deliberately so by the hand of man.
One might also note that several books of the NT are of unattributed authorship, and present themselves as compilations of thoughts.
(And, as has just been demonstrated – the heavy hand of dictatorship which will only tolerate one way of thinking has the ability – temporarily – to delete our words, but not our thoughts. So the idea of creating a singular viewpoint by eliminating others is hardly unprecedented, and given the lack of success such a strategy has enjoyed throughout history it is truly odd that some attempt to employ it even today . . . )
There are worse prisons than words (the assembled ‘bishops’ obviously decided), and worse tragedies than sacrificing one’s life and mind to words. But there might be no worse prison and no worse tragedy than ignorance – than blindly following words simply because you were told to do so, without ever questioning them. That is a betrayal of yourself.
I have said that I consider organized religions to be evil, in large part because they are completely constructed by men with the intention of controlling other men. But read carefully here, lest you mishear the message – the religious person, the individual, who follows a religion with benign intent, hoping only to do well and lead a moral life is handed a ‘Get Out Of Jail Free’ card. Those who become zealots, and bomb abortion clinics or become suicide bombers or assassinate rivals in the name of their ‘religious convictions’ are the shining exemplars of what is wrong with organized belief.
Evil presupposes a moral decision, intention, and forethought. Most people do not stop to think or to reason – they simply follow because they were taught to do so. Few of the individuals, even among the zealots, qualify as evil people – their leaders, on the other hand, fit the bill. Our world is filled with tragedies wrought by the blind following of words.
A thoughtful person, should one exist, might see the history of the world revealed here in a microcosm, and might be disturbed by the parallel . . .
Unfortunately, as the niggling continues over just which words may or may not have been changed in this Book or that of the NT, the point is missed.
It is always deliberate, of course, for the self-described ‘Defenders of the Faith’ to set a rhetorical brushfire as a distraction from the actual point at hand, but our attention is not so easily diverted.
Notwithstanding what can only be described as the chronic narcissism that makes it impossible for some to see or understand anything that is not what they wish to see or believe, the history is quite clear. Odd little distractions, fits of pique aimed at deleting entire lines of thought, and sophomoric verbal tricks are the stock-in-trade of Democrats, you will notice, and won’t win the day.
I did not say that any particular bit of ‘Scripture’ was revised or rewritten “at the Council of Nicea.” As has been pointed out, the Official Agenda of that Council (though murky, nefarious, and wholly revisionist in intent) did not include the actual writing of ‘Scripture.’ That had already been done for them. Officially, they were far more concerned with marginalizing the Eastern Bishops by exclusion and physically eliminating dissenting thought. (Sound familiar?)
Constantine had his own agenda, however, and had spent ten years creating a mountain of fictitious ‘authentication’ to back it up. Having assembled the bulk of the Western ‘Bishops’ at this Council, he essentially turned the situation into a hostage crisis at the point of his sword -- here Constantine gave each a simple choice, which was to ratify his version and swear an oath, or be banished or killed outright. After the few leaders of the opposition suffered just such fates, it took no time at all for the rest of the assembly to see the light.
You see, it isn’t that Eusebius spent ten years carefully rewriting each of the ‘Books’ that were to make up the NT (though no small number of what we will charitably call ‘translation errors’ certainly occurred), but rather that he spent that time sifting through hundreds of equally credible accounts, Gospels, and ‘Divinely Inspired’ writings and decided to throw most of them away out of fear for his life if he upset the nutball Emperor by including them. ‘Authenticity’ was what Constantine decided it was. Period.
The Gospel of Thomas? (Poof.) The Gospel of Mary Magdalene? (Poof.) Hundreds of contemporaneous writings were put to the flame (Sound familiar?) Anyone found in possession of these writings was executed. This is why archeologists find the few writings that remain buried in caves and the like – wise people hide books from madmen who seek to burn not only the books but those who own them.
The revision was not done so much by editing individual sentences. It was done by forcibly eliminating entire works and killing anyone associated with them. (Sound familiar?)
Knowing this to be true, and knowing that it is equally true of certain ideological movements even today, we are forced into a difficult but hardly unique need to make a set of ethical and value decisions. Here, allow me to make a parallel – when we see a News Story, and know that a great deal was left out quite deliberately, in order to serve the political aims of the reporting parties in question, we must conclude that this act of willful omission betrays any smug, sanctimonious declarations by journalists concerning their ‘objectivity.’
Similarly, when we know that certain works were chosen, by men, to be included in the ‘Book’ while others were not, we are forced to conclude that the ‘Divine Word Of God’ is actually somewhat less than that. The wholesale burning of disagreement and the ‘justifiable’ murder of dissenters betrays any possibility that the final work might have anything to do with anything other than the agendas of men. What is included may well be, in some instances, ‘contemporaneous,’ and some bits may well represent the opinions and thoughts of actual people – but the fact remains that the works is incomplete, and deliberately so by the hand of man.
One might also note that several books of the NT are of unattributed authorship, and present themselves as compilations of thoughts.
(And, as has just been demonstrated – the heavy hand of dictatorship which will only tolerate one way of thinking has the ability – temporarily – to delete our words, but not our thoughts. So the idea of creating a singular viewpoint by eliminating others is hardly unprecedented, and given the lack of success such a strategy has enjoyed throughout history it is truly odd that some attempt to employ it even today . . . )
There are worse prisons than words (the assembled ‘bishops’ obviously decided), and worse tragedies than sacrificing one’s life and mind to words. But there might be no worse prison and no worse tragedy than ignorance – than blindly following words simply because you were told to do so, without ever questioning them. That is a betrayal of yourself.
I have said that I consider organized religions to be evil, in large part because they are completely constructed by men with the intention of controlling other men. But read carefully here, lest you mishear the message – the religious person, the individual, who follows a religion with benign intent, hoping only to do well and lead a moral life is handed a ‘Get Out Of Jail Free’ card. Those who become zealots, and bomb abortion clinics or become suicide bombers or assassinate rivals in the name of their ‘religious convictions’ are the shining exemplars of what is wrong with organized belief.
Evil presupposes a moral decision, intention, and forethought. Most people do not stop to think or to reason – they simply follow because they were taught to do so. Few of the individuals, even among the zealots, qualify as evil people – their leaders, on the other hand, fit the bill. Our world is filled with tragedies wrought by the blind following of words.
A thoughtful person, should one exist, might see the history of the world revealed here in a microcosm, and might be disturbed by the parallel . . .
Last edited:
These gospels were never canon material. 
Early, apostle-qualified...undisputed. 
