The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Danny Cardwell's picture

    What If Jesus Was Just A Teacher and Philosopher?

    By Danny Cardwell on Sat, 12/27/2014 - 10:37pm |

    "Christ, not Christianity, is the power that has soothed and satisfied the spirit of the great multitude which no man can number." --CANON AINGER

    ​Why do we need religion in our post modern condition? This type of question turns off many believers, yet it's a question any person of faith will deal with--whether we want to or not. Our doubts and insecurities are real. The manner in which we deal with these doubts is what will build or crumble our faith. Christians around the world are preparing to celebrate the birth of Jesus, yet our influence on the world is lessening. We aren't as effective as many of us would like to be, and some of us won't even try to make a difference. How have we (Christians) become so impotent?

    Let's work backwards. What if Jesus was merely the teacher of a social gospel and moral philosophy, would we still follow him? What if he didn't die for our sins, would we still ground our morality and ethics in his teachings? If we struggle with any aspect of either question then we have reduced our salvation to a market style quid pro quo. In essence we are telling God that we will spread the gospels and worship, if one day we are granted power and eternal life. This type of worship is more common than most of us inside the church are willing to accept. We either get God the ATM or God the attack dog.

    I see three forms of religion being practiced today. The first form is diagnostic ideological religion. Practitioners of this form of religion use the teachings of Jesus and his disciples to offer critiques for the condition of the world. The men and women who subscribe to this particular kind of religion believe that all of the worlds ills could be solved by a greater commitment to the teachings of Jesus. I don't disagree with them, but the choice to come to the father is one each of us has to make on our own. The call for a mass commitment to Jesus seems improbable. Instead of working to change things many are comfortable offering their diagnosis.

    The second form of religion is medicinal. Practitioners of medicinal religion seek to find comfort from the conditions the world has imposed on them. Many have resigned to the fact that their kingdom shall come and that they will one day become what they cannot presently be. The trap of medicinal religion is acceptance. Medicinal religion's impotence comes from a lack of trying. Instead of embracing God's omnipotence as a way of shaping the here and now, they settle for the promises to come down the road.

    The last form of religion I see practiced is empowerment religion. When you're around someone who truly embraces this form of religion you can't help but notice their attitude and spirit. I know people who are connected in a way that I wish I was connected. There isn't an obstacle you could place in front of them they won't give God the glory during their attempt to overcome it. They have a belief so strong that they never outwardly doubt the circumstances of life. It's this group of believers that accomplish what was previously thought to be impossible. The sad thing about empowerment religion is that there aren't enough of them. They have no problem diagnosing societal ills, they are assured of their place in heaven, yet they set out to do the hard work of changing their communities.

    As a child I believed that God sent his only begotten son to die for our sins; later in life I found myself not believing this as much. I now find faith in the faith of others. When I'm around someone who really believes I'm comforted by their convictions. Jesus said follow me; he never called on people to worship him. This distinction matters because it creates the space for those who are weak in their faith and those who have no commitment to faith. If Jesus wasn't the perfect sacrifice of God he would still be worth emulating. If Jesus was just a myth, his lessons can still provide valuable insights for those who are lost. I thank God that he sent his son to die on Calvary. I believe what I can't provide physical evidence for. Jesus was the turning point in human history. His birth fulfilled a prophecy from God, and his impact is still felt 2014 years later. You can't look at a calendar without recognizing that we track the days since his arrival. I need the teachings of Jesus to sustain my sanity during crazy times and to comfort me during times of distress. I need religion because of the state of the world we live in.

    Comments

    Thank you for a very heartfelt and well thought out look at Christianity. I am glad it gives you what you need. Faith is something that, regardless of how far and how hard I have looked to try and understand it, and hence to find it; I simply cannot. One minister, when I talked to him about my inability to believe in God, replied, "Well, wouldn't you be better off if you just DID, in case I'm right?"  I was a little stunned, but I held my tongue and didn't say what I was thinking, which was this:  "If you ARE right, wouldn't that God you believe in see that my fingers were crossed behind my back?"

     You just can't fake faith. Although it seems to me that some people try to. 

    Thank you again for a very thoughtful piece of writing. 


    by CVille Dem on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 2:26pm

    Whenever anybody brings up Pascal's Wager, I tell them that I don't play the triangle.

    I play the drum.

    *rimshot*


    by Michael Maiello on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 4:00pm

    Having preached in Baptist churches along the Ohio river when I was 16 and coming full circle to being an Agnostic many decades later I do think the teachings of Christ are relevant in everyday life. You have described faith as a process and haven't hit people over the head with absolutes---that's a good thing.

    Thanks for posting. 


    by Oxy Mora on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 2:41pm

    Thanks for this great point of view article. Back in the 1930s, Black historian Benjamin Mays divided Blacks into Christians who believed in acting to change things as they existed. The next group was Christians who believed that you suffered on Earth and received a heavenly reward for suffering. The last group were the atheists. Mays  using the political bias of the day labeled the atheists as Communists

    I tend to put Christians into two broad groups, those who seek obedience to Authority and those who seek Justice. The first group falls into your first group and the second group falls into your last group. Your middle group I tend to place with the group that is judgmental because they often criticize those taking action to change things. I do think that placing them in a separate group may be more accurate

    Thanks again for posting and welcome to Dagblog.


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 7:40pm

    I appreciate the fact that you took time to engage my post. Thanks a million.

    by Danny Cardwell on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 10:22pm

    Thank you for breaking this up into paragraphs. It was a bit overwhelming when posted as just one.


    by erica20 on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 7:57pm

    I fixed the paragraphs. I think Danny must have had some technical problem. The email notification I received had paragraph breaks, but they didn't show up in the post, so I went in an edited it to add the original breaks.


    by Michael Wolraich on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 10:10pm

    Thanks for helping me out. I'm somewhat of a luddite. I look forward to reading and sharing posts to this sight in the future.

    by Danny Cardwell on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 10:20pm

    Thanks for posting here, Danny. It's not your fault; the dag technology is finicky sometimes. Did you paste in the content from another app? Which one?


    by Michael Wolraich on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 10:49pm

    Then the Romans really, really overreacted.

    Nice post.

     


    by Doctor Cleveland on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 8:17pm

     A key sentence . . .

    The following is found in Mr Cardwell's post:

    ''Jesus said follow me; he never called on people to worship him."


    To shed light on what the meaning is to "follow"Jesus, and if one has "faith" in the veracity of the Biblical words of Matthew, the word "worship" is not found but the intent is clearly stated:

     


    Thanks for coming in Mr. Cardwell and posting here at Dag. I look forward to more postings from you.

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Sun, 12/28/2014 - 11:05pm

    If Jesus wasn't the perfect sacrifice of God he would still be worth emulating. If Jesus was just a myth, his lessons can still provide valuable insights for those who are lost.

    Thank you for sharing this.  Nice work.

     


    by Bruce Levine on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 9:39am

    Thanks for your kind words. I'm humbled by the responses I've received.

    by Danny Cardwell on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 10:43am

    "Jesus said follow me; he never called on people to worship him. This distinction matters because it creates the space for those who are weak in their faith and those who have no commitment to faith. If Jesus wasn't the perfect sacrifice of God he would still be worth emulating. If Jesus was just a myth, his lessons can still provide valuable insights for those who are lost."

    A very useful way to look at Christianity, perhaps more useful than any other because it expands the space of the "fold" to shelter those who might not otherwise be comfortable there.


    by erica20 on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 11:31am

    If you are not of his fold  you should feel uncomfortable.

    Unless it is you want, your ears tickled by false teachers, who'll make you feel comfortable? 

    13 g “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy 1 that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.14 For the gate is narrow and h the way is hard that leads to life, and i those who find it are few. Matthew 7:13-14  

    Footnotes [1] 7:13 Some manuscripts For the way is wide and easy

    4 Then I heard another voice from heaven saying,

    w“Come out of her, my people,

    lest you take part in her sins,

    lest you share in her plagues; Revelation 18:4

    Come out of whom?  Churches led by teachers who wanted you to feel comfortable rather than the tell you the TRUTH ?

    Revelation 18:7

    7  cAs she glorified herself and lived in luxury,

    Speaking about the Churches who gained riches by making others feel comfortable. 

    Revelation 18:9

    9 And hthe kings of the earth, who committed sexual immorality and lived in luxury with her, iwill weep and wail over her jwhen they see the smoke of her burning.

    Why would anybody support Churches that support the building up of Satan’s system and war against the woman “Gods arrangement for deliverance?

    First HE will destroy the kingdoms and governments of the Earth and HE will replace them

    Matthew 10:7; Daniel 2:44; Matthew 6:10 - ESVBible.org ...

    Revelation 12:12-17

    12 Therefore, crejoice, O heavens and you who dwell in them! Butdwoe to you, O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because ehe knows that his time is short!”

    13 And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued  f  the woman who had given birth to the male child…….. 17 Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off   kto make war on the rest of l her offspring, m on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to n the testimony of Jesus.

    The Dragon and his false Churches including so called Christian churches are the ones that seek to hinder Gods arrangement for deliverance

    It is not yours or anyone else’s comfort he seeks.  

     Life?  or  Death?

    That is your choice; just as it was at Mt. Sinai.

    (Approximately 6 days ago, in Gods time frame.... 2 Peter 3:8)


    by Resistance on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 2:24pm

    Whatever floats YOUR boat...

    That is, if one has "faith" in the veracity of the Biblical words...

    Fire and brimstone and hell to pay if folks don't think your way.

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 3:15pm

    Not my way 

    Jesus said "follow me"  Just as Moses at the Red Sea may have said "Follow me" ........to escape the calamity  

    Fire and brimstone can also be byproducts of volcanic action, something that can certainly happen just as it did when the Earth was originally formed to create mans natural environment. 

    Who stopped or held back the magma? it wasn't for the Non Believers he held back the four winds either. 

    The Earths natural environment suspended; for the sake of living organisms?.

    Follow him and live 

    Hell is Dantes baseless imagination some churches capitalized upon and used to scare gift givers needed to enrich the church and not to really save lives.

    Revelation 8:6-13

    The Seven Trumpets

    7 The first angel blew his trumpet, and there followed d hail and e fire,….. 8 The second angel blew his trumpet, and something like h a great mountain, burning with fire……..10 The third angel blew his trumpet, and k a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch……..12 The fourth angel blew his trumpet, and a third of othe sun was struck, and a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of their light might be darkened, and a third of the day might be kept from shining, and likewise a third of the night……..13 Then I looked, and I heard an eagle crying with a loud voice as it flew directly overhead, p “Woe, woe, woe to those who dwell on the earth, at the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow!”

    Although symbolic  there may yet be, a literal fulfillment.  


    by Resistance on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 6:06pm

    The Earth will remain, but will you?

    Who you going to follow who has the power to save? 


    by Resistance on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 6:19pm

     You have your "beliefs"... I have mine!

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 4:21pm

    Sorry I'm so late coming to this, Danny.  Well done!  A thoughtful breath of fresh air.

    I know others have singled this out, but it's the most meaningful for me, too.

    Jesus said follow me; he never called on people to worship him. This distinction matters because it creates the space for those who are weak in their faith and those who have no commitment to faith. If Jesus wasn't the perfect sacrifice of God he would still be worth emulating. If Jesus was just a myth, his lessons can still provide valuable insights for those who are lost.

    Your three divisions are interesting, too.  I'll need to ponder them some more.  Looking forward to reading more from you.  And welcome to dagblog.


    by Ramona on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 6:33pm

    There are many points of view. The comments you have received so far are only a small portion of them. When Jesus said he brought us a sword, he wasn't kidding.

    Whatever testimony one makes or chooses not to make, there is a benefit in absorbing some of the history of different views. One excellent work in that regard is Jesus Through The Centuries by Jaroslav Pelikan. He doesn't include all the variations of the message as they were understood by different congregations but he does a good job of touching upon the wide range of responses within the Pauline tradition.

    One place where the swords have appeared many times concerns the "shortness of days" and the anticipation of a new world taking place. The Gnostic testimony was driven into oblivion because they claimed the change had happened where others were saying it was about to happen. The rejection of the Gnostics as heretics shows this much:

    The matter of faith as the confidence a person has pronouncing a creed has always been connected to a view of the world as a world.

    The more specifically a view of the world is tied to the necessity for a sequence of certain events, the more an announcement of belief becomes a wager: This Is What Is Going To Happen.

    That is all a lot to think about and have opinions about afterwards. My testimony concerns the command to follow. In all traditions, Jesus says "follow me". That command is what cuts through everything else. He did not make it easy for the first person he said that to.

     


    by moat on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 6:45pm

    I'm not familiar with the book by Jaroslav Pelikan. Your comment is very thought provoking. I think there's much to be learned from a Gnostic look a Christianity. Thanks for engaging with this writing.

    by Danny Cardwell on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 8:22pm

    Thank you for bringing a good spirit to the conversation.
    Maybe you are already familiar with it but the following site has many good resources: Nag Hammadi
    The Gospel of Thomas is interesting because it can be read as an expansion on what established church fathers have said or a direct challenge to them. I am inclined to read it as the latter but I hear the other side too.
    Apart from theological disputes, there is a quality of nearness to the teacher that is unlike any other texts I have encountered. The way that this intimacy intersects the Pauline tradition of Thomas as the doubting one is intriguing.
    Historically speaking, it is all very complicated.


    by moat on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 9:10pm

    This is a great article, Danny.

    It’s well-written, sensible (which is often not the case with many Christians), and you’ve obviously put a lot of thought into the subject.

    But that said, while I have Christian values and I believe in God, I have absolutely no faith in the word of man, or any organized religion whatsoever. There are many reasons for this, but the primary reason is most religions place far to much emphasis on the supernatural - talking snakes, walking dead men, and such - and I simply can’t bring myself to believe in such nonsense.

    I consider God, nature, and the universe one and the same entity. For me, God is whatever force is responsible for creating what we refer to as reality, and we can only know God’s will by what he has done, and "he" made birds to fly, fish to swim, and man to THINK, not to blindly follow the delusional contrivances of other men. Because in the final analysis, what we call "faith," is not faith in God at all. It’s having faith in other men, and what they’ve TOLD us about God.

    The "Holy Bible" wasn’t compiled until over 300 years after Jesus’ death, so the people who compiled the Bible were as remote from Jesus as we are from George Washington. They were much like a congressional committee. They simply picked the stories that they like - which were written by EXTREMELY superstitious and unsophisticated people, by the way - and then declared it the word of God.

    I could go on forever on this subject. When I was 12 years old I was Baptized by Rev. E. V. Hill, but by the time I was 14 I used to regularly debate him on the issue. He asked my grandparents, "Where is he getting this stuff!!!?" Well, I was getting it from God, because when he created me, he equipped me with common sense, so I no more needed a "User’s Guide" to govern my conduct than birds need a calendar and compass to know when to start heading South, and in which direction to fly to get there.

    So you show me a man who believes in talkin’ snakes, 900 year-old men, and walking dead men, and I’ll show you a man whose grasp on reality can’t be relied upon.

    About the Bible

    The Bible that Christians Worship today was compiled and "bless" by the Catholic Church, not God. Any book that disagreed with the Catholic Church was banned. What Christians call "The Holy Bible," and what these preachers run around thumpin’, wasn’t even put together until almost 400 years after the death of Christ. So everything in it is hearsay. In terms of years, they were as far away from the life and times of Jesus Christ as we are away from George Washington. So in reality, they didn’t know fact from fiction, any more than we know whether or not George Washington really chopped down a cherry tree:

    For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that it had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't. The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides. One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine.

    I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions. When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSON’S PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church.

    Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books.

    ROME HAD SPOKEN - IN THIS CASE, FOR GOD - AND THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED.
    .http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080928064041AATOZ


    by Wattree on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 8:01pm

    I remember EV Hill as one of the founders of SCLC with MLK Jr. I also remembered that he took a sharp right turn. He supported Sam Yorty for Mayor of LA. Hill also was in line with the Bakers, Falwell, Swaggart, and the Promise Keepers. He preferred the term Negroes. I can imagine the inner confidence a 14-year old would need to question such a figure as Hill.

    There is active debate in many seminaries about context and the Bible.Was James, the brother of Jesus, intending to lead the church as a more Jewish institution? Did Paul lead the church into a more authoritarian direction than Jesus intended? There are even discussions about the lost Christianities, those offshoots of followers of Jesus that fell by the wayside. Christianity is strong enough to stand up to the questions.


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 12/29/2014 - 8:21pm

    RM,
     

    I Pay my Tithes to the Homeless

    I used to routinely challenge Rev. Hill. I didn’t want to seem impudent or like a rebel rouser (after all, I was a child), but there was something inside of me that just YEARNED to let him know that I had his number - and I did. I was only 14, but by that time I had already been highly political for 4 years. I’d become fixated on politics by watching the campaign between JFK and Nixon when I was 10 years old. So for me it was just a political debate, and in order not to be disrespectful, I’d used the Socratic method (although I didn’t even know at that time that it was a method) of just asking him questions that he’d have to dig to try to answer.

    One time I asked him the following:

    Does God know all? And he said, "Of course he does." I then asked him, can God be wrong? And he told me, "No he can’t." I then reminded him that in his last sermon he said that all a person had to do to get into Heaven was to repent his sins and be Baptized. And he said, "That’s right." Then I dropped the bomb. I asked him, well, if God knows all, and he knows a billion years before Billy is even born that Billy is going to be born, live his life, and then end up in Hell, is there ANYTHING that Billy can do to make God wrong?

    After considering the question for a moment he ran to the preacher’s refuge - "There are some things that are so complex that it is only for God to know."

    Hmmmm . . . Well, here’s something that’s not complex. A loving father would never allow one of his children to agonize in "the burning pits of Hell" for refusing to blindly accepting the assertions of another man, because it was God himself who made us critical thinkers, wasn’t it? So as I see it, we have a choice, we can either trust in what man SAYS, or trust in what God has DONE.

    I also confronted him about his practice of publishing the names of everybody who tithed and what they paid in the church bulletin every month. I considered it extortion. It placed pressure on the members to not only tithe, but pay two and three times what they were "suppose" to pay so the rest of the church couldn’t calculate how little money they made.

     

    But no, I didn’t have any problem with confronting him at all, because I had been exposed to a REAL man of God. When my grandmother was ill, she used to send me to a little storefront church until she was back on her feet and could take me to join "THE BIG CHURCH." That entire little church wasn’t even as large as Mt. Zion’s choir section. It was presided over by a little un-ordained minister that we used to call Elder Hampton. But that little man had an impact on me that has remained with me to this day, because he was humble, and he didn’t just preach his sermons - he lived them. If Jesus came back to Earth, I would expect him to be just like him. No big cars, social climbing, expensive suits, or pushing meaningless rituals for this little man. He had only one mission - LIVING the SPIRIT of the Gospel.

    He’s who I’ve patterned my life after, so I don’t feel the need to get on Sunday morning and pay to be screamed at for two hours, or buy some preacher a mansion in the suburbs, because it doesn’t matter how rich you make your preacher, you cannot bribe God.

    While I have no way of actually knowing this for sure, but it seems to me that it is much more likely that life itself is Hell. We continue to suffer through the cycle of birth, life, and the agony of death until we’ve been around enough times to obtain the wisdom to become one with God.

     

    So I pay my tithes to the homeless. That way and I don’t have to wait until I die to be rewarded. I can instantly see God’s smile reflected in their eyes. Try it some time. The next time a homeless person ask for some change, give them 10 or $20 and then look into their eyes. I guarantee you, the look in their eyes will make it the best $20 you’ll ever spend, and the feeling will stay with you all week. It’ll make you want to go broke doing it.

    .

    About Elder Hampton:

    KNOW THE TRUTH AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

    http://wattree.blogspot.com/2011/07/know-truth-and-truth-shall-set-you-f...


    by Wattree on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 9:48am

    For me, God is whatever force is responsible for creating what we refer to as reality, and we can only know God’s will by what he has done, and "he" made birds to fly, fish to swim, and man to THINK,

    I believe the GOD that did all these reality things you speak of, had the power to make sure his words would find a way to survive? 

    Praise God; HE DID find a way to preserve his words from being adulterated by his enemy Satan 

    "A collection of some 981 different texts discovered between 1946 and 1956.......Text from the last three centuries BCE and the first century CE" 

    Dead Sea Scrolls - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Scholars now recognize that some of these works were composed earlier than the Essene period, when some of the Biblical books were still being written or redacted into their final form.[135]

    I can imagine it angers HIM, that so many of todays Church Leaders and their members will differentiate between OT and NEW  as though God changed his thoughts on scriptural matters like a pair of shoes. False teachers replacing HIS thoughts with theirs. 

    When instead the New should be examined with a view to harmonizing with the OT.

    I THINK; The Creator of the "realities" is wiser than most give him credit for.


    by Resistance on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 12:36am

    You have your opinion about false prophets.

    There are those who believe that Christians are of a religion created by Pharisees. They quote snippets to support their viewpoint. They consider Paul a liar 

    http://beforeitsnews.com/spirit/2013/04/new-covenant-for-gentiles-247745...

    Opinions based on Biblical snippets are a dime a dozen. People make their own interpretation of the meaning found in the Bible. Others completely reject the Bible. We have free will. For many, rejecting the call to care for the poor is a sign of a lack of understanding of the Bible. Some do not understand the meaning of rendering what belongs to Caesar. We recognize Christians by their fruits. Many of us see a God of love and reject those who only offer a fire and brimstone version.


    by rmrd0000 on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 10:53am

    I completely agree, RM.
    .
    People use religion to validate their animalistic need to feel like everyone who is not like them is evil. Even lions have this need.  A lion will kill anything that's not another lion.  Man tends to be the same way - Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.   
    .
    So this thing about religion and the Bible is ridiculous on its face. God needs neither a book, nor "prophets," to relate to man. When we were created, we were created with an innate sense of right and wrong - even dogs will look over their shoulder before they steal a chicken wing off of  a table.  So When my neighbor is at work, and I'm in my yard, and his fine young wife flashes that beautiful smile on me, I don't need a book to tell me what's appropriate. I can hear God whispering in my ear - "Now Eric, you know what you're thinking is not right. So just suck it up, and go on in the house."  And that's exactly what I do. That's the difference between having good sense, and no sense, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the Bible.


    by Wattree on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 1:44pm

    God needs neither a book, nor prophets, to relate to man

    ex cathedra?

    When we were created, we were with a sense of right and wrong.

    What was right about being disobedient, when the Creator of the realities stated you can eat from every tree of the Garden but not from this one.  For if you eat fom this tree; you will die"

    Good thing for the rest of Adams and Eves offspring, they didn't die immediately from being poisoned with no antidote they were aware of. 

    Sense of right or wrong?  Or just too stupid to know, the law was intended to protect them? 


    by Resistance on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 12:59pm

    Did Noah need a book to know God's Will?


    by Verified Atheist on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 1:47pm

    Resistance,

    Do you REALLY believe in talkin' snakes!!!? And after Cain killed Abel, the Bible said,

    God confronted Cain about the murder of Abel and banished him to the east of Eden. The problem arises in the next verse, where suddenly Cain is married and builds a city:

    • Then Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. (Genesis 4:16)
    • Cain had relations with his wife and she conceived, and gave birth to Enoch; and he built a city, and called the name of the city Enoch, after the name of his son. (Genesis 4:17)

      IF ADAM AND EVE WERE THE FIRST PEOPLE ON EARTH, WHERE DID THE PEOPLE OF NOD COME FROM?

    by Wattree on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 10:05am

    Wattree, knowing how you feel about the scriptures;  have you ever considered that your bias against the Bible,  blinds you from researching,  what other Professional Bible Scholars have ascertained; instead of relying on information that supports your bias?

    where suddenly Cain is married and builds a city:

    130 years had passed since Creation of Adam to Cain. Cain was already married and his wife followed. 

    Considering age of Conception at 20 years, and more than 110 years between the times recorded for Adam and Eve to Cain and counting an exponential growth, there would have been many possible candidates Cain knew well as a wife.

    Do you REALLY believe in talkin' snakes

    NO

    I believe Satan projected his voice, to make the snake appear to be talking.

    But I suspect, just because YOU can’t discern or can’t see members of the spirit realm, you mock others who believe,  just as those who mocked the pioneers of microbiology who although at the time, (prior to the invention of the microscope) believed and eventually proved the existence of microbes, too small to be seen without an aid.

     IF ADAM AND EVE WERE THE FIRST PEOPLE ON EARTH, WHERE DID THE PEOPLE OF NOD COME FROM?

    Are you being SERIOUS or looking for salaciousness?

    Do you drive by a herd of antelope and ask.... where did they all came from?

    Genesis 1:28

    28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, s“Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth

    Genesis 9:1

    9 And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, q“Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.

    EXPERTS to answer your questions about Cain so you'll have more information to clear out of your mind, a biased viewpoint to a more unbiased opinion by being more informed. 

    Pulpit Commentary ,  Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

    Genesis 4:17

    Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

    Genesis 4:1


    by Resistance on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 8:55pm

    In every instance, YOU want to put yourself in GOD’s position so you can judge me; claiming the needy I support, are not acceptable to YOU   GOD

    Many of us see a God of love and reject those who only offer a fire and brimstone version.

    The God, who loves us, always gives us warnings before he acts. He warned Noah before the deluge. Noah acted upon the warning and saved his family

     God warned the Nation of Israel twice before God allowed their destruction because of their disobedience

    People make their own interpretation of the meaning found in the Bible

    Why don’t you interpret for all of us, the scriptures below about the TRUE obligations of Christians?

    Ezekiel 33:6

    6 aBut if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, so that the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any one of them, athat person is taken away in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at the watchman's hand.

    Ezekiel 33:7

    7 b“So you, tson of man, I have made a watchman for the house of Israel. bWhenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me.

    Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

    33:1-9 The prophet is a watchman to the house of Israel. His business is to warn sinners of their misery and danger. He must warn the wicked to turn from their way, that they may live. If souls perish through his neglect of duty, he brings guilt upon himself. See what those have to answer for, who make excuses for sin, flatter sinners, and encourage them to believe they shall have peace, though they go on. How much wiser are men in their temporal than in their spiritual concerns! They set watchmen to guard their houses, and sentinels to warn of the enemies' approach,

     but where the everlasting happiness or misery of the soul is at stake, they are offended if ministers obey their Master's command, and give a faithful warning; they would rather perish, listening to smooth things.

    Many of us see a God of love and reject those who only offer a fire and brimstone version.

    While you want to pat yourself on the back about your service to God, while judging others for doing what they were Commanded to do. You want to REJECT and ridicule those doing, what they were commanded to do;  as you encourage others to believe they shall have peace if only they feed the poor.

    Is it laziness, to avoid the wrath of others, to be ridiculed as the one that is the bearer of bad news when instead the BAD news bearers are doing what they were commanded to do by GOD.

    Or is this the works of an Apostate, tickling the ears of others, telling them niceties, instead of the Truth that God wants people warned, before he brings judgment.

    "but his blood I will require at the watchman's hand." "Whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me"


    by Resistance on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 12:40pm

    Hey now...

    If you can translate the following without looking up the translation in a search engine, I might listen to you.

    If you can't, have a nice day...

     

    Yabba dabba doo . . .

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 1:27pm

    Is this what passes as intelligence or logic in your world? 

    Yabba dabba doo . . . ????

    Is that the language they speak? A language before the Dark Ages? 


    by Resistance on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 9:13pm

     It's you who is doing the Yabba dabba doo...

    I asked if you could translate the following without looking up the translation in a search engine. In light of the fact you didn't take a shot at translating it, I've elected to not listen to any thing you say...

     

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Sat, 01/03/2015 - 1:11am

    We have seen you be totally unaware of the context of a piece of Scriptur. You are not infallible. You have an interpretation of Scripture that differs from others. I have a different interpretation of Scripture than you. I am not arrogant enough to say that I am certain that I know the will of God. It seems that you do know the will of God.

    Congratulations 


    by rmrd0000 on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 6:45pm

    I am certain they didn't kill Jesus because he fed the poor.

    They killed him just as they attacked Jeremiah and others who preached denunciations against the Religious leaders. The False Teachers. 

    Jesus knew his Kingdom would replace the Kingdoms of the Earth, he was attacking the Church, and when he spoke of the Temple being destroyed, he had todays churches in mind also.

    If you thought those religious leaders of Jesus day were mad, imagine the churches and their dupes would like to do with those who denounce todays churches.   

    While you constantly preach about feeding the poor, so you don't have to get a hair hurt on your head,  Excusing your lack of obedience to get out there  and Warn the people, just as Jonah was commanded, yet he tried to shirk his responsibility

    To divert attention from your own lack of obedience, you mock those who do as commanded; labeling them as Peddlers of Brimstone and Fire, as though your work was more  important

    I know enough about Gods Will, to know what work HE finds more important. The same work Jesus did when he warned Israel of a coming calamity because of their disobedience.

    Happy is the slave who when his master arrives has increased the masters belongings,

    The only holdings the master had in mind was his sheep and his slaves better get out there and find them, That is the important work.

    Not how many mouths you've fed or hospitals and schools you've  built

    Although good works in themselves it is not the work Jesus commanded.

    Reminds me of the scripture that tells about a good for nothing, lazy slave, deciding what work HE"D  like to do, while he whips on his fellow slaves, when the master is away 


    by Resistance on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 10:13pm

    Happy is the slave who when his master arrives has increased the masters belongings,

    You refer to the Parable of the talents in Mathew 25. The tale is of a master who gives money to his slaves. Two use the tactics of the slave master to double their money.. The third merely buries his money. The master is enraged at the third slave. The third slave is called lazy by the slave master. Many consider the third slave as being at fault. The slave master is praised.

    How is the slave master described? Let us see how the slave master describes himself when he criticizes the slave:

    26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed ( The lord here is the slave master, not God). He describes himself as a man willingly to gain money by any means necessary. The slave master is not a man of God.

    How does Mathew 25 continue?

    31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

    32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

    33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

    34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

    35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

    36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

    37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

    38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

    39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

    40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

    41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

    42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

    43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

    44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

    45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

    46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

    The tone changes completely after the vile punishment handed out by the evil slave owner. Once again you totally missed the message about the poor and latched unto praising a slave owner not worthy of mention.

     


    by rmrd0000 on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 1:33am

    Don't hurt a hair on your head, or break a nail, while you try to put yourself on the Masters Throne of Judgment, insulting the Master, the King and Lord and judging the other slaves  

    How convenient you didn't  provide a link to all of Matthew 25:26-30  so all could see the deception and misrepresentation of the Master you've described. as did the lazy and worthless slave of the parable.


    by Resistance on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 5:38am

    Resistance the parable is preceded by a warning that one does not know the time of the return.

    The story is then told of a slave master who is described as harsh. The man reaps where he does not sow and collect harvests that do not belong to him. The man described is not a good man. In essence the man is a thief. You are too bound in snippets to see the full context of the message. The next section is about who will be welcome to sit at the side of God. The ones chosen are not those who ridiculed those in despair and poverty. Faith without works is death. Aiding the poor is part of the work required by a Christian.

    You read the Bible in snippet fashion and miss the context. The man who chastises the third slave is not a good man. Re-read the description of the man. Re-read who will.be blessed at the final judgment.

    One has to read the Bible critically.Similar misreading led to the fiction that God had condemned Ham's children and used as a justification for the race-based, rape-based perversion of slavery that occurred in the United States.


    by rmrd0000 on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 6:49am

    A similar parable is given in Luke 19:11-27. In this case it is a man rejected by the people traveling to become King. He is crowned King. He gives money to ten subjects to see how they would use the money. We are told the stories of three of the ten. One doubles the money. Another has a 50% increase. The third makes no profit. As in Mathew, the money is taken away from the third man, over the objects of the subjects who feel this is unfair. Again we hear the King say the line about to one who has much. Much more will be given. Again we are to admire the King. In fact the King demands that all who are against him be killed.

    Luke goes on to Jerusalem where he is about to meet his end. Unlike the King in the parable in Luke, Jesus did not kill those who opposed him.

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30%2CLuke+1...

    Those hearing this tale in Jericho where Jesus spoke would immediately have thought of Archelaus, the son son Herod. Archelaus was rejected by the Jews. He was also a horrible ruler. He slaughtered Jews for not bowing to his Authority. Would Jesus have made the mistake of identifying with Archelaus or was he testing the audience to realize the true bad actor in the parable? The King was not a good man. Archelaus was the reason Jesus family left Judea fearing  the evil ruler. This was noted in Mathew 2:22


    by rmrd0000 on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 10:14am

    False teachers replacing HIS thoughts with theirs.

    Wow, you really don't see how most Christians would consider your idiosyncratic, unusual and very individualistic interpretations of the Bible to be one of those adulterators, do you? This comment strikes me like you are talking about yourself and then damning yourself for what you do.

    Hello:

    The Dead Sea Scrolls are all Old Testament.

    What is the difference between being Jewish and being Christian?

    Who divided the Christian bible into two books, one called "Old" and one called "New"? Satan? Or followers of Christ?

    Actually, I wonder if you even consider yourself a Christian? I don't think you've actually ever said.


    by artappraiser on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 3:08am

    I believe the GOD that did all these reality things you speak of, had the power to make sure his words would find a way to survive? 

    Resistance,
     

    Here's the question. Wouldn't you think that God could find a more efficient way of disseminating his word than through corrupt and self-serving men? How about going directly to each individual, as I think he does, through the conscience? 

    Here's another question. Don't you think that if God did decide to use religion to disseminate his word, he'd have sense enough to create just one religion?  As it is now, religion is the most malevolent force on Earth.  It has generated more wars, hatred and suffering than any other force in the history of mankind.  One would think that God, in all his wisdom, would have foreseen that.  
     

    Thus, it is my opinion that religion is of man. It's much to flawed to be a creation of God.


    by Wattree on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 11:01am

     Mr. Wattree... as to your question . . .

    Here's the question. Wouldn't you think that God could find a more efficient way of disseminating his word than through corrupt and self-serving men? How about going directly to each individual, as I think he does, through the conscience?

    My basic answer to Resistance that she/he gave no reply in an early post up thread was . . .

    You have your "beliefs"... I have mine!

     

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 4:31pm

    Sorry OGD I thought your comment was absurd

    "she/he gave no reply"

    What kind of response were you wanting? Were you looking too justify your belief? 

    You have your "beliefs"... I have mine!

    A person goes to the top of the tallest building and jumps off, BELIEVING they'll live and wont be hurt. 

    Believing doesn't make it the smart thing to do.

    So keep your beliefs

    Just as I cant fix the minds of the foolish who will jump, once their minds are made up; despite attempts of using sound reasoning, something they lack.


    by Resistance on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 9:34pm

     "We are each our own answer"  

    You are evidently proud of the pictures and words, you posted it twice

    What is so profound about that?

    The Cannibal Jeffrey Dahmer, found the answer to satisfy his hunger? 


    by Resistance on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 9:37pm

     Dahmer? Apparently so...

    Dahmer's own answer was fulfilled on November 28, 1994 at the hands of another who continues to rot from his own doings.

    You have your own answer... to fulfill in your own way.

    I realize that's too deep for you to understand.

    ~OGD~


    by oldenGoldenDecoy on Tue, 01/06/2015 - 6:23pm

    I agree with your position on organized religion. I was taught that the Bible was a copy of a copy of a copy that has been passed down and altered to benefit those in power. The fact that the disciples have European names is something that should set alarms off. My commitment to my church is based on an appreciation for the history it helped shape. I'm from rural Virginia. My church, Piney Grove Baptist, is 95 years old. The members of my church are mostly older and have lived through extreme Jim Crow in the south. Our church mother is 91 years old. For me, part of my worship is a promise I made to do everything possible to help keep the doors open. My wife's childhood church has shuttered its doors and another black church in her neighborhood is down to two services a year. The oldest black church in our community, Mount Pisgah, is down to two services a week. Our community has seen a three decade mass black exodus. With all of that said, I still have a faith in a God who creates and amazes. I don't believe that God intervenes in the way many believers hope and pray he does. I believe in energy, vibrations, spirit and enlightenment. I believe in the Holy Ghost or the holy spirit. When two or three are gathered in his name I believe a communal bond can be formed and genuine love can lift spirits. I try my best to convey the best of that spirit to others. The teachings of Jesus are sufficient for grounding a moral system, but not necessary. There are several ways to be decent without a cognitive commitment to any religion. Thanks for you comment. I appreciate any chance I get to exchange ideas. Peace!

    by Danny Cardwell on Tue, 12/30/2014 - 8:47pm

    Back in the day when Black congregants were first exposed to the book "Philemon", they rejected the text as a trick played by slave owners. They refused to believe the assumed message that it was right to send an escaped slave back to his master. More recent analysis supports the idea that Paul was telling Philemon to free Onesimus. There is even a theory that Onesimus was not a slave but Philemon's estranged brother. The argument is based on analyzing the original text of the Scripture.

    The story of the controversies is told in the "Embassy of Onisemus" by Allan Dwight Callahan

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1563381478/ref=mp_s_a_1_sc_1?qid=142006157...


    by rmrd0000 on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 7:19pm

    "The fact that the disciples have European names is something that should set alarms off." - hardly a fact - asde from Greek being lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean at the time, most of the apostles had Aramaic names.

    http://www.city-data.com/forum/christianity/1791364-whats-name-apostles-aramaic.html

    Jesus spoke Aramaic (Hebrew) His name was Yeshua. Aramaic can be found even in Genesis. Y'shua was known as the king of the Yehudi (Jews). The name Apostle in Aramaic(Seliah) means to be sent.

    The twelve Apostles and their name meanings.
    Simon Peter--Aramaic--Simon (Shim'on)--means God has heard--Peter (Cephas/Kephas) means rock
    Andrew--A GREEK name--means Adam, man, manly--He's Peter's brother
    John--Aramaic/Hebrew--(Yochanan)--means God is gracious
    James/Jacob--Aramaic--(Ya'aqov)--means to follow, heel
    Thomas--Aramaic--(Tau'ma)--means twin
    Matthew--Aramaic--(Mattityahu)--means gift of God
    Simon the Cananaean--Aramaic--means the zealot or jealous one
    Philip--A GREEK name--means lover/friend of horses
    Bartholomew--Aramaic--means son of farmer/furrow/hill (He was also known as Nathanael)
    Judas Iscariot--Aramaic--(Yehuda)--means praised one
    James the younger--Aramaic--(Ya'aqov) means to follow, heel
    Matthias(chosen after Judas)--Aramaic--(Matityahu)variant of Matthew--means gift of God
    Thaddaeus--Aramaic--means heart--brother of James

    If you're curious the name of Mark is Latin (Marcus) and means sea green or hammer---The name of Luke is Greek (Loukas) and means from Luciania (Italy)Timothy is a Greek name tha means honouring God. Titus is Latin and means to honor or defender.
    Yeshua Bless You


    by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 4:58pm

    Thanks for taking the time to read and comment on this post; I'm truly humbled. I have wrestled with my faith over the years. There's a lot in the bible that has been misappropriated for the sake of manipulation. Over the last 500 years the hermeneutics of certain scriptures have been challenged by scholarship. I agree that translations are the cause of some of this confusion, but it seems odd that the disciples were given more European sounding names where as prophets in the Old Testament and the Hebrew names in Numbers or Kings were left in tact. Again, this is a belief that many hold. The use of Christianity to subjugate people is real. I choose to believe in the spirit of Christianity.


    by Danny Cardwell on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 9:50pm

    The 4 primary gospels were codified by Constantine at the Council of Nicaea in 325AD, when Greek was the most common language from Constantinople to Alexandria in Egypt. Even in the time of Acts, the apostles spoke Greek as their most common language when travelling. If you had a Bulgarian group (Bulgarian women's choir, great early recordings), would you put their album in Bulgarian or English?


    by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 01/02/2015 - 3:34am

    Christianity and most other religions are becoming less potent because the people are becoming less superstitious, and less willing to buy into "Voodoo."  That's the bottom line, Danny.


    by Wattree on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 10:40am

    We see the results. 

    Many people believe, the teachings about Moral Values, found in the Bible; benefit all of society. 

    Rather than each person gets to choose what is right or wrong. Even if they are selfishly motivated? 


    by Resistance on Wed, 12/31/2014 - 9:15pm

    The moral code of the bible is a mix of a few basic principles articulated by every religion i.e. don't steal don't murder, a lot of trivial and ridiculous food and hygiene rules, and a lot of actual evil rules and lessons. It's only of value as a moral code if one picks and chooses, which is what most christians do.  Unfortunately many christians pick and choose poorly and are more likely to have a bad moral code than humanists, atheists, and secularists.


    by ocean-kat on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 5:17pm

    No offense, but there are certainly other types/models of Christianity, such as personal guidance that is more or less a personal private relationship.

    by Anonymous PP (not verified) on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 1:54pm

    I agree with your conclusion. My specific claim was that these were the most prevalent forms I see practiced. My intention wasn't to lay out a universal system for classifying religious practices and beliefs. Thanks so much for engaging with this post.


    by Danny Cardwell on Thu, 01/01/2015 - 9:56pm

    Organized Religion - an Accident of Birth



    Danny, you wrote yet another great and insightful article. I'd like to address one of the issues that you broached 
    .

    In it you asked the pivital question - "What if Jesus was merely the teacher of a social gospel and moral philosophy . . .?"  
    .

    That's exactly what Jesus was, a philosopher, and then ignorant and superstitious people, who believed in talking snakes, took his words out of context and turned him into some kind of superhuman being. If we hadn't been conditioned all our lives to believe in this counterintuitive nonsense it would be clear to us that it holds just about as much validity as voodoo - Dead men don't walk, men don't walk on water, no man can walk up to the Red Sea and tell it to scoot over, and if Adam and Eve were the first people on Earth, where did the people come from that Cain went to live with after he slew Abel?
    .
    Just take a moment to consider the following.  Don't you think it's just a little bit strange that your religious beliefs are merely an accident of birth?  If you were born in Israel chances are you'd be just as devout a Jew as you are now a Christian, and if you were born in Iran you'd be a Muslim, or China, a Buddhist.  So your religion isn't God-inspired - it's an accident of birth. Think about it. Do you actually believe that just because a person happened to be born in Israel, Iraq, or China that they're going to Hell?  Anyone who does is stupid.

    .
    And here's another thing that should be considered. If God HAD decided to put religion on Earth to guide man, don't you think he'd have had sense enough to give us just one religion so religious dogma wouldn't be the most hate-inspiring, murderous, and destructive force on Earth?  Look around you - here in America, in the Middle East, and literally all over the world - organized religion is THE  primary source of agony, pain, and misery of all mankind. Thus, organized religion isn't a blessing; it's a curse.
    .
    God made birds to fly, fish to swim, and man to think, not to follow a users guide written by other men.
    .
    About the Bible
    .

    The Bible that Christians Worship today was compiled and “bless” by the Catholic Church, not God. Any book that disagreed with the Catholic Church was banned. What Christians call "The Holy Bible," and what these preachers run around thumpin’, wasn’t even put together until almost 400 years after the death of Christ. So everything in it is hearsay. In terms of years, they were as far away from the life and times of Jesus Christ as we are away from George Washington. So in reality, they didn’t know fact from fiction, any more than we know whether or not George Washington really chopped down a cherry tree:
    .
    For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that it had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't. The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides. One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine. I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions. When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSONS PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church.
    .
    Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books. 
    .
    THE POPE HAD SPOKEN, AND THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED. THUS, WHAT CHRISTIANS REFER TO AS "THE HOLY BIBLE" IS NOT THE WORD OF GOD, IT'S THE WORD OF POPE DAMASUS I.
    .
    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080928064041AATOZUD


    by Wattree on Sat, 07/25/2015 - 1:49pm