🚀 go-pugleaf

ghost_of_the_hangman@yahoo.com (Ghost of IT) wrote in
news:b22f8b35.0411151313.78309617@posting.google.com: 

> Jon Pike <Anonomoose@spamlesshotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns95A1B7944571ALessThanPerfectInc@24.71.223.159>... 
>> ghost_of_the_hangman@yahoo.com (Ghost of IT) wrote in 
>> news:b22f8b35.0411141555.32b478c7@posting.google.com:
>> 
>> > So as not to add miles to the previous thread.....
>> > 
>> > The problem with using the Bible as a guidebook is:
>> > 
>> > 1) The current King James Bible is not the original bible.
>> 
>> There's no such thing as an "original bible."
>> However, the KJV was not the first printed, as many claim, nor was it
>> the first translation.
>> 
> 
> The original bible was a canonization of several different works.

Do you know what "canonization" means? There was no bible until there 
were also popes.
 
>> > 2) When the current bible was created much was lost in translation
>> 
>> The "current" bible? Which version? The NIV is a very accurate
>> translation for the chosen inclusions.
>> 
> 
> Well I think real scholars would disagree.

Which ones do you know who would say that?

> I have seen plenty of work
> that shows how the Hebrew->Greek->Latin translations have the meanings
> of words mixed up.

Oh, I see. You're just ignorant. The NIV hasn't gone through that many 
translations; it's taken from the most original texts there are.
 
>> > 3) Many of the original scrolls and manuscripts have been left out.
>> 
>> Again, no such thing as an "original" bible. The bible as it stands
>> today  is a compilation chosen by the vatican; all versions of it.
>> 
> 
> The Vatican and Pope Innocent promoted the destruction of various
> smaller sects during both the Inquisition and the destruction of the
> Cathars and the Templar descendents.  They did this to destroy their
> popular support for different version of the bible, and different
> interpretations that clashed with the power base of the Catholic
> Church. 

proof?
no?
 
> There have technically been several versions of the bible with
> different canonizations, and some of what has been left out is in the
> Vatican Library Archives where none are permitted to see it.

that's not correct at all. you seem to not understand the processes 
involved.
 
>> > 4) The Vatican to this day has concealed much of the source of the
>> >    old scrolls and other writings that contradict the bible for
>> >    obvious reasons.
>> 
>> Proof?
> 
> Research the Gnostic Manuscripts and you will find out about other
> scrolls and stone tablets that were unearthed. They have been
> disavowed because they contradict the bible, not because the scrolls
> can't be validated historically. 

You call that proof?
that's nothing even resembling proof.

and the gnostics were hardly christian, by any stretch of the 
imagination.

-- 
http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet