The Gospel According to Judas

No, they didn't back what they did with scripture, they took single lines out of context, and spoon fed the masses little scraps of the bible. Even those in the hierarchy didn't have to read it directly. It's not really that open for interpretation if you just up and read it. Is the "Church" spoke of in the bible anything like the "Catholic Church?" Not even _remotely_.

Later, the Catholics were so against the bible getting out to the general populous, they burned copies of it in any language but Latin, or the originals, dead languages.

Ever notice the last indication of the beginning of the fall of "The Church" from power in English speeking countries coincides with the release of the King James Bible?



Not quite, the word "Church" isn't in the bible either. It was "Sunogogue" or "Ekklesia;" greek translations of hebrew words "kahal" and "edah;" all meaning simply "Gathering" or "Assembly." It NEVER referred to a building or religion, it could even refer to a group of pagans.

Nither is "Baptisim" really in the bible either, but thats for another day.

Anyway, it is spoken of, many writings speak of what false teachers will do in the future . . . I think Isaiah 1 also ties in pretty well, even though it was originally applied to those Jews who fell away to idol-worship at the time.

Err, thats what I was saying . . . that the Catholics didn't write/modify/codify the bible, they made up their own thing. Besides, they weren't the only "sect" of "Christianity" to exist at that time. They were just one of many.

Yes, as a matter of fact, two of them, and they both renounced their "Catholic Faith." And praised the God of Issac, Abraham, and Jacob.

What?

__________________
The blog: Tofuball's Worklog

Read The Bible - it's the Word of God.

Roman Catholic Church is a strong leader in faith. Discount their method all you want, Jesus will always be their number one focus.

Or at least some fellow NAMED "Jesus" that few of them know much about.

__________________
The blog: Tofuball's Worklog

Read The Bible - it's the Word of God.

ok here is a really dumb question and please forgive my ignorance but Jesus was a Jew that was what religon was based upon the Jewish faith, so why are there so many different religons based on the one god but have serverly different teachings?

Jews don't believe that Jesus was the Son of God, that's why.

__________________
Let's see how long this lasts.

and who exactly do Jews think jesus was?

some prophet

__________________
Let's see how long this lasts.

What? Almost _ALL_ of the first believers were Jews! :P

Depends witch one you ask. For example, I'm Jewish :P

__________________
The blog: Tofuball's Worklog

Read The Bible - it's the Word of God.

I was referring to Jews today. Of course, as you can testify, this is not an absolute

__________________
Let's see how long this lasts.

Why you Christians have to accuse the Jews of thinking everything is about profit???

__________________

How much more do you want to know about jesus? We all get it. We are all schooled by the fact that Jesus claimed to be God. And Jesus being God is the main staple of the Roman Catholic Church. Is possesion of the correct image more important here? And isnt His mother worthy to fuss over?

I never thought about that

Not sure why youre really even debating this with me because yorue saying the same exact thing I did, just in different words.

When I said "interpretation", I didnt say that as a good thing. I didnt say that they use the Bible all over the place. I didnt say that their church is the one talked about in the bible--in fact I said the complete opposite of that. So why are you acting as if I am saying these things, then debating them by repeating my position back to me like youre telling me something I dont know?

I said they use interpretation to make it look like the Bible supports what they teach. And I can give you examples quite easily--like how the story of Peter suddenly became their justification for the Pope's existence. They interpreted that scripture in such a way as to suit their actions. Wrongly, but they still did it. Hey, I never said they were in the right for doing it, I just said they did it. Confession is another one--they took James 5:16 and turned "confess your sins to one another" into "confess your sins only to this one man in a big box". The original scripture instructed the faithful to confess their sins to each other and pray for each other--=the Catholic church wrongly interpreted that and it became "confess your sins to this man, thats the only way to get forgiveness". NOW do you see my point? Or are you going to keep "debating" me by telling me what I just told you, like youre trying to educate me on the matter??

When you said they didnt back what they did whth scripture, youre saying the same thing I did. I never said they rightly did so--I said that they backed what they did witn a WRONG INTERPRETATION of bits and pieces of scripture. Here--try reading it again:

Next time youre going to try to educate someone, it would work well to not tell them what they just told you. You misread one specific part of that post and then ignored the rest of what I said, and ran with it.

__________________
"some people are like slinky,
their not realy good for much.
but you cant help but smile
when you see one tumbling down the stairs"