qondio.com/k3kf

The tyranny of the Bible

By Arthur Webster of Ask Old Coot

One of the most bought and least read books in the Christian world is the Holy Bible. It seems that most Christians own a copy but do not really understand what it is.

Initially the Bible was set up as a list of allegorical tales to enable a corrupt and mysterious priesthood to terrify its congegation into obeying the rule of law.

Because only the priesthood and a few nobles could read and write, the Bible was basically anything they wanted it to be. The congregation would be told tales of wonder and mystery during a service that was held in a foreign language, performed by the clergy and not participated in by the congregation except for those points at which it was directly addressed. The services were often used to make announcements that would affect the lives of those listening.

The established church was populated by politically motivated individuals who saw their place in society as being somewhere near the top of the tree. By using artists to create their own ideas of what Hell was like and displaying the results in churches, the clergy terrified the common man (and many nobles) into believing that subservience and sacrifice were the only ways to avoid the eternal torments of Hell. If you look at some of the illustrations that remain today, you will notice that Hell very closely resembled the dungeons of the nobility and the churches. The torments of Hell were often the very same methods by which confessions were extracted from (often innocent) suspects.

Huge excesses and abuse of power were justified by the use of 'quotations' from the Bible. Many sections of the Bible were deliberately re-written to carry the message that the clergy and nobility wanted to have delivered.

Monastic orders tried to redress the balance of power so that true Christians or seekers after knowledge would have somewhere to go. It is unfortunate that many who entered the monasteries were surplus sons of the nobility and were welcomed by the Abbot because of the 'gift' (usually land) that they brought with them.

The avarice of the church and many religious orders together with the naked ambition of many senior clergy created a loss of 'faith' among the laity but, by embelishing and threatening the torments of Hell, congregations were kept at a high numerical level even if it was of low conviction.

As the construction of religious buildings became a passage to Heaven for for the delinquent wealthy - encouraged by 'quotations' from the Bible that supposedly guaranteed eternal life to the donors of cash, material or labour 'to the glory of God' - they became more and more impressive. Eventually the Bible was used to encourage competition between parishes to build the most glorious edifice in which the congregation could worship and the senior clerics could live in luxury.

When it became possible to mass produce the Bible in the local language and provide it for the use of a newly educated population, the modified tales and exagerated stories were so entrenched in folk lore that they could not be removed nor significantly modified.

It is said that there are many books that have been excluded from the Bible because they 'lack the divine inspiration' that is evident in those that are included. This is probably true up to a point but it is much more likely that they are excluded because they are more aposite to the true teachings of Jesus when He walked among us.

In the modern world the Bible is once again being used as a method of brain washing and terrorising congregations.

It is so amusing to see the way that 'quotations' from the Bible can be made to support ANY scenario that a student of it might wish to promote. Selective quotations taken out of context are all over the 'god chanels' on TV where charismatic presenters can rake in fortunes from a single broadcast.

Does no-one else see the irony of Muslims and Christians berating each other and beating each other over the heads with their own 'bibles' and yet they worship the same god?

It is quite astounding how apparently intelligent people can use extracts from the Bible to predict with absolute certainty the time of the second coming and the creation of paradise on this Earth. The fact that all natural laws will have to be suspended for this to take place is a small side issue.

It is about time all the religions got together to decide which god they will promote and which books they will use. They have to decide if they are going to abide by the word of their god as already promulgated or examine the sources of their teachings in order to verify them.

The God of the Old Testament is a fearsome and angry God. He will rend assunder, hip and thigh, those unbelievers who would dare to transgress against His followers.

It is so convenient for Christians to forget the first books of the Bible because the God portrayed therein is so far removed from the being of light and forgiveness that has been popularised by the corruption and machinations of men. It is also convenient to use quotations from the first books like 'an eye for an eye' which is a sentiment Jesus did not preach (as far as we are aware) but which does feature in Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Exodus.

The Christian faith tells adherents to turn the other cheek and to express brotherly love, even unto those who would harm you, and yet there appears to be a perfectly acceptable slaughter of an army carrying out the legitimate orders of its commanders when the sea closed over them. How many times, I wonder, at that point in the story of the flight from Egypt, has a Christian punched the air and shouted 'Yes!' Do they really consider that every soldier in that army was an evil man? Are they really so bigotted?

The Bible is nothing more than a weapon to subjugate the minds of otherwise intelligent people. It should be used, like any other reference book, as a source of unconfirmed but authoritative information. It should be accepted for what it is - the work of man designed to elevate the priesthood and paralyse the laity.

It is no accident that the Christian church is obscenely wealthy - the Bible is the lever that raises the lids on the coffers, ready to receive even more.

As far as we are aware, Jesus neither placed one brick on top of another to build a place to the glory of His Father - neither did He leave instructions for anybody else to do so.

What Jesus did say (according to the Bible) was that 'where ever two or more of you are gathered in my name, there shall I be'.

His instructions to His disciples were to take the word of God into the world - not to set them down on paper and create untold wealth.

If you attend a church, look around you and wonder at the commandment - You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God - Roman Catholics, in particular, should consider the meaning of this commandment.

Naturally, this particular commandment has been 'modified' by custom and usage.

Right. Just like the Bible!

Contributor's Note

The Bible I read regularly is the Authorised King James Version although I often dip into the good News Bible, the Quran and the Book of Mormon. If you can only answer my comments by quoting the Bible, be prepared to have it quoted straight back at you. I hope, if you read this intel, that you will take a pause for thought and discover why you became so angry.

PLEASE VISIT THE CONTRIBUTOR'S WEBSITE

Ask Old Coot
An open invitation to ask questions.
www.askoldcoot.info

"His instructions to His disciples were to take the word of God into the world - not to set them down on paper and create untold wealth."

Tell me if you can which of the disciples became wealthy from writing an account of that which they saw themselves or gathered accounts from others.

It seems to be true that others tried to take these written works and try to profit from them either financially or politically. There seems to be a lot of editing done.

The disciples were the true carriers of the word of God. They set out on His errand, often at great personal risk, and did the best that they could. They carried with them the conviction that wealth for its own sake was sinful.

Neither Jesus nor the disciples were contaminated by the Bible - it hadn't been invented.

Jesus preached to the world at large and selected those whom He trusted to spread the word. His own words were a reflection of the intentions of His father for the human race and the words of the disciples were His words spoken from memory - the traditional method of carrying news.

There is no contemporary writing that reports the words of Jesus nor, specifically, of Pontius Pilate. There is also no justification in the Bible for the reactions to Pontius Pilate and Judas Isacariot.

If an unbiased and thoughtful look is used to judge these two men you will see that both of them are used to fulfil prophecies that were made. Jesus prophecied that he would die and that 'one among you will betray me'. If Pontius Pilate had refused to condemn Jesus or if Judas Iscariot had refused to betray Him, they would have proven Jesus to be a false prophet. For this they are vilified?

Protestants do not pray to, bow or gesture at statues or idols, and as there is no big protestant church ruling over all the little ones, the protestant Christian church is not wealthy. Granted, there are some bigger protestant churches rolling in the money, but since I'm not quoting scripture, I won't tell you what is in store for the leaders (somehow, I'm betting you know, or if you don't, you'll find it. ;) )

The Egyptian soldier who gets engulfed by waves IS the evil man in the story because "he" will either help re-enslave the Israelites or kill them. Yes, every single one of the soldiers seeking to cause harm to freed slaves can be called "evil", as in "unrighteous". Who doesn't cheer when the bad guy loses? Only the bad guys.

Not quoting the Bible, but my mother used to say, "Those who are completely ignorant of the Bible are happier than those who read it, but do not spiritually comprehend it, because it is better to know nothing than it is to know a little and be haunted. But those who do have a personal relationship with Christ comprehend it enough to grow from reading it."

Some Christians don't take the Bible seriously enough, while others take it too literally. Get a roomful of Christians together. You'll hear several different points of view about the same scripture. What really matters is the personal relationship with God.

I disagree on the Bible being written to elevate the priesthood, too. It was one man's study of the Bible that led to his break from the Catholic church, and ultimately, to Protestantism. While there are elements of Catholic manipulation, enough has been left to combat it.

For example, Christ taught everyone to pray to the Father (GOD, not a priest) for forgiveness and never advised that formal confession with a priest was necessary for forgiveness or salvation... oh boy... I could go on and on and everywhere....

A thoughtful response and much appreciated.

If the intended teachings of Jesus are extracted from the Bible they will make little more than a very valuable pamphlet. His message was simple. It is the simplicity of the message that created the need for a bigger and bigger Bible so that more and more sins could be 'forgiven' by avaricious clerics. (We will ignore indulgences since they were not biblically based though so justified).

It is a very dangerous road to walk down when you accuse a whole race of being evil. The army that was sent to reverse the flight from Egypt was probably made up of soldiers who were very devout in the way of their own religion and obedient to their own laws.

Compare this with any recent or current war. All soldiers believe that God is on their side and that they will, evntually, win.

Based upon the teachings of Jesus, as we understand them, there has not been a just war since He walked this Earth. They have all been flawed because they were contrary to His teaching. Please don't assume that only 'our' side is capable of being supported by God. Two world wars fought between many nations who worshipped the same God, asked the same God for victory and used the same Bible to justify themselves must raise a question or two, surely?

The churches have, to a great extent, moved away from Bible teachings. Many churches now condone same sex relationships for example. Many teachings of the established church teachings such as hell fire, immortality of the soul, the celebration of christmas, and the trinity doctrine are not Bible teachings, but come from pagan teachings and philosophies as found in ancient Greece and other places. People see the hypocrisy of the churches. Hence part of the reason fewer people now than ever before have any interest in the religions in christendom. Without the Bible though we have no hope for the future.

Hope for the future resides within each of us.

Mankind has an inherent capacity for sorting wheat from chaff and can often see through mumbo jumbo and false witness.

Early Christians were allowed to continue their pagan celebrations because nowhere in the Bible is there a divine instruction to celebrate. These early celebrations were often used as a cover for Christian fellowship and were soon ingrained into the daily lives of peasants and serfs.

Once it was accepted that Christianity should be adopted as the national religion (of whatever country) accommodations were made so that there would be no reason for a popular revolt because an accepted festival was banned. Over decades the nature and names of the celebrations were brought in to the Christian calendar.

Hell fire and damnation were constructs of the clergy to justify the very profitable sales of indulgences or 'crusades' against the 'heathen'.

"Over decades the nature and names of the celebrations were brought in to the Christian calendar." Agreed. The Bible itself states that following the death of the apostles false teachings would begin to flourish. Re the Trinity doctrine, The New Catholic Encyclopedia says "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century." - (1967), Vol.XIV, p.299.

Regarding Christmas, The Encyclopedia Americana says "The reason for establishing December 25 as Christmas is somewhat obscure, but it is usually held that the day was chosen to correspond to pagan festivals that took place around the time of the winter solstice, when the days begin to lengthen, to celebrate the 'rebirth of the sun.' " (1977), Vol.6, p.666

It is an interesting concept that 'man has misused the Bible' because the Bible is a man made item created from the accumulation of disparate and unrelated records. The records are not available to the population at large and huge sections of them are reserved for study by clerically approved 'experts'.

Anyone reading the Book of Mormon would have serious doubts about the reliability of much of the verbiage since it is written in a language far more florid than the early English versions of the Bible. The 'convenience' of Moroni having recovered the original plates of gold upon which the book was written cannot be under estimated.

A great similarity between the Book of Mormon and the Bible is the claim that there are sections (books?) that are sealed away and not included.

Although there are now many more laymen who are qualified to examine and comment upon the original texts, the Bible remains locked into the mish-mash that has been created over the past 1700 years by the expedience demanded by the clergy.

I sincerely believe that the message Jesus brought was of love and forbearance but that this message was not profitable enough. The Bible is the result of tradesmen releasing a series of 'the latest, greatest ways to earn ever-lasting life'.

I'm not angry either. Many people have "interpreted" the Bible to their own ends. But...

Your quote:
"Initially the Bible was set up as a list of allegorical tales to enable a corrupt and mysterious priesthood to terrify its congegation into obeying the rule of law."

1. Do you have a list of Biblical scholars that state that both testaments of the Bible were written with this in mind? If you do, you will find another list that will refute it. It becomes a question of who do you believe.

2. This "mysterious priesthood" -- I assume you mean old testament Jewish Priests? Where is the proof of your allegation that these priests were corrupt -- that is, when the law was given to Moses and these priests were then set up.

If you are referring to the Priests of the Sanhedrin during the time of Christ - then you are indeed correct on many of your points.

If you are referring to the "leaders" of Christianity from Emperor Constantine on up, you make valid points.

Books were rejected for various reasons by the council. Were all of those reasons valid? This has been the subject of debate ever since the scrolls were found. There is no good way to answer for the most part. I have heard that the "Book of Mary" was rejected simply because the council simply didn't want the New Testament to start with her. There was no problem with the book -- they just didn't want to spend a lot of time with Mary. That's just what I heard.

But if you are suggesting that the Bible was CREATED with the idea of setting up some kind of tyranny, you are wrong, my friend.

The Bible may in fact be the most abused book in the history of literature as far as interpretation is concerned, but it wasn't written with that in mind.

Just as virtually every quotation in the Bible has an opposite quotation, so do most arguments and discussions have two sides.

The priesthood consists of all those who claim the right to exclusively interpret the word of God as recorded, translated and transcribed by man. There is no shortage of evidence that many priesthoods have used the mysteries of their faith in order to elevate their perceived position in society and accumulate a level of comfort and power. Even at the time of Jesus, the priests rented out the temple precincts to benefit from the profits traders made.

Religions that demand 'sacrifices' to their gods are simply more evidence that the priesthood see a way to advance themselves.

As far back as records go, the wealthiest and most powerful people within a population have been the priests or holy men. This is as true today as it has ever been. Christianity simply tweaked the processes of attaining position and acquiring wealth. In the UK, for example, bishops live in huge palaces at the expense of their congregations and are elevated to the House of Lords wherein they can sit in judgement on others whose lifestyle and living conditions they have become ignorant of.

Of course I am making blanket statements. This is what everybody does when they formulate an opinion that can be applied in a widespread way - indeed, your closiung statement is also a blanket statement. If I was discussing the minutia of my opinion I would look to specific instances and examples but then I would be in the position where the examples became the subject and the opinion simply vanished in a fog of contradictory detail.

I would really love to know what the intended purpose of the Bible is but the people who initiated the process didn't tell anybody except by the way they allowed their creation to be used.

"The Bible is the result of tradesmen releasing a series of 'the latest, greatest ways to earn ever-lasting life'."

The Bible is remarkable because it has stood the test of time. There were periods when the clergy themselves sought to ban the Bible from the hands of ordinary people. Yet the Bible has survived. The fact that it was written by over 40 people over a period of 1,600 years says a lot about it. The fact the writers themselves often referred to their own failings and mistakes is remarkable, and testimony to the fact it was authored by God, written by men. Add to this the fact that it is in harmony with science when it speaks about the earth being round, for example, as well as its historical accuracy, as well as its many prophecies, makes it something 'special' which no other book can match.

What you have said is one aspect of the Bible that allows it a reign of tyrany.

It is not what is in the bible that is important, it is the way it is placed above all interogation by the demands of the priesthood that it must be accepted as the truth.

There are many writers throughout history who have scolded themselves for their foolishness - this is not a unique aspect of those whom it is claimed wrote the books of the Bible.

The Bible mentions the ends of the earth, the four corners of the earth, the foundations of the Earth and even says the the devil took Jesus to the heights and let him survey all that was on the Earth - nowhere in the Bible is there a hint that the world is a globe.

Many books of prophecy have been written and, because of the imprecision of the prophecies, can not be proven to be incorrect. Prophecies within the Bible are equally imprecise and the same prophecies have been used to predict the same even at different times.

If, and there is no proof, 40 people did write the Bible over a period of 1,600 years (that's one book every 40 years), what caused God to turn His back on us so that His word was left open to abuse rather than reinforced by the words (inspired or not) of more recent writers?

There are literally thousands on people, if not millions, who claim to have a personal relationship with God, why aren't these people writing new books to spread the joy and messages that they are receiving?

The answer is simple.

THEY ARE!

The problem is that the all powerful church will not accept them as inspired works so it 'examines' them until they are forgotten about. It is not in the interest of the established church to allow God to speak directly to His followers.

"nowhere in the Bible is there a hint that the world is a globe." Not so, Arthur. The scriptures clearly show the earth is round.

"There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze, who spreads them out like a tent in which to dwell,"

According to the King James version: "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in"

" He is stretching out the north over the empty place,
Hanging the earth upon nothing;"

And the King James version "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

I would love to agree with you but the circle of the Earth is flat - as are all circles.

There are many mentions in the Bible of the four corners of the earth, the edges of the Earth and mentions of the foundations of the earth (and the earth shall not be moved) and the pillars of the earth.

The idea that the heavens would be as a tent in which to dwell surely indicates that the heavens are seen as a dome or vertical structure placed over the flat earth in the same way as any tent is?

It would only be possible for the devil to tempt Jesus with all the nations of the earth if they could all be seen. they could only be seen if the earth is flat.

The quotation from Job is very contentious. Hanging the earth from what and with what over nothing? Certainly the idea that the Earth is suspended over nothing would have been a very radical thought in biblical times.

I'm laughing! You have covered so many subjects in this one intel and there have been so many comments that I don't know where to start or even if I should start!

A "circle" doesn't have 4 corners.*grin* So I'll say that a circle could mean a marble-like sphere.

So many scriptures are symbolical and to base a belief on/or to argue against a belief using these scriptures is impossible. As the saying goes .. don't sweat the small stuff. One needs to go to the basic doctrines of religion. Do they originate from the Bible or not? I don't dismiss the canonicity of all the Bible books. If God made man and the earth to live on, certainly "He" was capable of having a book of guidance for mankind written and preserved. The Bible provides sound counsel that can enable us to have a happy family life. Theories and practices involving family life have changed many times, and the results we see today are not good.

Those who know and apply what the Bible says have stable, happy families. (Now, how's that for a blanket statement. LOL)

There are far too many instances of the Bible being used to create ill-will and prejudice for it to be held as the recipe for stability.

God did not need to create a book for the guidance of mankind. He was made all to aware of the imperfection of man when His simple prohibition of eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge was ignored. Don't forget, if we are to believe the story, that was an instruction directly from God - not some third party report.

If the reported words of jesus could be regarded as the definitive 'how to live a Christian life' instruction manual, don't you think that there would be no room for argument? It isn't necessary to have a schematic diagram of your micro-wave oven in order to understand the simple instructions.

God provided the basis for an acceptable life within the ten commandments. Don't forget these were handed down to Moses so that, from that point on, followers would, indeed, know how to behave and save themselves from the damnation that they seemed to be embracing with some fervour.

Maybe Jesus was sent to earth to remind us of the commandments but also to help us to understand them?

"It would only be possible for the devil to tempt Jesus with all the nations of the earth if they could all be seen. they could only be seen if the earth is flat."

Not sure what you are saying Arthur. Surely not that the earth is flat. And whether flat or not Jesus wouldn't have been able to see ALL the kingdoms of the earth, would he? On a clear day a number of miles yes, but not the whole earth. Clearly he didn't have to see them when he was being tempted by the Devil, he could picture what was being said to him.

"Maybe Jesus was sent to earth to remind us of the commandments but also to help us to understand them?"

If you read Matthew 22V37-40 it shows that Jesus spoke of two laws on which all the commandments rest. Love of God, and love of our neighbour. On these two commandments the whole Law (including the 10 commandments) hangs.

For this story to be written at the time it was, it has to be understood that seeing was believing.

The circle of the earth mentioned earlier is the result of looking all around from one point. The distance you can see in any direction depends upon your elevation and the elevation of the places to which you are looking. We now know that the Earth is globular so we can explain why such a view would present as a circle if the viewer was surrounded by a plain.

The story of the temptations really does not make any sense since turning stones into bread, jumping off a high place and receiving all the kingdoms of the Earth simply pale in comparison with the heavenly rewards that Jesus already knew were His. This is probably why they receive little exposure.

I agree that Jesus was probably sent to earth to remind mankind of the commandments handed down by God but I believe He was also sent in response to the need to replace the priesthood with with less worldly teachers.

The copyright for this content entitled "The tyranny of the Bible" has been specified by the contributor as:

This content may be copied and distributed (but not modified), as long as the original author is acknowledged with a link back to the content page. If you use this content according to the license specified, you must link to the following URL: