What is the Christian (KJV) Bible?

Jane - posted on 08/30/2011

There are 12 different segments on You Tube, meaning 60 minutes worth. Odds are it is most of the show.

JuLeah - posted on 08/30/2011

Cool ... this looks like just a few minutes of the total program, but cool

Jane - posted on 08/30/2011

Banned from the Bible is on YouTube right now:

JuLeah - posted on 08/30/2011

I was thinking about a documentary on the history channel; Banned from the Bible was the title I think. I took notes, but didn't recall it was from the history channel until I looked it up again ... amazing stuff

Jenny - posted on 08/30/2011

Ta :)

Jane - posted on 08/30/2011

From 2008: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/ori...

From 2009: http://video.pbs.org/video/1051895565/

Jenny - posted on 08/30/2011

@ JuLeah
"Add: Of course all of this can be looked and varified too. PBS did a special not long back on this topic ... "

Can you give me the link for this?

Jane - posted on 08/29/2011

The King James Bible is simply the translation into English that King James ordered, using what he considered the best minds of his time, 47 scholars who were members of the Church of England. It took from 1604 to 1611 and James gave the translators instructions intended to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy, not the ideas of the Puritans. Thus it was biased from the get-go.



In common with most other translations of the period, the New Testament was translated from Greek, the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew text, while the Apocrypha were translated from the Greek and Latin. They also used just about all of the other existing translations, in German, French, etc. They really didn't use original manuscripts, unlike some modern translations.



King James did not like marginal notes so they were left out of the Old and New Testament translations. It was the third such official English translation. And the Apocrypha were included, at least until 1644, when the C of E decided they weren't the actual testaments.



It cannot be the direct word of God because it is in English, and all the various prophets, disciples, etc., through which this word was delivered spoke languages other than English. It is a translation and a biased construction based on a number of different ancient manuscripts written by a variety of people at a variety of times in a variety of languages and from a variety of viewpoints.



No way can you follow the whole 1000+ pages as literal truth because there are way too many contradictions. However, it does contain some good ideas, interesting stories, nice poetry, and a lot of genealogy of people long dead. It also contains some really bad ideas best left ignored.

JuLeah - posted on 08/29/2011

BTw, this isn't to say I don't believe in the Teachings of Jesus - I do.

I don't believe in all the political claptrap assigned to him 300 yr after his death - I don't believe in the way government and human kind used his teaching to enhance their own social power and evil ends

I don't believe in the way his name has been used to justify fear/hate/oppression

JuLeah - posted on 08/28/2011

Ok, first of all, was volunteering with the PD on a swing shift. It is 4:30 and I am too tired to sleep, if that makes sense.



So, forgive misspells please ….



There were many branches of Christianity practiced back in the day. Not all followed the teachings of Jesus.



The word Christ, I assume most know, is Greek for Messiah and Messiah means anointed one.



Jesus’ name was Jesus. It was not Jesus Christ, or Christ, Jesus. It was not Messiah, Jesus or Jesus the Messiah.



He was just Jesus.



He was not ever called the Messiah because he was never anointed with the holy oils.

There were many people killed by the Roman’s for the crimes Jesus was accused of.



When Constantine had his vision and decided all of Rome would now practice Christianity, it did not go over well. Jesus had been executed 300 years prior, but now Rome was to follow his teachings???



There was much fighting in Rome over religion. Each branch of Christianity had their own holidays, their own stories, their own practices and beliefs.



Constantine demanded unity for the sake of Rome. He gathered all the learned people, the Bishops, and others of influence and explained they were to create one bible so all holidays matched, all beliefs matches … he didn’t really care which beliefs were followed as long as the fighting stopped.



50 copies were to be made and placed in churches around Rome.



It was at this meeting they set the date for Easter (Jews honor Esther at that time of year) and Christmas; Yes, Jesus was actually born in the spring, but the Jews had a big winter holiday, as did the Pagans. The Christians needed one also.



They put in place all the rituals the church would practice. They selected, of the many hundreds, which stories to include in their bible and which to exclude.



One stumbling block was around Jesus’ lineage. One Bishop believed him to be half human, half God – as found in Greek mythology. The rest didn’t and held the line that he was a mortal man, but the Bishop would not give in. The others finally did. Jesus because ‘The Son of God’



In many stories Mary was reported to have been half God half Human, but the men gathered at this meeting left those stories out. Oddly, the Koran, devotes much time to Mary, far more then Christians do.



The idea of ‘Original Sin’ came about during this meeting. It was in response to, “Yah but how will we get parents to actually bring their kids?”



Well, if kids are sinners at birth and if only the church can baptize and ‘save their souls’ the kids will be brought



The powers that be wanted the church to be the only conduit to God. In other religions, communion with God could occur in many ways. You didn’t need a priest.



In many of the Pagan practices, sex (especially for men) was a fun path to God.



The church wanted to end this, and so made ‘sex’ a sin except when approved of by the church (Marriage)

BTW, this was when the stories of Adam and Eve got so jacked up



‘Last rights’ was a way to keep people involved through out their lives.



I could go on, but … actually tired now



Anyway, this is how (I was taught) the Christian Bible came to be. And people question why I don’t take it literally?



Add: Of course all of this can be looked and varified too. PBS did a special not long back on this topic ...

Stifler's - posted on 08/27/2011

I think it's important to just take the moral of the story and leave the rest of the poorly translated details. Doing the right thing is the main thing.

Minnie - posted on 08/27/2011

The KJV Bible is a translation of various manuscripts, a compilation called the 'textus receptus.'



It is a westernized translation. Yes Christians say the Bible is infallible, perfect, has not been changed, error-free. And many IFBs will tell you the KJV is the ONLY translation to be read by Christians as it is 'God's word for English-speaking people."



Phooey. Like I said, its a westernized translation. Full of western interpretation- words added in because the translators weren't Hebrew. Interpreted from a linear-thinking western perspective.



I prefer the English Standard Version.



I think that it is VERY detrimental to follow much of the KJV word for word. One simply CANNOT come away with what the author intended by reading it that way. Hebrews are oriental, circular-thinking people with a pictoral language.



The KJV Bible has been used to oppress so many people, cause injury to so many more and furthur the traditions of western fundamental Patriarchial Christianity.

Lissa - posted on 08/27/2011

I just think the bible is really a book of handy hints (do not partake of blood, you will get some horrible disease if you don't cook your meat) and moral tales(suitable for the time period) along side stories of a man who existed but who in my opinion was not the son of God, just a good man who was a revolutionary.

Jenni - posted on 08/27/2011

I was just watching Decoding the Ancients last night with David Daube. It was on Christianity being practiced in the Roman Army and along side Jewish followerers of the faith. The worship of Christian in the Roman army is believed to predate Constatine the Great. The show was on the discoveries of the SATOR stone which I had no idea had Christian origins. I use to use it as a magical implement during my teenaged Wiccan phase. Apparently, worship of Christianity by Roman citizens and the SATOR stone has origins to 60 AD.



An inscribed SATOR was found in the entrance to the house of a Roman soldier in Pompeii. Do you recall that famous painting from Pompeii, the one of the man and his wife? Apparently it was that house where it was found, along with curses against the evilness of Pompeii (thought to be a Soddam and Gommorah style city with it's streets lined with brothals).

Lissa - posted on 08/27/2011

What I find interesting is earlier today when I was reading this my daughter was asking me what I meant by it just being a version of.
So I said to her imagine Daddy was in charge of everything you heard,saw or read and he only let you see things the way he wanted them, would that be the truth about everything. She said no that would just be what he believes.
So there you go wisdom from a seven year old.

Jenni - posted on 08/27/2011

I love hearing from you on this one Juleah, I wish I had a better understanding of the ancient Hebrew texts. They sound far more enlightened than the KJV of Christianity. Not to mention, I love me, some ancient history and culture. ;)

Jenni - posted on 08/27/2011

Wanted to add, that Christianity (the fledging religion) was used for power, business and exploitation. An ingenius and ambitious endeavour by Emperor Constantine to hold onto the crown of Rome and for the Roman empire to live on (after the land itself was taken over by barbarian hoards). He is responsible for the spread of Christianity and the invention of the Roman Catholic Church. Systematically raising the religion.

Rosie - posted on 08/27/2011

you're so smart jennifer!! lol. i had no idea about that stuff. gah, i get so angry now when i hear stuff like this, i feel i was lied to and misled all my life.

JuLeah - posted on 08/27/2011

I think it helps to think of the audience for which it was intended. The Hebrews were slaves and knew nothing but bondage. How could they possible understand or believe pure love?



They knew master and whip. They knew hard work and the vengeance of a cruel king.



What they needed was a guide to live; a day to day plan for how to behave, interact, create society.



What I was taught was this: The people, fresh out of slavery, stood at the base of Mt. Sinai.



God made God’s presence known and ‘spoke’ to the people. They could not handle it, they could not deal. It was too much. Too big, too intense. It was a love they could not understand and it frightened them. They begged Moses to end the ‘conversation’ and go alone to speak with God on their behalf.



Moses was on the mountain in communion with God. Moses, who had not been raised a slave, understood unconditional love; was able to understood God’s message.



God, the story goes, wrote the ‘ten commandments’ with just one sentence “I AM”



Because, once that is understood, the rest will follow.



Moses brought this all back down the mountain to show the people.



Meanwhile, in fear they had returned to the old ways, the religion they had been raised with and understood.



Moses saw the golden calf they had made and broke the tablets God made with words to this effect; “Damn it all! These people are not ready for this message, it’s too much”



So, the poor old guy went back up the mountain and asked for a slower approach.



The ten commandments, as many of us know them, were then carved into stone. The Jews, the Muslims, and different branches of Christianity translate the ten in a different way, but for all, there are ten.



The commandments were meant to be a guild for life; near impossible to live by, but a good thing to strive for.



Now, the commandants, in Hebrew are a different thing; Thou Shall Not Murder, for example … in Hebrew, it is more like, “Thou shall not draw blood to the surface of the skin” Which means, no slitting ones throat, but also means you shall not cause embarrassment, cause a person to blush, to feel shame – especially in public.



The whole honor thy mother and father thing … yah, really is it more about honoring your family – parents honor children too.



Anyway, the story ends with the idea that when we are ‘ready’ there will be a shift in awareness, shift in consciousness, a new understanding, new paradigm … in the year 6000 as we reckon time, we will arrive in the messianic era. It will be a time when the majority, for the first time might truly understand God’s original message as a few of us have understood it throughout the ages…. Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. Mother Teresa …. There are others, but they are in the minority.

Jenni - posted on 08/27/2011

Indeed Julianne, it is a dark read.



I believe the Old Testament in the KJV is as Juleah described. A highly revised version of the ancient Hebrew texts. The recorded history of the ancient Isrealites that had been passed down by spoken word for centuries before actually being recorded. The stories were based on mythology and faith lore but included some historical significance. Much like the epic of the Iliad by Homer, the story of Trojan war. Which was passed down through generations 'round the campfire (so to speak) for 500 years before Homer recorded the epic poem. Grains of truth still remained to the story, but what it had become over the years was a glorified epic.



All ancient cultures passed down their history through spoken words; stories, fables, myths before the time of recorded history.

So imo ancient Hebrew texts are one of the best examples of a most complete collection of an ancient people's spoken/verbal history incorporated with their religious beliefs and culture. (phew! run on sentence)



The New Testament- Like Julianne, I suspect Jesus was a real person. A historical figure comparable to modern day Ghandi, Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King Jr., a passifist activist. ;)

But I believe the New Testament's account of him had been glorified to fuel the new emerging religion of Christianity. Much of the myths about Jesus were adopted from convential ideas of older Pagan relgions:



Vespatian who used his spittle to heal a blind man.

Apollonius of Tyana who raised a girl from the dead.

Dionysus who turned water into wine.

Romulus described as the son of a god, born from a mortal virgin.

Alexander the Great, Dionysus, Scipio Africanus (Scipio Africanus, for Christ's sake) and Augustus also described as sons of gods born to mortal women.

Ancient writers tell us that in general ancient people believed in eternal life, with the good going to the Elysian Fields and the not so good going to Hades

Hades = Hell

Gods caring about the well being of humans, Osiris promising his people eternal life.

The sacred rites of Demeter at Eleusis are described as bringing believers happiness in their eternal life.



It appears that Pagan religions that predate Christianity had the same conventional ideas about gods. To me, Christianity was merely a product of its time. A perversian of the ancient Hebrew texts and a new character and we have the KJV Bible.



Edit: apologize, I hastily rewrote this after I did a $%^$%$#%#@% when COM ate my original post close to completion. :P

Julianne - posted on 08/27/2011

I think its just a story. I read it and found it rather violent and horrific. How anyone can say its about peace and love is beyond me.

Julianne - posted on 08/27/2011

Jesus the person DID exist. HE is recorded and proven to have been a REAL LIVE PERSON.
The only thing in question is if he is the profit, the only son of god. He was real though.

JuLeah - posted on 08/27/2011

You said the same thing as I did Lissa, but with fewer words ... "It's all in the title" I like that

Lissa - posted on 08/27/2011

Though not as detailed, your answers are always well thought out and articulated well JuLeah, whereas I usually srcibble nonsense that only I understand :)

Lissa - posted on 08/27/2011

Well my answer was going to be very similar to JuLeah's , the answer is all in the title, King James Version.

JuLeah - posted on 08/27/2011

Well, King James wrote it ... chose what would go in, what would be left out.



Did he have an agenda?



He was just one of many who wrote or rewrote for their own ends.



The story of Adam and Eve, and I love this story, is one of the best (though there are thousands) examples as to why the bible was not ever meant to be taken literally.



This is long enough to be its own spin off, so I will just say: There is the Adam and Eve story the Christians tell - the one most know - which differs SO much from the Jewish version that it is hardly the same story at all.



The gender of God, I have been taught, is not defined anywhere in the bible – My Rabbi says: God does not have a penis



It is a violation of a commandment to 'create a false image' of God - so, to call God… He, or Father or King .... Puts an image in the mind - God is not human, not a man, not a woman, not anything we can understand or visualize ... God IS



Yet, the bible uses defining, image concluding language all the time - in the translations - not the original text



The concept of 'sin' does not exist in the original text, just in the translations



The concept of 'Fear God' does not exists in the original text - but the word, which translates best as respect, was often translated as fear



There are many words in ancient Hebrew we simply don’t know the meaning of … scholars admit they are guessing



AND, the original text was written WITHOUT vowels, so in many cases we had to guess the meaning of a word.



For example, the word PN … might be pin, might be pain, might be pen, might be pan …. No vowels, so guessing happens. Often we can guess based on context, but not always



It is part of recorded history; the canonizing of the Bible. It is part of recorded history that a group of scholars gathered to decide which stories to include, which to exclude and why.



To blindly follow the ‘law’ of another without using your own thinker is beyond detrimental, it is cowardly.

That anyone would take this as literal … well, I just can’t wrap my brain around that

Carolee - posted on 08/27/2011

To me, it's a book of metaphors that was originally designed to help guide people to be the best that they can be. And this is where the saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" comes to mind.

Jason and I actually had a conversation about the "what ifs" of the Bible's beginnings. As in: "What if it was originally written by some random guy's friends after he died?" Like, if they were just sitting around after his funeral, getting piss-drunk, saying all these "great" things their friend had done and how he had SO much potential. All the embellishments kept topping one another, then, when they were REALLY drunk, one of them gets the idea to write all of it down. Somebody finds it the next morning at the bar, and takes it literally (because, for some reason, they didn't know better), and BAM there's Christianity.

The thing is, we don't know. None of us WILL know until it's "too late".

Rosie - posted on 08/27/2011

i'm not entirely sure, but i think that jesus COULD have existed, and subsequently the stories about him, or others in the bible are completely tall tales.
i just am at a loss as to how after a flood that wiped out the entire population except for noah, his wife, and their sons and the sons wives, these few people could repopulate the earth-and OBVIOUSLY there is some incest going on there. not just the incest thing, but how do these people know the stories of everyone that lived before them? and how did they successfully pass them on without messing anything up.
i don't believe people lived hundreds on years, i don't believe someone lived in the belly of a big fish, i don't believe a god would create man and woman with original sin, then impregnant a woman with himself, so he can be "born" then once alive he would kill himself as a sacrifice to himself, to save us from the sin he originally condemned us to.

there are so many words that have been shown that could be lost in translation, it's unreal. i just don't trust anything that comes out of that book anymore.