Replies

When you people finally admit that the Bible is more than the 'New Testament' then you can start making assinine claims to the Bible again - but until then, remember that the front 3/4s of the CATHOLIC BIBLE owes nothing to the Roman Church.

Please do not direct your comment about "assinine claims" towards me, since I made no such thing. The Christian Bible, as it exists today, owes its existence largely to the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, due to its councils and the copying skills of monks throughout the centuries.

The Christian Bible, as it exists today, owes its existence largely to the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, due to its councils and the copying skills of monks throughout the centuries.

Even when using a source that is relieved from copyright it is still polite to cite your source. If you people were polite the first line of your copyright claim would say, "We owe the largest part of this document to the Jews and their careful preservation of the Scriptures". Instead you make assinine comments about delivering to the world "the Bible".

BTW, If you knew anything about textual transmission you would know that the 'New Testament' is not a single document. It is not even thousands of documents. It is many thousands. And there are so many variations and omissions that it makes the head spin. That is not to say that it cannot be derived from - it is only to say that if you people had done a better job of preserving what you claim comes from you, it would have made it easier for people like me.

On the other hand, when the earliest known copy of the Masor from Isaiah (Codex Leningrad) was compared to the great Isaiah scroll discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls, it was THE SAME except for some punctuation. Separated by 1,300 years of scribes, and the Jews had preserved it. That is why the 'New Testament' says that the oracles of G-d were entrusted to the Jews - not Catholics or Protestants.

BTW, I am not Jewish.

"The Christian Bible, as it exists today, owes its existence largely to the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, due to its councils and the copying skills of monks throughout the centuries."

True, as far as the New Testament is concerned.

Just for some historical trivia, it was primarily the Celtic Church tradition of monks that did this, not the Roman, which did not have nearly a strong tradition of monestaries --- which, while sometime unified with Rome (founded allegedly by Joseph of Aramathia, joined with Rome in the Synod of Whitby (like 300AD something), then broke off again just PRIOR TO Henry VIII, but was always a bunch of savages (think Braveheart)and a pain in Rome's buttocks in the interim).