Thursday, March 14, 2013

A Lamp In The Dark:untold history of Bible ~ Full Film

A Lamp In The Dark:untold history of Bible ~ Full Film

  • being polite i think religion causes division between ppl and families .over 50 mill live to the rc church alone . we really need to learn from each other or theres no hope an i dont believe that
    · in playlist conspiracy docs
  • amy2x
    Satan runs Catholicism. Nothing to learn from that Whore Church.
    · 2 in reply to worlee60

Video Responses

This video is a response to Tares Among the Wheat-Preview(Film by Christian J. Pinto) Sequel to "A Lamp In The Dark"

All Comments (2,810)

Sign in now to post a comment!
  • don26gr
    You said you saw the documentary. What about of the part of this documentary where the reformeers started reading from the original greek texts when byzantines went to west after the fall of constatinople.They used some of the collection not all...Even today the catholic Bible i think has some books wich the protestants Bibles don't have(not 100% sure though)
  • don26gr
    it is better to have 1000 popes 1 mile away who as wrong as they can be they always will encourage you to read the Bible and therefore you can see yourself if they are right or wrong than to have 1 who his word is law and stronger than the Bible and who will encourage you to listen to the pope and not read the Bible.
  • MrRichardwinkel
    The bible is collection of writings that are to read in church. It is special in the sense that it is part of tradition, however, it is not all of tradition. It was a tradition that the early church had, however, many of them were read as well the didache, 1st clement and others. Some places had more books some had less. The protestants took the collection that rome made and made it their own. If the protestants are so anti-catholic then why do they use a roman catholic book?
    · in reply to don26gr (Show the comment)
  • don26gr
    What do you mean so much later?The canon of 4th century is much later?If the canon doesn't fit you then there are the gospels and the epistles of Paul that were read from the 1st century.Of course we most follow the Bible and get the information from there.Of course the Bible was man written so as the Old testament.Does that mean that the Bible is not special just because is man written?? I don't think so..
  • MrRichardwinkel
    I don't know what your beliefs are however, as the reformers believe that we must follow the bible and get all theology and information form there. So, if the the bible was created so much later, obviously the early church never followed the bible since it wasn't made yet. So, why should be think the bible is something special since, it was made by people in the church. The reformer believe that it made the church and other churches have other bibles and books with different stuff in them.
    · in reply to don26gr (Show the comment)
  • don26gr
    Still today the list is not the same.Even today some churches have other canon to their Bibles.What does that mean?Nothing. What is the matter if Athanasius spoke with the authority of the church or not. Who is the leader of any church??Nobody,only Christ.What matters is that since the 4th century there was a canon of the books.Since 4th century there was a basis from where somebody could start and agree or not agree with the doctrines of every church that would arise.Catholics or Reformers.
  • MrRichardwinkel
    no, just because Athanasius wrote about them in 367 does not mean that he was speaking with the authority of the whole church. If you look earlier then that at the constitine bible, they have different books. There were different list floating around the world. This is the first time we get a list of the 27 books of the new testment. Other parts of the world came to different conclusions. The books of revalation was not accepted until the syrian church accepted it in the around the year 900.
    · in reply to don26gr (Show the comment)
  • don26gr
    Yes my friend the books were approved during the church. But this books were approved to be the cannon of the new testament since the 4th century and not 900.. So from the year 367 NT is widely approved to be 27 books just as today..
  • MrRichardwinkel
    why do you slander things you know nothing about? Is that what jesus would do?
    · in reply to amy2x (Show the comment)
  • MrRichardwinkel
    no, actually the bible as you know it is a collection of books that was approved to be read during church. The last book that was approved was the book of revelation in the year 900. This is my problem with this video, It acts like the bible was just there. It doesn't take into the account that the bible evolved, and it evolved differently in different places. The reason the bible has 66 books is because that was the collection rome used, not the whole church. just rome.
    · in reply to don26gr (Show the comment)

No comments:

Post a Comment