Lots of heresy I saw in all of your posts.
I'll take that as a compliment.
Martin Luther didn't agree with the Council, and got the version that was closer to the original.
Where did he find it? How did he know it was more original? What council, btw, did he disagree with?
Who am I gonna believe? I will believe Martin Luther, because in Catholicism, Church sets the doctrine, not the Bible.
The Catholic church differentiates between doctrine and dogma. Everything in the Bible, presumably, is dogmatic, as well as, presumably, papal edicts made ex cathedra (with infallibility). It's the stuff that is considered to come straight from God, and is not up to debate. Dogma is what defines the faith.
Everything else is doctrine. Doctrine is not considered as central to the faith as dogma is. Disagreeing with doctrine is usually just lawyer-talk, while attempting to find the proper interpretation of dogma is the work of theologians (is my impression; I could be wrong).
And there was a whole lot of laws Catholic Church set that were in direct violation with the scripture, just as an example: Each sin had a price tag that you had to pay to the church if you wanted you sin to be forgiven. You could buy a place in Heaven for yourself.
You misunderstand indulgences, which is what you're referring to. An indulgence is a "get out of purgatory free" card. It can only be received for sins that would be forgiven anyway, after time spent in purgatory. Instead of the temporary punishment there, the indulgence says you don't have to go.
Martin Luther was not against indulgences. He was against simony, which is the practice of receiving payment for church services, such as an indulgence. Simony was a crime in the Catholic Church before Martin Luther came around, but it was practiced anyway. This was the injustice that Luther was angry about, not Catholic doctrine itself (in re. indulgences at least).
I don't believe such version of the Bible is original, it is maybe older, but far from original.
"Such version"? Which version of the Bible attaches price tags to sins?
Maybe there was no one in the Garden with Jesus, maybe person writing it took an educated guess. Matbe there was no "mustard tree" who cares? The main point of the whole thing stays unchanged.
You haven't said a word in justification that the bible hasn't changed. Even if it hasn't, why is that impressive? If the original is fiction, then the fact that it stayed the same since it was written doesn't make it any less fictitious. I don't think Beowulf has changed much since it was first put to paper....
Anyway it's quite clear that the bible has changed. If nothing else, it was extended when new things happened, and new books added.
Jesus - son of God (knows everything about everything) was without sin, he was sacrificed on the cross to pay for all our sins, because he was without sin.
Yeah so this is probably dogma, not doctrine. That being said, I don't recall Jesus ever saying, "God is my father in a different sense than the sense in which he is your farther. I want you to take this literally and not interpret it is a parable or metaphor." All he did was refer to god as "my father" and "our father". When people pressed him on the issue, his response was "It is you who say I am."
Maybe I missed it though. Can you point me to the relevant verses?
Jesus quoted Old Testament and creation week more than 20 times. Suppose creation didn't happen the way it is written, in a week. Such assumption would mean Jesus was telling a lie when he spoke of creation, which would make him a sinner.
Suppose creation didn't happen the way it is written. Then when *you* quote it, are you lying? Not by any definition of "lie" that I know. You lie when you make a statement you believe to be false, in the hopes that others will believe it to be true. It's entirely conceivable to me that Jesus could simply have been wrong, but believed he was right, along with the rest of the mystical bits of the Bible.
Adam and Noah did write part of Genesis, so as Moses, and they singed it too. Look in Genesis for a phrase "These are the generations of..." after these words the style of writing changes and even the way God is addressed changes.
In what sense does this constitute a signature?
Genesis has a total of 10 different writers, which were all first-hand witnesses of the event described.
So, I wouldn't get much for this on eBay because most Christians know this already.
Yeah yeah, whatever. Your notion of knowledge is quite different from one that permits rational discussion whose non-futile goal is to arrive at a new, better understanding of the world.
-Erasmus
Poll