Just my two cents...

[jarhead]

Wrong Catwoman. The Religious board says "this board shall not be used for religious / spiritual debates or bashing"

[Wilma]

Varmit, I really respect your beliefs and your knowledge of the Bible, but you have to remember that the contents of the Bible is a history of a time when the Christian religion was in danger of being eradicated.  The history of the Christian religion was not written and in books for the access of common people.  Most common people couldn't read anyway.  It was necessary for the Word to be spread by mouth to keep it from being lost.  Christians were persecuted.  I would have to go back to my lesson books to come up with all of what the Christian religion went through to survive.  It was necessary to speak about it and to help people find the way.  Today, example speaks louder than words.  Don't you know someone whom you would like to be like and don't you do whatever you can to be like them?  Sure I think that if you gather up all the little heathens in the neighborhood and take them to Bible School where you teach them how to be better people, you are obeying the word of God.  I did that for years.  And most of them are good people now.  But forcing the Word on people whom you judge to be in need of it is more likely to push them away.

[Anmar]

I don't really want to get into this for personal reasons.  But I'll just add that its pretty sad t hat sometimes the people who claim to be the most religious are also the most hateful and judgmental people around.

[srkruzich]

Varmit, I really respect your beliefs and your knowledge of the Bible, but you have to remember that the contents of the Bible is a history of a time when the Christian religion was in danger of being eradicated.  The history of the Christian religion was not written and in books for the access of common people.

? Where did you get this idea?  It was the common people that spread christianity and they did so through letters as well as through word of  mouth.  These letters we're written and read by all.  The reason there wasn't a whole lot of bibles is duplication problems.  Each letter had to be transcribed by hand. 

Most common people couldn't read anyway. 

Again wilma this is NOT true.  The people we're very educated. 
In the early Republic, there were no public schools, so boys were taught to read and write by their parents, or by educated slaves, called paedagogi, usually of Greek origin.[81][82][83] The primary aim of education during this period was to train young men in agriculture, warfare, Roman traditions, and public affairs.[11] Young boys learned much about civic life by accompanying their fathers to religious and political functions, including the Senate for the sons of nobles.[11] The sons of nobles were apprenticed to a prominent political figure at the age of 16, and campaigned with the army from the age of 17 (this system was still in use among some noble families into the imperial era).[11]

Educational practices were modified after the conquest of the Hellenistic kingdoms in the 3rd century BC and the resulting Greek influence, although it should be noted that Roman educational practices were still much different than Greek ones.[11][84] If their parents could afford it, boys and some girls at the age of 7 were sent to a private school outside the home called a ludus, where a teacher (called a litterator or a magister ludi, and often of Greek origin) taught them basic reading, writing, arithmetic, and sometimes Greek, until the age of 11.[11][83][85]

Beginning at age 12, students went to secondary schools, where the teacher (now called a grammaticus) taught them about Greek and Roman literature.[11][11] At the age of 16, some students went on to rhetoric school (where the teacher, almost always Greek, was called a rhetor).[11][11] Education at this level prepared students for legal careers, and required that the students memorize the laws of Rome.[11] Pupils went to school every day, except religious festivals and market days. There were also summer holidays.

It was necessary for the Word to be spread by mouth to keep it from being lost.

The word was completely written down when john wrote revelation.  He lived to be around 90 and knew christ. so that would mean he would have been around the same age of christ.  So no word of mouth was not used to keep the record.  IN FACT all 4 gospels were written down and completed shortly after christ left this earth.  Along with pauls letters and revelation, all of the bible was complete before 100 ad.  As far as the OT, the only period that was written down from oral tradition was the pentetuch and was completed by AAron.  This did include oral history from the beginning.   After that records were kept and written down.   

[Wilma]

srkruzich, if you would stop taking things out of context and leaving the full text behind, it would be easier for all of us.  I did not say that the Bible was not written.  I said that the Bible was not written and in books for the access of common people.  Let me translate this for you.  The Bible was not available for common people to read for themselves.  It was not printed until 1456 after the printing press was invented.  Do you really think that the common people had access to any of the lovely hand written copies of the Bible?  Not even all the educated people had access to them.

The people that could afford to were educated.  Most of the people were too poor to even think of education.

It WAS necessary for the Word to be spread by mouth as (see first paragraph above).  The Word was also spread by handwritten letters but wasn't this just another method of word of mouth.  Nothing was printed for the general use of the people.  The point of this is that Witnessing orally is not as necessary as it used to be.  Witnessing by example is as effective as words, maybe more so and that is what I was saying to begin with.

And, yes, the Christian religion did face eradication.  Why else did Christians have to hide in the Catacombs?

[Varmit]

And yet once again...This should be on the Religion board...Not the Political board.

If you don't want to read or take part in a discussion then don't.  Fairly simple solution don't you think?  What difference does it make where its at?

"Hateful" and "Judgemental" are somewhat subjective aren't they?  Doesn't it matter which side of that argument you're standing on? 

[srkruzich]

srkruzich, if you would stop taking things out of context and leaving the full text behind, it would be easier for all of us.  I did not say that the Bible was not written.  I said that the Bible was not written and in books for the access of common people.  Let me translate this for you.  The Bible was not available for common people to read for themselves.  It was not printed until 1456 after the printing press was invented.  Do you really think that the common people had access to any of the lovely hand written copies of the Bible?  Not even all the educated people had access to them.

Absolutely thats where the gathering together came in.  each of the churches were a small room that all of the scriptures that had been copied and passed to each of the churches wete kept.  The common folks made up the churches.  Come on, it was even pointed out that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to accept christ.  So i doubt you would have found a rich man in the churches.   All the jews could read.  And most if not all of the people during that time knew aramaic, greek and hebrew.   If you had studied some on the origins of a NT church, you would know that the common man was the church. 

The people that could afford to were educated.  Most of the people were too poor to even think of education.

again who did paul go to minister to?  mostly greek and romans. The greek and romans taught their children to read. All of them were homeschooled unless they were rich enough to go to private schools. 

It WAS necessary for the Word to be spread by mouth as (see first paragraph above).  The Word was also spread by handwritten letters but wasn't this just another method of word of mouth.  Nothing was printed for the general use of the people. 

That is simply not true.  The average joe could read the scrolls in each of their churches.  Illiteracy only happened after the catholic church decided that the common man was not able to read Gods word without a priest interpreting it for them. 

The point of this is that Witnessing orally is not as necessary as it used to be.  Witnessing by example is as effective as words, maybe more so and that is what I was saying to begin with.

Why isn't witnessing orally not ncecessary?   First of all, in order for the unbeliever to be able to read the word we have to put it in their hands.  that requires oral witnessing.

And, yes, the Christian religion did face eradication.  Why else did Christians have to hide in the Catacombs?

Well Eradication by the catholic church, yeah you are right about that.   But God preserved his word through the NT church. 

[Wilma]

Again you have left out part of the text.  I said that "witnessing orally is not as necessary as it used to be."  I did not say "that it is not necessary."

And all these scrolls were avaliable for the common people to take home and study?

[srkruzich]

Again you have left out part of the text.  I said that "witnessing orally is not as necessary as it used to be."  I did not say "that it is not necessary."

And all these scrolls were avaliable for the common people to take home and study?

You need to read up on how the churches were set up during christs time. then you will understand that no they were not illiterate. The majority could read and write.

[Varmit]

Okay, thanks for the history lesson you guys, but frankly (for me anyway) it doesn't matter...for God said,

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: And lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."  Matthew 28: 19-20 

To me witnessing is not so much necessary as it is commanded.  If we take the view that we don't need to witness and that God will just come to the people without their asking then we should quit going to chruch, or sending missionaries to places like China, N. Korea, inner city slums, or anywhere else for that matter.  We may as well forget that God sent His son to minister to us before He died.  If the written text was to be the only means of delivery for Gods word why didn't He just use tablets like He did with moses and allow people to find Him through those? 

Not taking a shot at you wilma, just putting in my 2 cents..thank you though for answering my questions.