Wow! We have diverted our course from the original topic, haven't we! I originally avoided this article and thread because I was getting sick of all the religion-based topics and their circular arguments. As it kept reappearing, though, I thought I'd take a look.

On the surface, I get where Mr Holden is coming from. The Protestant Bible was distinguished from the Catholic Bible first by its translation into the vernacular, then by the removal of some 'apocrypha'. The Catholics took a long time to catch on that this was a good thing, and have still held onto those apocryphal books. Interestingly, when doing some recent study for my Masters, those apocrypha (Maccabees, among others) were the only books of the bible that we used as historical sources (with some reservations). But I diverge.

The benefit of translating the bible into the vernacular was that it allowed ordinary people to read and think for themselves, rather than having teachings dished out to them. It credited some of the recipients with a bit of intelligence (or, perhaps, assumed that they were too stupid to question and would swallow it whole). It follows, then (at least according to this line of thinking), that the Protestant Bible provoked a renaissance of mind, of sorts.

I'm not sure how far I support that argument. I think it was a good thing that the bible was demystified and 'opened up' to the people, but I don't think it was the catalyst that changed our society for the better. People were already questioning, looking outside the Church for answers to life's big questions and proposing alternatives. If you look at the popularity of puritanical movements which rose after the widespread distribution of local-language bibles, and if you look at the self-righteous bigotry that still exists among many religious people (protestant or not), it's possible to support the alternative argument that the Protestant Bible led not to the opening of minds, but to the self-justification of closed minds whose owners now had access to scriptures to back up their beliefs.

Otokonoko

Thanks for heading the thread back on topic. Very informative and honest. A freethinker.

Wish more Christians could take such an objective look at their religion. Huh, make that anyone who remains fixed and close-minded on their chosen ideology.

The risk by releasing any text to the public is to enable people to think for themselves and many do - and to question. A decision made by men for everyone.

Now to open the minds of the dogmatists... maybe not, maybe no-one is home.

;P

I've just finished watching 12 DVD's on the Tudors [Henry VIII} a bloody period of English history of people protesting against the Papal authority as they read the bible in their language
Though Henry's personal motive was carnally based and often ill advised it brought about about reformation against the power of the Roman Church.

The moral is be genuine to your understanding of the truth even if it means martyrdom.

Au contraire, Philo.....

The moral is that if you wield immense power in your own realm, you get to make your own rules (religion).

Philo wrote: "The moral is be genuine to your understanding of the truth even if it means martyrdom."

That moral justifies the suicide bombers who are genuine to their understanding of the truth.

Truth is not a matter of understanding. It is a matter of facts and proof. If your premisses are sound, your logic is reasonable and the facts support your reasoning you may have something approaching the truth. Regardless of how sure you are that you have the truth you may be proven false. Newton's laws of motion were accepted for several hundred years until Einstein showed them indequate.

Philo, you consistently confuse religious belief with truth. No matter how strongly you believe something is true and even if you martyr yourself for what you believe that does not make it true.

david f,
There is a distinct difference between suicide and martyrdom. One is you take your own life because of your beliefs: the other is others take your life because of your beliefs.

You should know me bt now I do not advocate death.