Can anybody upload a photo/scan of New Encyclopædia Britannica (1988), Volume 16, pages 326 and 327?

Here are more Christian Myths to study and compare to the Bible.

Exposed: Six Myths About Christianity

3 One Myth Leads to Another

4 Myth 1: The Soul Is Immortal

5 Myth 2: The Wicked Suffer in Hell

6 Myth 3: All Good People Go to Heaven

7 Myth 4: God Is a Trinity

8 Myth 5: Mary Is the Mother of God

9 Myth 6: God Approves of the Use of Images and Icons in Worship

I find it very amusing that one ignorant JW writes:

"Seeker,if you are actually in the mood to do some research, have a look at The Two Babylons by Alex Hislop (non JW) and see even more evidence of the paganism of the mainstream churches. Enjoy :)"

LOL. I wonder if that JW has actually read that book? I wonder if she is aware that that book says the following:

"The three heads are different arranged in Layard's specimen, but both alike are evidently intended to symbolise the same great truth [of the trinity], although all such representation of the Trinity necessarily and utterly debase the conceptions of those, among whom such images prevail, in regard to the sublime mystery of our faith." - page 17

"While overlaid with idolatry, the recognition of a Trinity was universal in all the ancient nations of the world, proving how deep mated in the human race was the primeval doctrine on this subject, which comes out so distinctly in Genesis." - page 18

So Alexander Hislop believed that the trinity doctrine is a "great truth . . . which comes out so distinctly in Genesis" Clearly "The Two Babylons" does not condemn the trinity doctrine as being an entirely pagan originated false doctrine. It only criticizes the Catholic church's pagan-borrowed, false representations of it.

Isn't it very amusing to see a JW holding up as an authority, a book that says things contrary to their teachings? Oh wait, let me guess, the book is right about everything it says that harmonizes with JW teaching but wrong about everything it says that contradicts JW teachings, right? Silly, Watchtower-quote-mine-deceived JW! LOL

Can't find a scan of that encyclopaedia online, but this whole paragraph in context is quoted here...

"Veneration of the mother of God received its impetus when the Christian Church became the imperial church under Constantine and the pagan masses came under Christian influences and became members of the church. The peoples of the Mediterranean area and the Middle East could not make themselves conversant with the absolute power of God the Father and with the strict patriarchalism of the Jewish idea of God, which the original Christian message had taken over. Their piety and religious consciousness had been formed for millennia through the cult of the "great mother" goddess and the "divine virgin," a development that led all the way from the old popular religions of Babylonia and Assyria to the mystery cults of the late Hellenistic period. Despite the unfavourable presuppositions in the tradition of the Gospels, cultic veneration of the divine virgin and mother found within the Christian Church a new possibility of expression in the worship of Mary as the virgin mother of God, in whom was achieved the mysterious union of the divine Logos with human nature. The spontaneous impulse of popular piety, which pushed in this direction, moved far in advance of the practice and doctrine of the church. In Egypt, Mary was, at an early point, already worshiped under the title of Theotokos--an expression that Origen used in the 3rd century. The Council of Ephesus (431) raised this designation to a dogmatic standard. To the latter, the second Council of Constantinople (553) added the title "eternal Virgin." In the prayers and hymns of the Orthodox Church the name of the mother of God is invoked as often as is the name of Christ and the Holy Trinity. (see also Index: Great Mother of the Gods)"

And you are correct that the quoted words you mentioned in brackets "[that of pagans converted to Christianity]*" were deliberately inserted and added as a misquote!

Seeker,if you are actually in the mood to do some research, have a look at The Two Babylons by Alex Hislop (non JW) and see even more evidence of the paganism of the mainstream churches. Enjoy :)

See Carib man using his useful double forked tongue to wriggle any statement around - a real christendom trait :) And yes, I have read the book, I got it very cheaply from amazon :) It is now with about the 10th person Ive loaned it to. And dont be so silly, the fact is it shows just where the paganism of the trinity, the confessionals, the clothing, the idols, the rituals all come from. Stop wriggling.

Sorry cant help you but do you know the watchtowers infamous book "Should you believe in the trinity?" has been taken out of circulation by them ?

Its not surprising they have. Many JWs who have used that book have been taken to task by people and authorities who have pointed out the amount of biased, inaccurate and twisting of historical facts to back up their anti-trinity doctrine including what you are alluding to. This book is a utter disgrace and shows how low they will scoop to.

(1Tim 4:1) Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and DOCTRINES of DEVILS.

v:2 Speaking LIES in HYPOCRISY; having their conscience seared with a hot iron.

These scriptures sum up the watchtower quite accurately !

the new encyclopaedia britannica is not the official encyclopaedia of the CC: the authorize is the Old Encyclopaedia.

Thus any reference to the Britannica should not be construed as coming from the Vatican. No way, Jose!

No, couldn't find it online either.

However, even with the words in brackets removed, the text still means the same thing.

They were just clarifying by adding them.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia says:

“Mary is truly the mother of God >if< two conditions are fulfilled:

that she is really the mother of Jesus and that Jesus is really God.” (1967, Vol. X, p. 21)

The Bible says that Mary was the mother of Jesus, but, was Jesus God?

In the fourth century, long after the writing of the Bible was completed, the Church formulated its statement of the Trinity. (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 295)

At that time in the Nicene Creed the Church spoke of Jesus Christ as “very God.”

After that, at the Council of Ephesus in 431 C.E., Mary was proclaimed by the Church to be The·o·to′kos, meaning “God-bearer” or “Mother of God.”

However, neither that expression --nor the idea-- is found in the text of *any* translation of the Bible.

What are the historical origins of the adoration of Mary?

Says Catholic priest Andrew Greeley:

“Mary is one of the most powerful religious symbols in the history of the Western world . . . The Mary symbol links Christianity directly to the *ancient religions of mother goddesses*.”—The Making of the Popes 1978 (U.S.A., 1979), p. 227.

Of interest is the location where the teaching that Mary is the Mother of God was confirmed.:

“The Council of Ephesus assembled in the basilica of the Theotokos in 431. There, if anywhere, in the city so notorious for its devotion to *Artemis, or Diana as the Romans called her,* where her image was said to have fallen from heaven, under the shadow of the great temple dedicated to the Magna Mater since 330 B.C. and containing, according to tradition, a temporary residence of Mary, the title ‘God-bearer’ hardly could fail to be upheld.”—The Cult of the Mother-Goddess (New York, 1959), E. O. James, p. 207.

So, is the veneration of images of Mary in harmony with *Bible-based* Christianity?

The practice was definitely encouraged by Vatican II (1962-1965):

“This most holy Synod . . . admonishes all the sons of the Church that the cult, especially the liturgical cult, of the Blessed Virgin, be generously fostered. It charges that practices and exercises of devotion toward her be treasured as recommended by the teaching authority of the Church in the course of centuries, and that those decrees issued in earlier times regarding the veneration of images of Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and the saints, be religiously observed.”—The Documents of Vatican II, pp. 94, 95.

How can such veneration be scriptural in light of what the BIble tells us, for example of Peter's response to being vernerated while a man on earth . . . ?

Acts 10:25, 26, in the Catholic Jerusalem Bible, says:

“As Peter reached the house Cornelius went out to meet him, knelt at his feet and prostrated himself. But Peter helped him up. ‘Stand up,’ he said ‘I am only a man after all!’” (

Since Peter did not approve of such adoration when he was personally present,

would he encourage us to kneel before an image of him?

Notice also the admonition given by the angel that was revealing the Revelation to the apostle John:

“At that I [John] fell down before his feet to worship him. But he tells me: 'Be careful! Do not do that! I am only a fellow slave of you and of your brothers who have the work of witnessing concerning Jesus. **Worship God!** For the witness concerning Jesus is what inspires prophecy.'” (Revelation 19:10.)

It might be helpful if you gave the SUBJECT.

I looked in my 1978 edition and those pages are part of the history of Scandinavia.