»The bible is inaccurate and written by criminals and mad men«
|
|||
 hey knn have you heard of a thing called FAITH posted by Agent Zero |
|||
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgReligion and Mysteries, from worship to werewolvesReligious & Philosophical TopicsThe bible is inaccurate and written by criminals and mad men |
|
|||
 stinkz: Actually, yes. I have been studying New Testament Greek the past few summers. Thank you for asking. So? That still doesn't make you understand Greek completely. I have been reading the bible in Japanese the last summer. So what? Am I now more likely to understand it? posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hello! Thanks for letting me in! Do you know the Concordant Bible translated by A. E. Knoch in 1927 and published by Concordant Publishing Concern  I just want to know if you are aware that this Bible is very accurate. It is Unitarian Universalist. Thanks in Christ Jesus. Cristorly [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] posted by cristorly |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 knn: So? That still doesn't make you understand Greek completely. What do you mean, "so?" I was answering a direct question. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Agent Zero: hey knn have you heard of a thing called FAITH Now to tell you the truth, THIS is the best argument. It really is. I am totally willing to accept that the bible is more than its words for believers. But if stinkz starts to argue on a level that "Christians LOVE accuracy" then this is laughable. Christians could care less. posted by knn |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: How does "is it written somewhere what the priest says?" have anything to do with accurate translations of the Bible. It doesn't. There is no connection. Argh, for heaven's sake: Because it shows that the usual Christians don't even care for WHETHER it's even WRITTEN in the bible. Thus they care even less whether it has been translated accurately. If the priests says "Masturbation is a sin" then the crowd accepts it. It's not even in the bible. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: The point is, it is because many, most, whatever... Christians have this concern, that the Bible is not only the most accurately passed-down, but the most accurately translated text in existance. Most accurately passed down? Yes. Especially I believe that the Old Testament is very accurately passed down. The most accurately translated text? Never. Get 2 bible versions and you get 2 different meanings. Especially the standardized "political correct" versions are disgusting. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: Mary and Joseph also fled from a tyrannical king. Do claim that Jesus is also a terrorist? Jesus was prosecuted, wasn't he? Paulus was prosecuted, wasn't he? Now Christians jump in and claim "Because they were holy" or something similar. But the fact remains: Christianity was founded on the shoulders of convicted criminals. Thus if you accept the word from such sources then caring about the ACCURACY of translations is marginal. Just take your statement "Mary and Joseph also fled from a tyrannical king". That this king was killing thousands babies is just a fairy-tale (otherwise other sources would have reported such gruelsome act, but only the bible writes about it). So here you have it again: Christians don't even care about the FACTS. So they couldn't care less about translations. It's like discussing "Whether Osama bin Laden's claims have been translated correctly word by word". Why should we care? Most probably his claims are terroristic bunk anyway. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: You evidently believed Paul's words when he told you of his past sin. Why must you believe him in one instance, only to discredit him in others? Well, if I believe him 100% then he was a child slaughterer. If I don't believe him, then I couldn't care less about whether translations of his words are correct. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: This shows how little you know about Biblical texts. The original manuscripts were written in Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). I know. But what you state here in other words is that Jesus was a jew, yet his statements are written in GREEK. Jesus didn't make statements in Greek. Jesus did not speak Greek. Jesus spoke Aramaic. "We have accurately written in Polish what the Frenchman said 300 years after he died. Then we have translated it from Polish into English. We have produced a 100% accurate translation" That is basically the statement you make, stinkz. GIVE ME A BREAK, stinkz, the sources are bugged in the first place. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Sometimes when knn writes an argument instead of nit-picking everyone else's, he comes up with some good stuff. The points I liked best were: Jesus was aramaic not greek, (and the gospels are written at least 50 years after his death) so how can you be sure the Bible is an accurate translation of what he said, even if it HAS been translated perfectly ever since? Jesus' followers were often criminals. Paul admits himself that he used to be a mass-murderer of Christians before his conversion. How do we know we can trust their testimony? Especially when details such as the actions of King Herod appear to be propaganda? Best counter-argument so far? You should have FAITH that the Bible is true.  *shrugs*
posted by fatpie42 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
cristorly: Hello! Thanks for letting me in! Do you know the Concordant Bible translated by A. E. Knoch in 1927 and published by Concordant Publishing Concern
concordant.org... I see the numbers at many words but where are the alternative meanings? Link please posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
SLL5150: An excellent article on Biblical accuracy ... Yes, it's good. Of some 2500 real differences, only about 300 involve any substantial difference in meaning. What do they mean by "only 300". 300 is a lot. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
fatpie42: Best counter-argument so far? You should have FAITH that the Bible is true. *shrugs* Hardly. The best counter-argument is to read the New Testament for yourself. See if it is a mass-murderer talking (Saul) or a changed man in Christ (Paul). Doubtless it would make no difference to knn's opinion. Back the original idea, the accuracy of the Bible speaks for itself. No book has been as accurately passed down and translated. These are the facts of the case, and they are undisputed. You can see this as a sign that the Bible has been preserved by a divine power, or you can claim that it is "not enough" and that Jesus should have been cryogenically frozen so that he might speak to you in his original language. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
 Register Log in |
The time now is 12 February 2012, 21:02 php B.B. |