U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2016, 10:30 PM
 
10,183 posts, read 10,551,735 times
Reputation: 3018

Advertisements

No wonder parts of the Bible are strictly off-limits for Sunday School


Take Ezekiel 23:20 for example:


Quote:
New Living Translation
She lusted after lovers with genitals as large as a donkey's and emissions like those of a horse.

Is this really necessary? I'm speechless with horror.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2016, 11:01 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
8,597 posts, read 5,120,460 times
Reputation: 3917
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
No wonder parts of the Bible are strictly off-limits for Sunday School


Take Ezekiel 23:20 for example:





Is this really necessary? I'm speechless with horror.
First, the New Living Translation is a revision of "The Living Bible." That early edition was more of a paraphrase than a translation. Just a cursory glance makes it appear that the editors of the NLT actually hired some translators.

Second, when the author of Ezekiel wrote those words, he was unaware that your sensibilities would be pricked some 2500 years later.

If you are going to be a reverse fundamentalist, then use the literal language to determine 21st century shock value. Otherwise try some contextual study to determine if Ezekiel was actually shocking any of his fifth century BCE readers. Probably not.

A better one for English "shock value" in the same book would be this:
Quote:
And thou shalt make staves of ****tim wood, and overlay them with gold.
Ezekiel 25:13
And yes, how you think it is pronounced is correct. My father once read several verses from Ezekiel in an adult Bible school class, and he said, "Does that say ****-UM!! My, my, it does!"

The word is repeated many times in Ezekiel. But again, our shock or humor is based on a 21st century thought process. It was simple a description in Hebrew.

P.S. OUR sensibilities have the biblical word of s h i t t i m blocked out from public view on CD!! Imagine that!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2016, 11:11 PM
 
10,183 posts, read 10,551,735 times
Reputation: 3018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
First, the New Living Translation is a revision of "The Living Bible." That early edition was more of a paraphrase than a translation. Just a cursory glance makes it appear that the editors of the NLT actually hired some translators.

Second, when the author of Ezekiel wrote those words, he was unaware that your sensibilities would be pricked some 2500 years later.

If you are going to be a reverse fundamentalist, then use the literal language to determine 21st century shock value. Otherwise try some contextual study to determine if Ezekiel was actually shocking any of his fifth century BCE readers. Probably not.

A better one for English "shock value" in the same book would be this:
Ezekiel 25:13
And yes, how you think it is pronounced is correct. My father once read several verses from Ezekiel in an adult Bible school class, and he said, "Does that say ****-UM!! My, my, it does!"

The word is repeated many times in Ezekiel. But again, our shock or humor is based on a 21st century thought process. It was simple a description in Hebrew.

P.S. OUR sensibilities have the biblical word of s h i t t i m blocked out from public view on CD!! Imagine that!

Here's the thing: if this were a racy porno stage play from the 5 century BC I wouldn't bat an eye. Euripides has written worse. But this is God talking. He knows the end from the beginning. He knows this is going to cause ripples some 2500 years later, even cause some to turn their backs on Him because they are not going to believe it was necessary for God to be so graphic. So we're not talking about translations here, nor are we talking about men who debated how much shock value to put into their descriptions. We are talking about God inspiring men to write these words, as if such descriptions are really necessary in ANY time or place.


As a parent I would never allow my child to read such scripture and I am NOT a prude.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2016, 07:54 PM
Status: "Even better than okay" (set 12 days ago)
 
Location: Coastal New Jersey
51,323 posts, read 50,576,723 times
Reputation: 60245
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
Here's the thing: if this were a racy porno stage play from the 5 century BC I wouldn't bat an eye. Euripides has written worse. But this is God talking. He knows the end from the beginning. He knows this is going to cause ripples some 2500 years later, even cause some to turn their backs on Him because they are not going to believe it was necessary for God to be so graphic. So we're not talking about translations here, nor are we talking about men who debated how much shock value to put into their descriptions. We are talking about God inspiring men to write these words, as if such descriptions are really necessary in ANY time or place.

As a parent I would never allow my child to read such scripture and I am NOT a prude.
Another good reason not to believe everything in the bible is the inspired word of God Himself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2016, 09:57 PM
 
9 posts, read 3,849 times
Reputation: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
No wonder parts of the Bible are strictly off-limits for Sunday School


Take Ezekiel 23:20 for example:





Is this really necessary? I'm speechless with horror.
If it's God's Word(& it is)it more than necessary. The Old Testament is known for being a little more gruesome, more descriptive, etc. I'm reading straight out of KJV & it says, "For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, & whose issue is like the issues of horses."


And then you plainly say those words are from an NLT version. I'm not saying that isn't a perfectly good Bible, but they lay things out beyond descriptive so people get what is being said...plain as day.

And I'm sure you & your church know not teach that to children in such laymen's terms. no brainer on that one.

If you took the KJV & switched asses to donkeys that would fly over most adults' heads. Wonder how that made our Heavenly Father feel when you screamed He was a potty mouth? He is without sin! Has he ever had to forgive you for a not so flattering sin? I have to be honest, He has me. I can't even imagine how he's feeling when one of his children that he will still love forever so much made Him out to basically be a sinner which is not even possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2016, 11:47 PM
 
10,183 posts, read 10,551,735 times
Reputation: 3018
Quote:
Originally Posted by God & His word View Post
If it's God's Word(& it is)it more than necessary. The Old Testament is known for being a little more gruesome, more descriptive, etc. I'm reading straight out of KJV & it says, "For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, & whose issue is like the issues of horses."


And then you plainly say those words are from an NLT version. I'm not saying that isn't a perfectly good Bible, but they lay things out beyond descriptive so people get what is being said...plain as day.

And I'm sure you & your church know not teach that to children in such laymen's terms. no brainer on that one.

If you took the KJV & switched asses to donkeys that would fly over most adults' heads. Wonder how that made our Heavenly Father feel when you screamed He was a potty mouth? He is without sin! Has he ever had to forgive you for a not so flattering sin? I have to be honest, He has me. I can't even imagine how he's feeling when one of his children that he will still love forever so much made Him out to basically be a sinner which is not even possible.

I think you're being a little dramatic. God couldn't care less if I call Him on a bad description. He's as angry at me as I would be a bacteria if it gave me an infection. He's a big boy (a VERY big boy, if you want to know) and can stand a stray opinion or two.


However you want to word it, what I'm saying is that God could have left it at "She doted upon her paramours." Do we really have to know the reason why she doted on them? As I said, we're reading holy writ to learn about God, not to hear about how a man could ejaculate more semen than a horse. Such details are purely extraneous and have nothing to do with the point. I repeat, if this were an ordinary man writing I couldn't care less. But this is God talking to us in explicit detail about why a woman got the hots for male prostitutes. Totally unnecessary, and I think God would agree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2016, 06:40 AM
 
6,818 posts, read 3,136,050 times
Reputation: 2374
She lusted after lovers with genitals as large as a donkey's and emissions like those of a horse.

Just goes to show you, size matters. Or, it was written by a man with ... um..... confidence issues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2016, 09:00 AM
 
19,952 posts, read 12,978,948 times
Reputation: 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
No wonder parts of the Bible are strictly off-limits for Sunday School


Take Ezekiel 23:20 for example:





Is this really necessary? I'm speechless with horror.
It is a very descriptive way of stating the case. It describes how God's people chased after other gods, and other nations rather than him.

That's why marriage is so important to us -- because it is a object lesson in how God wants us to remain faithful. It's a covenant that we can't simply toss away when we want a new partner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2016, 09:23 AM
 
10,183 posts, read 10,551,735 times
Reputation: 3018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
Another good reason not to believe everything in the bible is the inspired word of God Himself.

Well, that's what I'm leaning toward after reading this and other egregious passages that I refuse to believe could have anything to do with God's interests because of the subject matter. I used to think the whole Bible might be uninspired, but then I considered maybe it gets more compartmentalized; perhaps numerous writers were involved with the creation of a single book such as Ezekiel. We have this fanciful idea that Ezekiel the person sat down and wrote all this at his desk one night. More than likely a person named Ezekiel never lived; the name was adopted for use by the writers and several scribes threw in their two-cents in this chapter and then another scribe put in theirs on another and the book took various forms with editing until we got what we have today. Hence parts may be inspired and other parts may not and still other parts are definitely not inspired and this passage is one of them.


But inerrantists like God & His Word above I suppose cannot stand the thought that even a single passage could be thought of as not-God-inspired--that every single jot and tittle was written by God himself and that seems to include passages about large donkey genitals and buckets of their semen. I, however cannot go there. I think parts of the Bible are beautiful prose and there many be a tiny bit of reliable history in it, but for the most part, and this passage seems to prove it, the Bible is nothing more than the thoughts of men jotted down over centuries and edited and edited until a final form emerged in the Septuagint. Thus it is no more inspired than the Bhagavad Gita or the Tibetan Book of the Dead. The differences is the parts of the world. In India the Bhagavad Gita is their Bible and nobody there has ever read the Western Bible. In Asia the Tibetan Book of the Dead is the Bible for Buddhist-dominated countries. And so on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2016, 09:25 AM
 
19,952 posts, read 12,978,948 times
Reputation: 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
Well, that's what I'm leaning toward after reading this and other egregious passages that I refuse to believe could have anything to do with God's interests because of the subject matter. I used to think the whole Bible might be uninspired, but then I considered maybe it gets more compartmentalized; perhaps numerous writers were involved with the creation of a single book such as Ezekiel. We have this fanciful idea that Ezekiel the person sat down and wrote all this at his desk one night. More than likely a person named Ezekiel never lived; the name was adopted for use by the writers and several scribes threw in their two-cents in this chapter and then another scribe put in theirs on another and the book took various forms with editing until we got what we have today. Hence parts may be inspired and other parts may not and still other parts are definitely not inspired and this passage is one of them.


But inerrantists like God & His Word above I suppose cannot stand the thought that even a single passage could be thought of as not-God-inspired--that every single jot and tittle was written by God himself and that seems to include passages about large donkey genitals and buckets of their semen. I, however cannot go there. I think parts of the Bible are beautiful prose and there many be a tiny bit of reliable history in it, but for the most part, and this passage seems to prove it, the Bible is nothing more than the thoughts of men jotted down over centuries and edited and edited until a final form emerged in the Septuagint. Thus it is no more inspired than the Bhagavad Gita or the Tibetan Book of the Dead. The differences is the parts of the world. In India the Bhagavad Gita is their Bible and nobody there has ever read the Western Bible. In Asia the Tibetan Book of the Dead is the Bible for Buddhist-dominated countries. And so on.
You complain about the Bible not being relevant...then you complain about it being too descriptive. Seriously...I don't know what it would take to convince you. You are set on disbelieving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top