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)
 
Old 05-17-2010, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,713,783 times
Reputation: 10450

Advertisements

Mistranslations? You mean like the verse in Isaiah that refers to a "young woman" giving birth, but which was--how shall I say--mistranslated to read "virgin?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-17-2010, 02:53 PM
 
Location: Oxford, England
1,266 posts, read 949,743 times
Reputation: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
Hi Daniel O. McClellan,

Please tell me why it is important that we understand what the Hebrews believed about death and the afterlife.
I approach it from an academic point of view. These beliefs have changed a great deal over time, and my personal beliefs about death and the afterlife are not based on the assumption that they did not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
When Jesus spoke to the folks in the "New Testament," what scriptures were they reading? And, did they understand them? (I'm not sure they would have nailed Yeshua to a tree if they did.)
They understood them according to their contemporary traditions, just like we today understand the Bible based largely on contemporary traditions. The people who translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek in the third and second centuries BCE did the same. It's quite naive to suppose that the Bible is a univocal text. It demonstrably is not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
The link I provided was an exceptional link, if you ask me, on how the Hebrews used their language (definitely FLOWERY AND POETIC) and how the Old Testament folks understood life after death and such.
But it's a modern (and quite uninformed) interpretive framework imposed on an ancient text that was never meant to be read in that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
Also, please explain why the link that I posted would not establish what happens to a person when they are dead, and why the New Testament folks (Jews) would have had to start thinking COMPLETELY foreign thoughts to understand Jesus!

Thank you.
It does not establish what happens to a person when they're dead because it's just a synthesis of a variety of ancient literary traditions about death that don't even harmonize with each other.

Regarding the scholarship of the link, the following is what it says about Deut 32:22:

[SIZE=2]
Quote:
Actually, the truth is that "tachtiy Sheol" is a reference to the roots of the mountains. The second half of this verse is a repetitive clarification of the first half. "Tachtiy Sheol" (the lowest hell) is clarified as "the foundations of the mountains."[/SIZE]
The second cola is not a "repetitive clarification." It's synonymous parallelism, which isn't a clarification, but just a poetic convention. The semantic quality of the first cola does not necessarily equal the semantic quality of the second. It just means that they overlap in some capacity. That capacity may be lexical, grammatical, morphological, or semantic. In this case, the two phrases simply refer to a region underground. As I've already pointed out, שאול fundamentally refers to the underworld. The article at this link doesn't seem associated with ancient Near Eastern cosmology, with ancient literary themes, or with Biblical Hebrew philology. It also treats the associated verses synchronically, which is a problematic approach to begin with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Miami, FL
58,469 posts, read 31,862,344 times
Reputation: 9405
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
I am a she. And, dear Finn_Jarber; that ol' gulf that you are talking about?

ONE VERSE in the ENTIRE BIBLE talks about a gulf! AND IT IS A PARABLE! Jesus was speaking in parables the ENTIRE TIME to those hard- hearted guys.

A PARABLE is not supposed to be easily understood!
It's not that complicated if you think about it.

"Besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, that those who want to pass from here to you are not able, and that none may cross over from there to us"

You have given a poor excuse to ignore parts of the Bible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
3,381 posts, read 3,379,961 times
Reputation: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel O. McClellan View Post
I approach it from an academic point of view. These beliefs have changed a great deal over time, and my personal beliefs about death and the afterlife are not based on the assumption that they did not.



They understood them according to their contemporary traditions, just like we today understand the Bible based largely on contemporary traditions. The people who translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek in the third and second centuries BCE did the same. It's quite naive to suppose that the Bible is a univocal text. It demonstrably is not.



But it's a modern (and quite uninformed) interpretive framework imposed on an ancient text that was never meant to be read in that way.



It does not establish what happens to a person when they're dead because it's just a synthesis of a variety of ancient literary traditions about death that don't even harmonize with each other.

Regarding the scholarship of the link, the following is what it says about Deut 32:22:

[font=Arial][SIZE=2]

The second cola is not a "repetitive clarification." It's synonymous parallelism, which isn't a clarification, but just a poetic convention. The semantic quality of the first cola does not necessarily equal the semantic quality of the second. It just means that they overlap in some capacity. That capacity may be lexical, grammatical, morphological, or semantic. In this case, the two phrases simply refer to a region underground. As I've already pointed out, שאול fundamentally refers to the underworld. The article at this link doesn't seem associated with ancient Near Eastern cosmology, with ancient literary themes, or with Biblical Hebrew philology. It also treats the associated verses synchronically, which is a problematic approach to begin with.
Hi,

Again, I want to understand WHAT the Jews of Jesus' time heard when He was talking to them. What framework were they working with. They were already confused when He showed up, having brought a LOT of pagan thought into their thinking. I am not interested in how thought has changed over time. I want to know what the GOD of ABRAHAM, ISAAC, and JACOB taught.


I believe the Hebrews were told to stay AWAY from pagan thought! The Egyptians, with their Pharaohs, Pyramids and Underworlds were in a completely different realm of thought than the Hebrews. The Hebrews were given ENTIRELY different messages about God, death, and the afterlife. From reading the Old Testament views on these matters, you can EASILY understand this. There isn't ANY hint at some fiery underworld where people are being punished. I wish SOMEBODY would tell me EXACTLY what is wrong with the link on Sheol and Hell in the Old Testament.

After the Hebrews, who, of course became the Jews, came out of Egypt, Babylon, Greece and such, I am SURE their heads were filled to the BRIM with NONSENSE!

God was ANGRY at the idea that He would want them to set their children on fire for Him!!

"And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, and it did not come into My mind," (Jer. 7:31)

Why in the world would the Hebrews think God would be pleased with burning their children! Do you think they MISUNDERSTOOD what God was about? Who He was? What His character was about? Has He changed? Will He EVER CHANGE?

God's ways were MUCH HIGHER than the STUPID and RIDICULOUS gods that the people around them were worshiping.

I can easily see how much PAGAN thought is STILL in our religion, EVEN TODAY. If you look around the world at our corporations, our symbols, etc., you will see how ENTRENCHED this stuff is! And our churches are not immune! Not by a LONG shot! Paganism had already completely INFECTED the Catholic church by the time the Protestants showed up! I am SURE things have not gotten any better!

The apostasy of the church happened a LONG TIME AGO!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 03:26 PM
 
6,221 posts, read 6,403,926 times
Reputation: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
It's not that complicated if you think about it.

"Besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, that those who want to pass from here to you are not able, and that none may cross over from there to us"

You have given a poor excuse to ignore parts of the Bible.
This is a symbol in a parable, that if taken literally, contradicts every other description of sheol/hades in the bible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 04:09 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
21,263 posts, read 20,865,688 times
Reputation: 9950
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
And, dear Finn_Jarber; that ol' gulf that you are talking about?

ONE VERSE in the ENTIRE BIBLE talks about a gulf! AND IT IS A PARABLE! Jesus was speaking in parables the ENTIRE TIME to those hard- hearted guys.

A PARABLE is not supposed to be easily understood!

Parable: A short and simple tale based on familiar things meant to convey a much deeper and profound moral or spiritual truth,"

HE SPOKE IN PARABLES FOR A REASON!
I disagree, herefornow. Jesus did speak in parables a lot of the time, but we can find dozens of examples where there is little doubt but that His words were to be understood literally, as not as a parable. I'm curious as to why you think this particular passage is a parable.

For the sake of argument, though, let's say it is a parable. A parable always teaches us a deeper truth and everything mentioned in the parable is symbolic of something else. If you think this is a parable, what do you believe the gulf represents? Who do you believe the rich man represents? And the poor man? Explain in your own words what it was that Jesus was teaching in this parable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
3,381 posts, read 3,379,961 times
Reputation: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur View Post
I disagree, herefornow. Jesus did speak in parables a lot of the time, but we can find dozens of examples where there is little doubt but that His words were to be understood literally, as not as a parable. I'm curious as to why you think this particular passage is a parable.

For the sake of argument, though, let's say it is a parable. A parable always teaches us a deeper truth and everything mentioned in the parable is symbolic of something else. If you think this is a parable, what do you believe the gulf represents? Who do you believe the rich man represents? And the poor man? Explain in your own words what it was that Jesus was teaching in this parable.

No problem, Katzpur.

I'll get back to you later this afternoon. I'm out with my husband right now, and it's kind of difficult to type from my phone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Oxford, England
1,266 posts, read 949,743 times
Reputation: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
Hi,

Again, I want to understand WHAT the Jews of Jesus' time heard when He was talking to them. What framework were they working with. They were already confused when He showed up, having brought a LOT of pagan thought into their thinking. I am not interested in how thought has changed over time. I want to know what the GOD of ABRAHAM, ISAAC, and JACOB taught.
I've explained in general terms what the concept of Hell consisted of during NT times. There wasn't a lot of pagan thinking in first century Judaism when Christ was preaching. Not any more than had always been influencing Judaism, anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
I believe the Hebrews were told to stay AWAY from pagan thought!
They were, but the people who told them that were also steeped in "pagan" thought. The majority of the theology and ideologies found in the Old and New Testaments are derived from pre-existing non-Judeo-Christian traditions. Like I already said, the concept of the underworld was borrowed from a larger Syro-Palestinian ideological matrix that was itself based on Assyro-Babylonian concepts. The idea of an incorporeal deity is based on Greek ontology. The concept of the devil is largely derivative of Persian dualism. As the Israelites came into contact with their neighbors they absorbed aspects of their worldviews, without exception.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
The Egyptians, with their Pharaohs, Pyramids and Underworlds were in a completely different realm of thought than the Hebrews.
Not really. There is quite a bit of ideological overlap between the two. The majority of Israelite religion, however, derives from a Syro-Palestinian context. The closest analogy is found in the Ugaritic texts, which illuminate many aspects of early Israelite theology and even philology that were a mystery before the 20th century. Psalm 104 is actually based in large part on the Egyptian Hymn to Aten. Archaeologists have discovered hundreds of jar handles in and around Jerusalem dating to the reign of Hezekiah that bear the inscription "to the king." They also bear the Egyptian solar disc or a scarab beetle. Both are symbols of the Egyptian sun deity, clearly viewed during the reign of Hezekiah as Yhwh. Psalm 29 is based on an archaic hymn to Baal, the Syro-Palestinian storm god. Yhwh was conceived of in the earliest Israelite pantheon as a storm god.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
The Hebrews were given ENTIRELY different messages about God, death, and the afterlife. From reading the Old Testament views on these matters, you can EASILY understand this. There isn't ANY hint at some fiery underworld where people are being punished. I wish SOMEBODY would tell me EXACTLY what is wrong with the link on Sheol and Hell in the Old Testament.
I've given you one example. The primary problem is that the author is looking at the whole Bible synchronically. The Bible was not written at one time. It is a collation of almost 1000 of religious literature coming from authors who were writing from dozens of different perspectives. The concept of the afterlife developed a great deal between Genesis and Revelation. While the earliest Israelites didn't believe in a fiery place of eternal torture, Late Second Temple Period Jews and early Christians absolutely did. That covers the composition of Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Job, several of the Psalms, the entire New Testament, and portions of numerous other redacted biblical texts. The author of your article assumes that he can take and early text and impose that ideology on a text from a completely different time and place so that it means the same thing. The texts do not all mean the same thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
After the Hebrews, who, of course became the Jews, came out of Egypt, Babylon, Greece and such, I am SURE their heads were filled to the BRIM with NONSENSE!

God was ANGRY at the idea that He would want them to set their children on fire for Him!!
Seems odd, then, that he commands the sacrifice of the firstborn children of all Israelites in Exod 22:29. This was just in keeping with common ideas from the time period. Later they introduced the idea of redeeming the firstborn, but Exodus 22 says nothing of this. There are distinct historical layers in Exodus and in all the books of the Bible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
"And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, and it did not come into My mind," (Jer. 7:31)
Jer 7:22 says that God didn't give Israel any commandments about sacrificing when he brought them out of Egypt. The book of Exodus says differently. Which is correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
Why in the world would the Hebrews think God would be pleased with burning their children! Do you think they MISUNDERSTOOD what God was about? Who He was? What His character was about? Has He changed? Will He EVER CHANGE?

God's ways were MUCH HIGHER than the STUPID and RIDICULOUS gods that the people around them were worshiping.

I can easily see how much PAGAN thought is STILL in our religion, EVEN TODAY. If you look around the world at our corporations, our symbols, etc., you will see how ENTRENCHED this stuff is! And our churches are not immune! Not by a LONG shot! Paganism had already completely INFECTED the Catholic church by the time the Protestants showed up! I am SURE things have not gotten any better!

The apostasy of the church happened a LONG TIME AGO!
Please don't shout. I've explained my position. So far you've not bothered responding to my concerns, you've only asked additional questions. I'd appreciate it if you'd simply address my concerns this time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Miami, FL
58,469 posts, read 31,862,344 times
Reputation: 9405
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow View Post
Why in the world would the Hebrews think God would be pleased with burning their children! Do you think they MISUNDERSTOOD what God was about? Who He was? What His character was about? Has He changed? Will He EVER CHANGE?!
They didn't sacrifice their children to God, they sacrificed them to false Gods such as moloch, who were the gods of the Canaanites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2010, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Miami, FL
58,469 posts, read 31,862,344 times
Reputation: 9405
Quote:
Originally Posted by legoman View Post
This is a symbol in a parable, that if taken literally, contradicts every other description of sheol/hades in the bible.
No, it does not contradict anything. If you think is does, then why don't you just explain the contradiction.
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
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