Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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 04-05-2016, 10:36 AM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
16,155 posts, read 12,861,012 times
Reputation: 2881

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
This thread has nothing to do with evolution. .
Sore point was it? We are not discussing evolution, just pointing out your hypocrisy.

...and you still haven't answered the question.

Quote:
I don't use the KJV. I prefer a better translation such as the ESV, NASB, or even the NIV.
Doesn't alter the fact that the Bible has been translated, edited, added to, subtracted from etc...regardless of what version you subscribe to. They all come from the same source....even yours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-05-2016, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,190,517 times
Reputation: 14070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrett View Post
Feel free to debate the accuracy of the content at the time it was written, but as far as modern translation of historical texts go, we can't do much better.
Nonsense updated is still nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 10:45 AM
 
Location: Turlock, CA
323 posts, read 377,147 times
Reputation: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude View Post
Nonsense updated is still nonsense.
Now you're moving goalposts. The question at hand was the authenticity of the text and adherence to available source material, which is exceptionally good.

If your opinion is that the source material was a children's fairy tale or outright fabrication misinterpreted at some point into being something more, then that's a different discussion entirely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 10:56 AM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,190,517 times
Reputation: 14070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrett View Post
Now you're moving goalposts. The question at hand was the authenticity of the text and adherence to available source material, which is exceptionally good.

If your opinion is that the source material was a children's fairy tale or outright fabrication misinterpreted at some point into being something more, then that's a different discussion entirely.
I agree. The nonsense in the bible comes from ancient, authentic, nonsensical sources.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Hong Kong
689 posts, read 549,695 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by L8Gr8Apost8 View Post
I was wondering if you are religious and think your holy book is inspired by God, who do you think wrote the other holy books. I can't answer that one even though I was once involved with a Christian sect because I never thought about it. For example, if you are Christian do you think a human wrote the Quran or the Buddhist holy book or do you think it was something more sinister? Do you think these holy books were planted by Satan to mislead?
The only one reconcilable book which humans can acquire is the Holy Bible. Theologically you read the same today and you read the same 2000 years ago or so.

The only God brought forward the whole theology of His salvation across 2000 years of human history such that humans today can read the same as they did 2000 years ago.

The OT Bile is reconcilable theologically because we have a whole library survived history to reach us. It's the dead sea scrolls. The NT Bible is reconcilable theologically because we have 2 streams of the Bible from 2 independent sources. That is, the NIV and KJV versions of the Bible which are coming from different sources but theologically conveying the same theology of salvation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Turlock, CA
323 posts, read 377,147 times
Reputation: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude View Post
I agree. The nonsense in the bible comes from ancient, authentic, nonsensical sources.
Ok.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Hong Kong
689 posts, read 549,695 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
Doesn't alter the fact that the Bible has been translated, edited, added to, subtracted from etc...regardless of what version you subscribe to. They all come from the same source....even yours.
That's the way how humans keep records of everything. Human imperfection won't hinder God's purpose for what has been written down.

The Bible actually is the only book which is reconcilable for the conclusion to be drawn that the theology we see today is the same theology conveyed 2000 years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Northeastern US
20,007 posts, read 13,486,477 times
Reputation: 9939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
The only one reconcilable book which humans can acquire is the Holy Bible. Theologically you read the same today and you read the same 2000 years ago or so.

The only God brought forward the whole theology of His salvation across 2000 years of human history such that humans today can read the same as they did 2000 years ago.

The OT Bile is reconcilable theologically because we have a whole library survived history to reach us. It's the dead sea scrolls. The NT Bible is reconcilable theologically because we have 2 streams of the Bible from 2 independent sources. That is, the NIV and KJV versions of the Bible which are coming from different sources but theologically conveying the same theology of salvation.
I have no problem granting you that there is not much daylight between the relatively subtle differences between the various modern translations ... at least with respect to the literal-leaning ones vs the idiomatic or paraphrasing ones. But I don't even have an issue with the latter since the are honestly and accurately promoted up front, with the arguable exception of the JW's New World Translation, which has questionable, non-consensus scholarship behind it.

This reflects not so much a superior provenance for scripture as a higher level of interest by more people over more time.

For me the more fundamental problem is what all these translations substantially agree ON ... most basically, the failed epistemology of faith being superior to reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 11:14 AM
 
Location: Hong Kong
689 posts, read 549,695 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant View Post
I have no problem granting you that there is not much daylight between the relatively subtle differences between the various modern translations ... at least with respect to the literal-leaning ones vs the idiomatic or paraphrasing ones. But I don't even have an issue with the latter since the are honestly and accurately promoted up front, with the arguable exception of the JW's New World Translation, which has questionable, non-consensus scholarship behind it.

This reflects not so much a superior provenance for scripture as a higher level of interest by more people over more time.

For me the more fundamental problem is what all these translations substantially agree ON ... most basically, the failed epistemology of faith being superior to reason.
You need to know what perfection could mean.

Can you say a mirror is not perfect because it can't talk. No, as a mirror is not designed for talking. A mirror is perfect when it serves its design purpose, that is, to give out a reflection image.

You on the other hand, never know the design purpose of the Bible to realize its perfection.


The Bible is:
A human account(s) of witnessing for God to convey His message (theology) of salvation.

The Bible serves the purpose of:
Bring His sheep to salvation while filtering out those unwanted.


So I am not surprised when someone like you is abandoned for His Bible to become perfect!


Matthew 25:29 (NIV)
For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.

Last edited by Hawkins; 04-05-2016 at 11:23 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2016, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Northeastern US
20,007 posts, read 13,486,477 times
Reputation: 9939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
You on the other hand, never know the design purpose of the Bible to realize its perfection.
You assume too much. I was an evangelical / fundamentalist Christian believer for three decades of my life .. in fact at this point, still most of my adult life. I know more than most believers about the claims for scripture's miraculous fitness-to-purpose (although honestly, most unbelievers who are interested enough to debate with believers, tend to have the better command of scripture).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
The Bible is:
A human account(s) of witnessing for God to convey His message (theology) of salvation.

The Bible serves the purpose of:
Bring His sheep to salvation while filtering out those unwanted.
Unsubstantiated assertions and not 100% in agreement with many Christians on that last point. Feel free to substantiate at any time though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
So I am not surprised when someone like you is abandoned for His Bible to become perfect!
I am not clear what you are asserting here but I suspect you are answering an argument that I never made. I said nothing about scripture not being perfect in some way. I said that it advances a demonstrably failed epistemology that I now decline to believe in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
Matthew 25:29 (NIV)
For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.
Here again it is not clear what point you are trying to make, but I suspect it is in the nature of a dark foreboding hint that eternal punishment awaits those who don't agree with your personal subjective interpretation of your holy book. More empty assertions. You must first substantiate your positive claim that your deity exists. Then you must define your beliefs about the nature of that deity and why you believe that. Then we must have a conversation about how one reconciles that nature with reality. First things first, and one thing at a time.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:41 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top