May They Just As Well Condemn The Bible To The Skip?

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 62
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Is the Bible written in English worth the paper it is written on? I personally wouldn’t want to see this ancient work destroyed.

I think it is well known of me by now that on the surface I find the Bible (New Testament in particular) to be a book of contradictory, ambiguous, anomalous, vague, enigmatic and problematic half stories surrounding a man that believed or was led to believe he was a rightful king and heir to the throne of Jerusalem and the power struggle that he had to endure in the times of ancient Palestine under Roman occupation and between the many other factions and sects that existed at the time. And not to be taken literally at all times. i.e. a man didn’t rises from a physical death to be alive again after being physically dead for three days.

Others think to the contrary. For instance, there are those that I have met that believe the Bible to be clear and concise in its presentation and self evidently true and without any ambiguity whatsoever in the way it has come down to us. Until of course they are posed a few simple questions which usually arise not just frequently from the Bible but just as frequent from their own commentary, and when pressed on such it appears that these very same people will resort to the default that one must understand Greek or Hebrew to even begin to understand a Bible that is written in English! But by saying so they do not seem to understand that they have, in just a few words, rendered the Bible written in English redundant, pointless and unreliable as any kind of “witness” source to the life and times of the Christ.

So is there at all any point to reading, never mind studying the Bible written in English? A Bible that those who have said that is clear and concise but suddenly insist that the Bible is fathomable and understandable only when one is tutored, trained and learned in the ancient Greek or Hebrew languages?

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I would suggest reading it in English and studying the words it was translated from when something catches your attention. It's also worth studying Jewish culture and the culture of the time as well as understanding the period of history where Israel was under Roman occupation. 

Yes any Greek work translated to English will lose something in translation.

Nietzsche has been translated to English even more recently, and people familiar with German usually remind us that a lot is loss in translation. It doesn't mean that nietzches work, ancient Greek works or the Bible is useless.

Just read the emerald tablets of thoth or what remains of them. They are great works and a little pain in the ass to understand without the use of Google and the opinions of some scholars. 

These things have value, but you Don't want to read to deep into them. So the general stories just like in the oddysey would be accurate as to the intended meaning when they were written, whether true or not. However when you start really digging into it, it might be hard to differentiate between actual inconsistencies and inconsistencies that are a result of how limited translations can be at showing the original meaning. 


zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,255
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
The Bible is what it is, and is what it has become.

It is a collection of Middle Eastern folk tales and creation myths.

And along with other similar compilations,

Have become the basis of  worldwide cultural, social and political ideologies.

Daft but true.

Yet probably an evolutionary certainty.

Popular religions and all fanciful creation hypotheses are analogies for something that a group of sentient organisms don't understand.

Best just leave them with their books and their ignorance.

Put yours in a skip if you wish.

Mine went into a metaphorical skip long ago.

Still makes for entertaining discussion though.

And not that I purport to understand the meaning and potential purpose of creation.

I just understand that religious books are what they are, and are what they have become.

GOD principle sound,

Floaty about blokes not so.

Amen.


Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Wylted


Is the Bible written in English worth the paper it is written on?

I would suggest reading it in English and studying the words it was translated from when something catches your attention.

So that's no, then.



but you Don't want to read to deep into them.

So why suggest "studying the words it was translated from" ? 


Yes any Greek work translated to English will lose something in translation.

So do you agree then that this loss renders the bible in English redundant, pointless and unreliable as any kind of “witness” source to the life and times of the Christ?


a result of how limited translations can be at showing the original meaning. 

Interesting. Do the meanings and definitions of words translated from Greek to English change? And can you give us an example  from the New Testamant where certain words change their meaning and definition once translated from Greek into English?

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2


Relative to the Priesthood I hold, it is not a matter of what I consider. I am an ordained High Priest.

 The same "High Priest" that  is also versed " in Greek"  then brings the "integrity" of the English Bible into doubt with this comment;


" Frankly, I'm shocked the book[bible] managed to have enough integrity left in it when monks and such finished their agenda and still managed to give us an inkling of truth"#79

 So when we have figures of such high status telling us that they are "shocked" that there is any remaining integrity at all in the Bible and only just enough to leave only an "inkling" of truth, does this not add to the pointlessness of the ancient scriptures written in English?

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Another,  he is himself educated in Greek that also makes the claim that for one to understand the NT Bible in English one has have been schooled in the Greek language while also telling us that:

“no one takes the Bible as“100% accurate”.

And have made comments such as :

"I would have translated the Greek words differently before putting them in the bible so as not to confuse people like you. You see the Greek language is highly contextual".



So when we consider that both the above mentioned - the High Priest & Bringerofrain  are qualified in the field of scripture and ancient Greek language, does not their learned and experienced opinion seriously damage the reliability and the credibility of this so called holy scripture? 
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Then there are people such as Preterists, those that believe that the Second Coming of the Christ has already taken place and had happened way back in AD 69-70 as written about in Revelation.

So doesn’t this completely do away with the whole last book of the Bible? What is  the purpose of this last book if the event had already happened over 2050 years ago. Can it simply be that Revelation only now serves as an `historical` record of an event that is alleged to have occurred all that time ago?

218 days later

Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,740
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
Is the Bible written in English worth the paper it is written on? I personally wouldn’t want to see this ancient work destroyed.

I think it is well known of me by now that on the surface I find the Bible (New Testament in particular) to be a book of contradictory, ambiguous, anomalous, vague, enigmatic and problematic half stories surrounding a man that believed or was led to believe he was a rightful king and heir to the throne of Jerusalem and the power struggle that he had to endure in the times of ancient Palestine under Roman occupation and between the many other factions and sects that existed at the time. And not to be taken literally at all times. i.e. a man didn’t rises from a physical death to be alive again after being physically dead for three days.

Others think to the contrary. For instance, there are those that I have met that believe the Bible to be clear and concise in its presentation and self evidently true and without any ambiguity whatsoever in the way it has come down to us. Until of course they are posed a few simple questions which usually arise not just frequently from the Bible but just as frequent from their own commentary, and when pressed on such it appears that these very same people will resort to the default that one must understand Greek or Hebrew to even begin to understand a Bible that is written in English! But by saying so they do not seem to understand that they have, in just a few words, rendered the Bible written in English redundant, pointless and unreliable as any kind of “witness” source to the life and times of the Christ.

So is there at all any point to reading, never mind studying the Bible written in English? A Bible that those who have said that is clear and concise but suddenly insist that the Bible is fathomable and understandable only when one is tutored, trained and learned in the ancient Greek or Hebrew languages?
The problem with the English translation of the Bible is the many ways English can be translated which have given rise to some 33,000 denominations of Christians.

The Jews are united behind their Hebrew Bible which makes up the Old Testament.
The Romans were united behind the Greek translation of the Gospels and books in The New Testament. The Roman Catholic Church made Christianity a universal religion based on their Greek and Latin translation of the New Testament.

But the problem started with Tyndale’s Bible.
A translation by William Tyndale of portions of the Bible from the original Greek and Hebrew texts.
The Tyndale Bible usually refers to the translations of various books of the Bible by William Tyndale in the 1500s. His work is credited with being the first English translation from the original Hebrew and Greek texts and the first English biblical translation that was mass-produced as a result of new advances in the art of printing. Tyndale never published a complete Bible prior to his execution, as he only finished translating the New Testament and roughly half of the Old Testament. However, Tyndale's translations have greatly influenced nearly every modern English translation of Scripture.

English is unique in that one can say anything in English which can mean the same thing to any other language translators but the meaning quite easily gets lost in translation.

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
English is unique in that one can say anything in English which can mean the same thing to any other language translators but the meaning quite easily gets lost in translation.

As I have already written above:

Stephen wrote;  when [Christians are]  pressed on such it appears that these very same people will resort to the default that one must understand Greek or Hebrew to even begin to understand a Bible that is written in English! But by saying so they do not seem to understand that they have, in just a few words, rendered the Bible written in English redundant, pointless and unreliable as any kind of “witness” source to the life and times of the Christ.#1

My point is that when Christians are pressed on matters biblical and posed awkward and or embarrassing questions about what is written in the bible, their default is along the lines of  " your question is redundant because you can't read or understand the context of ancient Greek of ancient Hebrew".  And by using this default they don't seem to realise that they, themselves, have just condemned all bibles written in English to the trash pile. Hence my question:

May They Just As Well Condemn The Bible To The Skip?

So is your answer yes or no?




Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,740
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
English is unique in that one can say anything in English which can mean the same thing to any other language translators but the meaning quite easily gets lost in translation.

As I have already written above:

Stephen wrote;  when [Christians are]  pressed on such it appears that these very same people will resort to the default that one must understand Greek or Hebrew to even begin to understand a Bible that is written in English! But by saying so they do not seem to understand that they have, in just a few words, rendered the Bible written in English redundant, pointless and unreliable as any kind of “witness” source to the life and times of the Christ.#1

My point is that when Christians are pressed on matters biblical and posed awkward and or embarrassing questions about what is written in the bible, their default is along the lines of  " your question is redundant because you can't read or understand the context of ancient Greek of ancient Hebrew".  And by using this default they don't seem to realise that they, themselves, have just condemned all bibles written in English to the trash pile. Hence my question:

May They Just As Well Condemn The Bible To The Skip?

So is your answer yes or no?
There was a reason the Bible was translated in over 150 different languages so it could become a universal outreach.
The fact the original Greek, Hebrew manuscripts are forever lost proves no one thought  they were worth saving.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
There was a reason the Bible was translated in over 150 different languages so it could become a universal outreach.
The fact the original Greek, Hebrew manuscripts are forever lost proves no one thought  they were worth saving.


OK. So what is your answer? 

Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,740
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
There was a reason the Bible was translated in over 150 different languages so it could become a universal outreach.
The fact the original Greek, Hebrew manuscripts are forever lost proves no one thought  they were worth saving.


OK. So what is your answer? 
Jesus better learn English before returning or he will be largely ignored again.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
Stephen wrote: May They Just As Well Condemn The Bible To The Skip?

Shila  wrote: There was a reason the Bible was translated in over 150 different languages so it could become a universal outreach.
The fact the original Greek, Hebrew manuscripts are forever lost proves no one thought  they were worth saving.

Stephen wrote: OK. So what is your answer? 
Shila  wrote: Jesus better learn English before returning or he will be largely ignored again.

But what about the bible? Should it be condemn The Bible To The Skip?


Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,740
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
Stephen wrote: May They Just As Well Condemn The Bible To The Skip?

Shila  wrote: There was a reason the Bible was translated in over 150 different languages so it could become a universal outreach.
The fact the original Greek, Hebrew manuscripts are forever lost proves no one thought  they were worth saving.

Stephen wrote: OK. So what is your answer? 
Shila  wrote: Jesus better learn English before returning or he will be largely ignored again.
Stephen wrote: But what about the bible? Should it be condemn The Bible To The Skip?
The Bible is what will be used to question and hold Jesus accountable to the world in as many languages it has been translated to.

English will make the job simpler because it is the most widely spoken language.

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
So your answer is , No, then. 


Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,740
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
The Bible is what will be used to question and hold Jesus accountable to the world in as many languages it has been translated to.

English will make the job simpler because it is the most widely spoken language.


So your answer is , No, then.
You cannot destroy the only evidence we have which is in the Bible that could possibly justify crucifying Jesus a second time.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Shila
So your answer is , No, then.
You cannot destroy the only evidence we have which is in the Bible..................

So your answer is no, and I agree but not for the same reasons. I said in my op :
Stephen wrote: I personally wouldn’t want to see this ancient work destroyed.#1

And so by Christians claiming for one  to know and understand the bible, one has to be able to read ancient Greek and ancient Hebrew is complete and utter bullshite and only used as default when they find themselves cornered by  awkward and embarrassing questions. 



Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,740
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
So your answer is , No, then.
You cannot destroy the only evidence we have which is in the Bible..................

So your answer is no, and I agree but not for the same reasons. I said in my op :
Stephen wrote: I personally wouldn’t want to see this ancient work destroyed.#1

And so by Christians claiming for one  to know and understand the bible, one has to be able to read ancient Greek and ancient Hebrew is complete and utter bullshite and only used as default when they find themselves cornered by  awkward and embarrassing questions. 

What you are not considering is the people who could read Hebrew and Ancient Greek where the very same people who demanded Jesus be crucified and crucified him.

It was only after the Bible was translated into English that a more moderate interpretation of the Bible surfaced. But did did not prevent the religious wars and crusades or religious discrimination.

Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
If it is made of paper.  Paper don't last that long. 
Put it on a usb stick 

Hey It seems like God only showed up and engaged with people in a "certain area."    And wih size in perspective a very small area. 
It's almost like the bible was ummmm,  did/done     WITHOUT taking / factoring in the events that happen in the year 2384. 

Was the bible written without this knowing ? 

It doesn't have a used by date but it definitely has a best before.

The parts of the bible written after a name ( not always a name )   and a set of numbers like for example 
The bible reads normal then all of a sudden
Wayne  1 : 22.  ( followed by writings ) 
Is them parts of the bible ummmm " different " in anyways.       

Are the scriptures in a bible more important then the rest ?  
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,740
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
If it is made of paper.  Paper don't last that long. 
Put it on a usb stick 

Hey It seems like God only showed up and engaged with people in a "certain area."    And wih size in perspective a very small area. 
It's almost like the bible was ummmm,  did/done     WITHOUT taking / factoring in the events that happen in the year 2384. 

Was the bible written without this knowing ? 

It doesn't have a used by date but it definitely has a best before.

The parts of the bible written after a name ( not always a name )   and a set of numbers like for example  

The bible reads normal then all of a sudden

Wayne  1 : 22.  ( followed by writings ) 

Is them parts of the bible ummmm " different " in anyways.       

Are the scriptures in a bible more important then the rest ?  
The scriptures is the message. The rest are the events that triggered the message. They help to provide a timeline and historical background.
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@Shila

Arrrr scripture,  you wouldn't have a god speak anything but hey
Tis brilliant. 

The taker downers of this message, it was the first time they heard such a thing I'm guessing. 
It must have been a very odd encounter for them. 
That being having god speak to them. Anddddd getting them to write down MEGA IMPORTANT SHIT what he says.    

God wouldn't be able to do a book like that these days. 
Like a BNT brand new testament  or NT  Newest test

Actually this is what will one day come about as a re- rise of the christians. 
The year 2384 god does a book.  

My guess for names is
Mavis 17 : 34
Garrett 
The person formally know as Eddie. 
$$ ♡♡ ☆☆.
Five.
Teak.
Fawn
And Russell.   


 

Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
God could of made this book 100% correct. In a more Nostradamus way.

He could of made it uncannily, undeniably 100% correct. 
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
God could of done a pinical of sciences book
Right?
Like if he wanted to right.  
He should of did like a be all and end all of human knowledge with a freaky mass of " predictions " book and in the last paragraph he writes. its me THE real one and only God here.
Then 
P.S  BE a seventh day adventist. 

Then bammmmm ima  insta 7th dayer. 

Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@Shila
How many denominations of Christians was there at the time of the bible coming to be known ?   

What specific type of Christian was the bible written for. ?
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
QUICK REMINDER.  
God didn't choose to interact with people and do the whole bible thing in and around the time you were here on earth. 
Andddddddddddd.
The whole 2nd coming thing looks like it's not going to happen in  our lifetimes.

What i am trying to say is. 
We the people of today are not that ummmm,  terribly important to god. 

I couldn't imagine us being nowhere near as important to god as puffins or stars.   
Just to name two of gods top 10 greatest loves.  
Butttttttttttt, i may be wrong.  
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
This skip. Is it a recyclable one ?  If so yes 

Or 

A bible buy back scheme. 

I will be keeping my  king james bible however for it Sits nicely inbetween  mein kemph and dianetics.  
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
I bet $10 bucks 
Every theist and probably every atheist  on site has a old tattered bible that used to be someone else's. 

 
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
This skip. Is it a recyclable one ?  If so yes 

All the skips contents usually end up in landfill ,Deb The skip is reusable...until it isn't.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,255
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
Worn out, then to either landfill or incineration.

Bibles and people alike.

Though tattered old bibles have a habit of outliving their guardian.
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@zedvictor4
I still have trouble picturing a priest / pastor standing their speaking with a computer infront of him. 

Do you think they do? 

Maybe a computer tab with a old awsome looking bible cover would be a hit.