imtwenty
Meteor
Can I put anything here and it will go underneath my name everywhere?
Posts: 73
|
Post by imtwenty on Apr 1, 2010 7:36:37 GMT -5
I have been watching the Eric "Blue Office Chair" Lastname and Dan "The Cube King" Brown debate. I commented on one of the Blue Office Chair's video about the bible. No one has responded yet. I am starting a similar discussion here. Some people claim, the bible is "the inspired word of god" and should be taken literally. How do these believers rectify possible errors in translation from the original languages (hebrew & greek... I think) ? Do they just deny the errors? How come Christians do not read a hebrew old testament? Hebrew should be closer to the actual word of god. Islam (at least the most dominant forms of Islam) require the Qur’an to be in Arabic. Literal readings of the bible make more sense in this case. It seems to me that the bible has been through a very long, multilingual, game of Telephone. The modern wording is certainly different from the original. For those of you who don't know Telephone (are there such people!?!?), here is a wikipedia article. It goes by a much more racist name. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispersThe whole business reminds me of this old (and bad) joke that my dad told me. CAUTION LAME HUMOR A few years ago, a young priest went to work in an Abbey and his first job was to copy the ancient scriptures of the bible by hand. One day he noticed a problem. All the priests, who were doing the same thing, were making copies from other copies and he went to the Abbot and told him about it. " Father..." The young priest explained, "If there was just one mistake made then it's been repeated over and over again!"
The Abbot thanked the priest for noticing the problem and disappeared. Hours later, when no one had seen him all day, the worried priest went searching and finally found him sobbing over the original text, which had been locked away in the Monasteries safe for centuries.
The young priest was somewhat taken aback at his distress and said; "Father, what's wrong?" Tearfully, the old Abbot looked up and said;
"Celebrate......the word was celebrate"
Also I think there is no mentions of priests and therefore priestly celibacy in the bible. I know not all Christians do the celibacy but some do. Priests are celibate because Christ was celibate...unless you are the other Dan Brown or you believe the Da Vinci CodeThoughts!?
|
|
|
Post by stephen5000 on Apr 1, 2010 10:31:29 GMT -5
One thing I've never understood is believers who claim that claim that their favoured translation of the Bible - and their specific interpretation of such - is the inspired word of God (and thus everyone else got it wrong), especially since pretty much all modern versions of the Bible have clear flaws in them (you can tell just by looking at the translation notes).
Some versions attempt to REALLY modernize the Bible in current English and current perspectives on life. From my perspective, this really scews the original meaning and leaves much potential for the translator/adaptor to input their own views on Christianity that weren't in the original text - but this has probably happened over the history of the Bible. Any hope to take the Bible literally has been lost centuries (or longer) ago.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Apr 1, 2010 14:38:21 GMT -5
The reason Priests are celibate in the Catholic Church is because Christ was Celibate and he was the first priest, and it has become Church Doctrine to be celibate to be a priest. Now Permanate Deacons and Acolytes dont have to be, but they cannot become Priests.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 1, 2010 15:21:58 GMT -5
The reason Priests are celibate in the Catholic Church is because Christ was Celibate and he was the first priest, and it has become Church Doctrine to be celibate to be a priest. Now Permanate Deacons and Acolytes dont have to be, but they cannot become Priests. Well... most priests are celibate in the Catholic Church.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Apr 1, 2010 15:23:33 GMT -5
Thats what I said
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 1, 2010 15:24:33 GMT -5
No, I don't think you understand what I'm talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Apr 1, 2010 15:33:02 GMT -5
yea yea re-read it. Not funny bashing religons.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 1, 2010 15:47:09 GMT -5
yea yea re-read it. Not funny bashing religons. I wasn't bashing it. I was bringing up a legitimate point and issue.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Apr 1, 2010 15:49:27 GMT -5
yea yea re-read it. Not funny bashing religons. I wasn't bashing it. I was bringing up a legitimate point and issue. Okay I just dont find it said kindly.
|
|
|
Post by stephen5000 on Apr 1, 2010 18:30:32 GMT -5
There's one point I'm confused about here. Where in the Bible does it state that Jesus was celibate? It never makes mention of him having a family, but it never says he didn't either. Also, it's not like the Bible is detailed enough about what happened to say everything Jesus did in his free time.
|
|
imtwenty
Meteor
Can I put anything here and it will go underneath my name everywhere?
Posts: 73
|
Post by imtwenty on Apr 1, 2010 18:34:30 GMT -5
The reason Priests are celibate in the Catholic Church is because Christ was Celibate and he was the first priest, and it has become Church Doctrine to be celibate to be a priest. Now Permanate Deacons and Acolytes dont have to be, but they cannot become Priests. I knew this and forgot. Thank you for reminding me! I'm not a religious person but... If priests/people were like Christ in all aspects of their lives than the world might be a better place. Everyone turning the other cheek. Love. Peace. Understanding. Long hair. Sandals. Forgiveness. Ect...
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 1, 2010 18:37:05 GMT -5
There's one point I'm confused about here. Where in the Bible does it state that Jesus was celibate? It never makes mention of him having a family, but it never says he didn't either. Also, it's not like the Bible is detailed enough about what happened to say everything Jesus did in his free time. We must also remember that the books included in the standard Bible (new and old testament) aren't the only books in existence.
|
|
imtwenty
Meteor
Can I put anything here and it will go underneath my name everywhere?
Posts: 73
|
Post by imtwenty on Apr 1, 2010 20:56:35 GMT -5
There's one point I'm confused about here. Where in the Bible does it state that Jesus was celibate? It never makes mention of him having a family, but it never says he didn't either. Also, it's not like the Bible is detailed enough about what happened to say everything Jesus did in his free time. I think you are right. It never explicitly says Jesus was celibate. It was weird (really weird) for a 30 year old guy to be single and have no family. The common interpretation of the religious church fathers that Jesus was celibate. Paul (the Bible guy) was very very pro-celibacy. Paul said (and I am paraphrasing), "Be celibate. if you cant be celibate then get married."
|
|
bleabot
Moon
Set phazors to dance, Mr. Warf.
Posts: 109
|
Post by bleabot on Apr 1, 2010 21:27:59 GMT -5
The original hebrew text is very different from the modern texts. I mean, the big point is the same (ten commandments, Jesus = Messiah, etc.), but some of the details are skewed. For example, Hebrew is not very specific; the word for "day" can also mean a long period of time. It all depends on context. If you take that into account, God creating the world in 7 days could actually be an enormous period of time...although I'm not sure how the language works and haven't read the original, so it could be days xD
Point is, yeah, the Bible has been lost in translation. That's one reason I'm agnostic. If I'm ever incredibly rich and bored in the future, I plan on learning Hebrew and Greek and attempting to read the Bible in its mostly-original form (the Old Testament is in Hebrew, but the New Testament is Greek).
|
|
jaw
Moon
Oh yeah!
Posts: 154
|
Post by jaw on Apr 1, 2010 23:04:31 GMT -5
The reason Priests are celibate in the Catholic Church is because Christ was Celibate and he was the first priest, and it has become Church Doctrine to be celibate to be a priest. Now Permanate Deacons and Acolytes dont have to be, but they cannot become Priests. Well... most priests are celibate in the Catholic Church. Did I hear a little boy yell rape? Haha
|
|
|
Post by IMAGINARYphilosophy on Apr 2, 2010 4:42:46 GMT -5
The main premise of this question underscores why Martin Luther was probably one of the biggest fools in the history of Christianity, despite his good intentions.
The notion that the layman should be allowed to interpret the Bible for him/herself is an outright folly, as those who are not members of the clergy or scholars of religion have not had the appropriate education to do so. The Bible is laced with references to the time and place of its creation, the culture and history of Judea from approximately 1400BCE to 100CE. Without this context, the intended meaning of the text becomes lost, leaving the whole of the work open to subjective standards of literal and figurative interpretation.
Any person of the modern age who believes they can simply pick up the Bible, read and understand it is sorely mistaken. And unfortunately, I estimate that this is a belief that most Christian people carry.
|
|
imtwenty
Meteor
Can I put anything here and it will go underneath my name everywhere?
Posts: 73
|
Post by imtwenty on Apr 2, 2010 5:44:20 GMT -5
The main premise of this question underscores why Martin Luther was probably one of the biggest fools in the history of Christianity, despite his good intentions. The notion that the layman should be allowed to interpret the Bible for him/herself is an outright folly, as those who are not members of the clergy or scholars of religion have not had the appropriate education to do so. The Bible is laced with references to the time and place of its creation, the culture and history of Judea from approximately 1400 BCE to 100 CE. Without this context, the intended meaning of the text becomes lost, leaving the whole of the work open to subjective standards of literal and figurative interpretation. Any person of the modern age who believes they can simply pick up the Bible, read and understand it is sorely mistaken. And unfortunately, I estimate that this is a belief that most Christian people carry. I totally disagree with what you say about Martin Luther. I would rather have 1,000,000,000 Christian thinking for themselves and interpreting the bible their own way then have a single interpretation decided by the few. If only priests can read the bible and people rely on that priest as the sole arbiter of religious knowledge within their community. The priest alone is control of the community's theology. That sounds bad.
|
|
imtwenty
Meteor
Can I put anything here and it will go underneath my name everywhere?
Posts: 73
|
Post by imtwenty on Apr 2, 2010 5:49:32 GMT -5
Well... most priests are celibate in the Catholic Church. Did I hear a little boy yell rape? Haha It bothers that people are more upset about the Pope's cover-up of molestation than about his possible Nazi past. No one (to my knowledge) has proven that he was a real Nazi but the possibility bothers me. I'm not saying rape is better or worse then being a Nazi. Both are bad. Everyone should be upset about both. Did I fulfill Godwin's law?
|
|
|
Post by IMAGINARYphilosophy on Apr 2, 2010 6:01:45 GMT -5
I totally disagree with what you say about Martin Luther. I would rather have 1,000,000,000 Christian thinking for themselves and interpreting the bible their own way then have a single interpretation decided by the few. If only priests can read the bible and people rely on that priest as the sole arbiter of religious knowledge within their community. The priest alone is control of the community's theology. That sounds bad. On the contrary, if a single scholastic body were empowered to make authoritative claims about what the Bible really says and means, based on a thorough understanding of the work's historical context, then all the argument and speculation over interpretation would be confined to those persons best able to make such a determination. In doing so, you eliminate the influence of those who use the Bible subjectively to further their own campaigns of intolerance and self-empowerment.
|
|
imtwenty
Meteor
Can I put anything here and it will go underneath my name everywhere?
Posts: 73
|
Post by imtwenty on Apr 2, 2010 6:57:52 GMT -5
I totally disagree with what you say about Martin Luther. I would rather have 1,000,000,000 Christian thinking for themselves and interpreting the bible their own way then have a single interpretation decided by the few. If only priests can read the bible and people rely on that priest as the sole arbiter of religious knowledge within their community. The priest alone is control of the community's theology. That sounds bad. On the contrary, if a single scholastic body were empowered to make authoritative claims about what the Bible really says and means, based on a thorough understanding of the work's historical context, then all the argument and speculation over interpretation would be confined to those persons best able to make such a determination. In doing so, you eliminate the influence of those who use the Bible subjectively to further their own campaigns of intolerance and self-empowerment. You are assuming that the single scholastic body would not be used to further that body's own campaigns of intolerance and self-empowerment (even accidentally or subconsciously).
|
|