Those condescending atheists

[TboneAgain]

Gangin' up on me. Shoulda seen it comin'.   

Why in the world did I stick my toes into this water?

Do you believe that the old and new testament, as well as the other books that relate to God and Christ, are fictional constructs of the human mind?

If yes; why would people go to that much trouble?

No, and that's not what I said. What I said is that they are works written by man, and heavily (sometimes politically) edited over the centuries. Neither Testament is a work that fell out the sky one day, to be reprinted ad infinitum and verbatim through the ages. King James I, who commissioned the most widely-used translation of both testaments, didn't much care for women, and used his influence to alter the texts to reflect his views. Perhaps more importantly, KJV is the product of a period in England's history when government and church were inextricably entwined.

I must honestly confess that my biblical training, such as it is, does not extend further than the KJV. But that translation remains the most-used in the Christian world. It is what it is.

Sorry, I kind of glazed over and ...
Oh, this went right over your head, didn't it?
Time is definitely a human construct, if man were not here, it wouldn't exist.
Kind of like a tree falling in the forest, if no one heard it, it made no discernible noise.

Point is, the Universe was created solely for our existence, all life.
I know, that sounds vain, but look at it this way, if time did not exist, the big bang would look like a big explosion, or implosion, depending on the theory you prefer.
But slow it down to near stop frame, and throw life into the mix, now we have a place of existence.

From my years of researching the subject, when we die, all those that went before us, will greet us as if they had just finished life here on Earth as well, in fact when we're gone, the Universe will no longer exist, because time does not exist on the other side.
Time is merely a flash in the pan.

You are trying to understand life as wee know it from a human perspective, which by comparison, is that of the ant trying to understand infinity, the concept is far beyond their comprehension, as is life and the universe to us.

Do you really think matter ,physics, algebra, water, etc matter to us after we're gone?
Of course not, it is the here and now, it is all slowed down solely for our existence, or rather all life through out the known expanse beyond us.

Is that too deep?

No, I think time is a constant. The measurement of time is a human construct, and that's one thing, but time itself is quite another. To propose otherwise is to propose that this moment is every moment, that everything that has ever happened is still happening, that all time is now.

And for the record, I think when a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, it still makes a lot of noise. 

I'm not privy to know why the universe was created. It massages my vanity to think that it was all done for us; and maybe it was. I simply don't know.

But to classify time itself as a human construct that exists only in this life... that's too many for me. If it were so, what sort of structure could life (however you define it) on the "other side" have? If you remove time as a concept or as a fact, how does anything "happen?" (Or, for that matter, stop happening?) How can there be an existence where there is no tomorrow, no yesterday, and today is just one big blob of "now?"

No, it's not too deep. I've heard these things before. I guess I'm stuck with this pesky human perspective because, well, I'm a pesky human. Accepting the concept of God as Creator and of Christ as Savior is a metaphysical leap for me, as it is for many. It is an act of faith, simply because it cannot be proven by any means we have as humans living on Earth.

Discarding the concept of time is not something I'm willing to do. Yes, I see things from a human perspective. That may be because I'm a human. 

[kramarat]

Gangin' up on me. Shoulda seen it comin'.   

Why in the world did I stick my toes into this water?

No, and that's not what I said. What I said is that they are works written by man, and heavily (sometimes politically) edited over the centuries. Neither Testament is a work that fell out the sky one day, to be reprinted ad infinitum and verbatim through the ages. King James I, who commissioned the most widely-used translation of both testaments, didn't much care for women, and used his influence to alter the texts to reflect his views. Perhaps more importantly, KJV is the product of a period in England's history when government and church were inextricably entwined.

I must honestly confess that my biblical training, such as it is, does not extend further than the KJV. But that translation remains the most-used in the Christian world. It is what it is.

No, I think time is a constant. The measurement of time is a human construct, and that's one thing, but time itself is quite another. To propose otherwise is to propose that this moment is every moment, that everything that has ever happened is still happening, that all time is now.

And for the record, I think when a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, it still makes a lot of noise. 

I'm not privy to know why the universe was created. It massages my vanity to think that it was all done for us; and maybe it was. I simply don't know.

But to classify time itself as a human construct that exists only in this life... that's too many for me. If it were so, what sort of structure could life (however you define it) on the "other side" have? If you remove time as a concept or as a fact, how does anything "happen?" (Or, for that matter, stop happening?) How can there be an existence where there is no tomorrow, no yesterday, and today is just one big blob of "now?"

No, it's not too deep. I've heard these things before. I guess I'm stuck with this pesky human perspective because, well, I'm a pesky human. Accepting the concept of God as Creator and of Christ as Savior is a metaphysical leap for me, as it is for many. It is an act of faith, simply because it cannot be proven by any means we have as humans living on Earth.

Discarding the concept of time is not something I'm willing to do. Yes, I see things from a human perspective. That may be because I'm a human. 

I'll agree that humans, (having written the Bible), likely colored God's word with their own beliefs at the time. In fact, while I was watching The Bible, on History channel, a commercial came on from the Catholic church, and in it they claimed that it was Catholics that wrote the entire Bible. Someone must have called them on it, because it only ran once, and they changed the wording to, "We compiled the entire Bible", which is still a stretch.

Over time, we have seen people become Bible obsessed to the point of insanity; the Spanish Inquisition, the Christian Crusades, the Salem witch trials, David Koresh, Jim Jones, and the Westboro Baptist Church, to site a few examples. I don't see these things as a weakness with God, but as a weakness with humans.

Like you said, there are more Christian denominations than can be counted; each one jockeying to be #1 in the eyes of God. This is mostly the reason that I am not big on church. I am going to one now, but the minute I hear them start saying that they have it right, and nobody else does, I'm out.

I think that each individual should accept Christ and God into their hearts, and I don't believe it will be identical for each person. The Bible is a tool to use to help forge that relationship. I know it says to worship in groups and go to church, but I think that was intended to reinforce the individual relationship with God, not form groups that are separate from others, appoint leaders, and impose rules that are created by man. It's a form of socialism, (IMO), and has evolved to the point that it reduces the burden on the individual to know God in his/her own heart.

Anyway, I'm not going to gang up on you.

I don't think God should be pushed on anyone. He's always available to anyone that asks though.

[Solar]

No, I think time is a constant. The measurement of time is a human construct, and that's one thing, but time itself is quite another. To propose otherwise is to propose that this moment is every moment, that everything that has ever happened is still happening, that all time is now.

And for the record, I think when a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, it still makes a lot of noise. 

I'm not privy to know why the universe was created. It massages my vanity to think that it was all done for us; and maybe it was. I simply don't know.

But to classify time itself as a human construct that exists only in this life... that's too many for me. If it were so, what sort of structure could life (however you define it) on the "other side" have? If you remove time as a concept or as a fact, how does anything "happen?" (Or, for that matter, stop happening?) How can there be an existence where there is no tomorrow, no yesterday, and today is just one big blob of "now?"

No, it's not too deep. I've heard these things before. I guess I'm stuck with this pesky human perspective because, well, I'm a pesky human. Accepting the concept of God as Creator and of Christ as Savior is a metaphysical leap for me, as it is for many. It is an act of faith, simply because it cannot be proven by any means we have as humans living on Earth.

Discarding the concept of time is not something I'm willing to do. Yes, I see things from a human perspective. That may be because I'm a human. 

I almost missed this, you know better than to lump replies together...

The reason and attraction were here, is to feel, time, love, hate, hot, cold, time etc infinitude.
That's why life is a gift. In the spirit realm, there is nothing, just existence, but life is a challenge, it is what it is, so we can Feel alive, but it's mere existence is time stopped, so we can get on.

In the spirit world, there is no large or small, up or down, pain, sorrow even love or hate, and time is completely a different view.
Then again, with none of the elements that make us human, what is the use of time?

Imagine yourself wandering through infinity and wondering what those little flashes of light are around you, then stop one of those flashes midstream, get on an electron microscope and peer into the view finder and see debris nearly frozen in time, then zoom in more to discover even smaller bodies floating through space, then zoom in even further and now you see these aren't individual bodies, but rather clusters of more clusters.
So you zoom in with your telescope even further and see brightly lit bodies, trillions of them, even closer upon examination, you discover smaller bodies circling around the bright ones, with even closer inspection you now see color, which is something unique in and by itself considering like time, it doesn't exist.

This color thing interests you, and you want to explore even further, while others around you see other things that attract them, you and others like you agree this little colored object seems interesting at the moment,  so you enter and investigate.
Keep in mind, time does not exist where you come from, so our little excursion was merely a brief moment where we came from and we'll be back in a second, but here, in order to experience this little colorful marble, you have to be one with it on a scale our size to appreciate it.
Any smaller and we couldn't see the vast horizon, any larger and we couldn't feed ourselves or appreciate it's true beauty.

But as quickly as we all entered, we will all depart just as rapidly because it was us, all of us as a collective that stopped that flash in motion to have something to do.
Does that make us a part of God, or God himself, no one knows, but regardless, we are still aware of God and know we have a certain set of agreed upon rules to make our short existence here all the better.
Maybe just maybe, those that were here before us were able to see that our existence here as rather miserable and were sent to heed us warning , reminders of who and why we're here.
People like Noah, Moses, Jesus, but apparently we are a selfish lot and trample on others regardless of warnings from (for a lack of a better term) God, we still ignore the purpose of our existence, to experience the most important part of our journey, the gift of love.

[JTA]

Gangin' up on me. Shoulda seen it comin'.   

Why in the world did I stick my toes into this water?

No, and that's not what I said. What I said is that they are works written by man, and heavily (sometimes politically) edited over the centuries. Neither Testament is a work that fell out the sky one day, to be reprinted ad infinitum

This is something I've always been curious about. I enjoy reading philosophical texts, much of them originally written in German or some other language. Something that always strikes me as interesting is when I'm reading sometimes the translated text will have an asterisk next to a word or phrase with a note mentioning there's no direct English translation, but the word/phrase sort of means "such and such". Try reading anything by Heidegger and you'll see what exactly what I'm talking about. Some of the words remain untranslated and you're more or less forced to incorporate the words into your vocabulary (Dasein for example is the most obvious. It directly translates into "there-being" if I remember correctly).

You mentioned the bible has been translated many times over from its original language (NT - Greek, OT - Hebrew?). How is one to know that they aren't missing out when reading, say, an the King James version of the bible and not some other version? Surely the differences aren't too great, but can't even slight variations in words and sentences communicate ideas in an entirely different manner? I've heard from others that to get the full effect of certain texts, you must read it in its original language. When I read texts translated from German surely I'm missing out on many of the nuances implicit in the language itself that cannot be translated properly into English. I wonder if the same applies to the bible? The general gist is there I suppose, so maybe that's all that matters. It seems though that for a text that holds such a special place for so many, it ought to be the duty of every Christian to find the oldest, most original untranslated text (if it even exists) and read it in its original form to get the full effect.

[kramarat]

This is something I've always been curious about. I enjoy reading philosophical texts, much of them originally written in German or some other language. Something that always strikes me as interesting is when I'm reading sometimes the translated text will have an asterisk next to a word or phrase with a note mentioning there's no direct English translation, but the word/phrase sort of means "such and such". Try reading anything by Heidegger and you'll see what exactly what I'm talking about. Some of the words remain untranslated and you're more or less forced to incorporate the words into your vocabulary (Dasein for example is the most obvious. It directly translates into "there-being" if I remember correctly).

You mentioned the bible has been translated many times over from its original language (NT - Greek, OT - Hebrew?). How is one to know that they aren't missing out when reading, say, an the King James version of the bible and not some other version? Surely the differences aren't too great, but can't even slight variations in words and sentences communicate ideas in an entirely different manner? I've heard from others that to get the full effect of certain texts, you must read it in its original language. When I read texts translated from German surely I'm missing out on many of the nuances implicit in the language itself that cannot be translated properly into English. I wonder if the same applies to the bible? The general gist is there I suppose, so maybe that's all that matters. It seems though that for a text that holds such a special place for so many, it ought to be the duty of every Christian to find the oldest, most original untranslated text (if it even exists) and read it in its original form to get the full effect.

Just my opinion, but when it comes to the Bible, I believe that God intended for us to take in the entire forest, rather than obsessing over the individual trees. Even among Christians, groups of people attempt to take ownership of the true meaning. Much like my conservatism, I believe that the individual should take God's word for him/herself, rather than attempting to make it a collective truth. Humans can mess up anything, it doesn't matter how perfect it started out.

[MFA]

This is something I've always been curious about. I enjoy reading philosophical texts, much of them originally written in German or some other language. Something that always strikes me as interesting is when I'm reading sometimes the translated text will have an asterisk next to a word or phrase with a note mentioning there's no direct English translation, but the word/phrase sort of means "such and such". Try reading anything by Heidegger and you'll see what exactly what I'm talking about. Some of the words remain untranslated and you're more or less forced to incorporate the words into your vocabulary (Dasein for example is the most obvious. It directly translates into "there-being" if I remember correctly).

You mentioned the bible has been translated many times over from its original language (NT - Greek, OT - Hebrew?). How is one to know that they aren't missing out when reading, say, an the King James version of the bible and not some other version? Surely the differences aren't too great, but can't even slight variations in words and sentences communicate ideas in an entirely different manner? I've heard from others that to get the full effect of certain texts, you must read it in its original language. When I read texts translated from German surely I'm missing out on many of the nuances implicit in the language itself that cannot be translated properly into English. I wonder if the same applies to the bible? The general gist is there I suppose, so maybe that's all that matters. It seems though that for a text that holds such a special place for so many, it ought to be the duty of every Christian to find the oldest, most original untranslated text (if it even exists) and read it in its original form to get the full effect.

It is possible to do this, but it isn't easy to learn Hebrew.  Greek is easier and since the vocabulary of the New Testament isn't very large (only a few hundred words), it's not inaccessible, even to the layman.

However, most modern translations are translated, not from existing translations, but from the earliest extant collections of texts.  If there are doubts about translation or accuracy, simply look at multiple translations.  It gives you a pretty good idea as to the original autographs.

There's still the issue of idiom, but there are many commentaries available.  Conspiracy theories a là Dan Brown notwithstanding, an accurate reading of the Bible in English is possible and accessible.

(I would add that the KJV is a notoriously bad translation; much of the earliest texts were not available when it was translated (it was largely translated from the Vulgate--a translation of a translation), it was politically motivated (rather than motivated purely by accuracy or doctrinal purity), and the agenda that led the team of translators made for a change in tone of language.

[JTA]

It is possible to do this, but it isn't easy to learn Hebrew.  Greek is easier and since the vocabulary of the New Testament isn't very large (only a few hundred words), it's not inaccessible, even to the layman.

However, most modern translations are translated, not from existing translations, but from the earliest extant collections of texts.  If there are doubts about translation or accuracy, simply look at multiple translations.  It gives you a pretty good idea as to the original autographs.

There's still the issue of idiom, but there are many commentaries available.  Conspiracy theories a là Dan Brown notwithstanding, an accurate reading of the Bible in English is possible and accessible.

(I would add that the KJV is a notoriously bad translation; much of the earliest texts were not available when it was translated (it was largely translated from the Vulgate--a translation of a translation), it was politically motivated (rather than motivated purely by accuracy or doctrinal purity), and the agenda that led the team of translators made for a change in tone of language.

The only translation of the bible I've read was the King James. What in your opinion is both the most accurate and accessible version of the bible?

[MFA]

The only translation of the bible I've read was the King James. What in your opinion is both the most accurate and accessible version of the bible?

I don't think there is a single "most accurate" version.  Different versions have their strengths.  NASB is a "word-for-word" translation which is good for indepth study; not great for plain understanding.  NIV is quite good.  Lately I've been reading a translation called "God's Word," that has made a lot of good translation decisions, but also a few poor ones.

The problem, as someone stated, is that no language translates directly.  There are different grammatical rules, lack of straight equivalency, and issues of idiom.  But there isn't a translation that I know of that is so bad that it should be discarded.

[walkstall]

I don't think there is a single "most accurate" version.  Different versions have their strengths.  NASB is a "word-for-word" translation which is good for indepth study; not great for plain understanding.  NIV is quite good.  Lately I've been reading a translation called "God's Word," that has made a lot of good translation decisions, but also a few poor ones.

The problem, as someone stated, is that no language translates directly.  There are different grammatical rules, lack of straight equivalency, and issues of idiom.  But there isn't a translation that I know of that is so bad that it should be discarded.

MFA
It's a shame you live in Canada, would you make a good politician young man. 

[MFA]

MFA
It's a shame you live in Canada, would you make a good politician young man. 

NO THANK YOU!

[JustKari]

I don't think there is a single "most accurate" version.  Different versions have their strengths.  NASB is a "word-for-word" translation which is good for indepth study; not great for plain understanding.  NIV is quite good.  Lately I've been reading a translation called "God's Word," that has made a lot of good translation decisions, but also a few poor ones.

The problem, as someone stated, is that no language translates directly.  There are different grammatical rules, lack of straight equivalency, and issues of idiom.  But there isn't a translation that I know of that is so bad that it should be discarded.

I could easily discard "The Message", that version is barely a Bible.  I am reading the ESV, English Standard Version and like it even better than NIV.  There are tons of free tranlations online, you can even buy Bibles with two translations side-by-side.

[kramarat]

I could easily discard "The Message", that version is barely a Bible.  I am reading the ESV, English Standard Version and like it even better than NIV.  There are tons of free tranlations online, you can even buy Bibles with two translations side-by-side.

Now wait just a minute...

Are you guys saying that there are versions of the Bible, in which the message has been completely distorted?

[JustKari]

Now wait just a minute...

Are you guys saying that there are versions of the Bible, in which the message has been completely distorted?

I don't know that I would call it completely distorted, but it tries too hard to be current.  Here is the Lord's Prayer from The Message (Matthew 6:9-14)

7-13 "The world is full of so-called prayer warriors who are prayer-ignorant. They're full of formulas and programs and advice, peddling techniques for getting what you want from God. Don't fall for that nonsense. This is your Father you are dealing with, and he knows better than you what you need. With a God like this loving you, you can pray very simply. Like this:

Our Father in heaven,
Reveal who you are. Set the world right;
Do what's best—as above, so below.
Keep us alive with three square meals.
Keep us forgiven with you and forgiving others.
Keep us safe from ourselves and the Devil.
You're in charge! You can do anything you want!
You're ablaze in beauty! Yes. Yes. Yes.



14-15 "In prayer there is a connection between what God does and what you do. You can't get forgiveness from God, for instance, without also forgiving others. If you refuse to do your part, you cut yourself off from God's part.

 

[kramarat]

I don't know that I would call it completely distorted, but it tries too hard to be current.  Here is the Lord's Prayer from The Message (Matthew 6:9-14)

Hmmm.....I see what you mean. Kind of a "chill out, God is your buddy", type attitude.

I don't think it's terrible, since God knows what's in our hearts, but they shouldn't be calling that the Lord's Prayer. Also, the opening line, before the prayer, is utter garbage. Christians casting disparaging remarks about other Christians, really gets under my skin.

I won't be getting "The Message".

[MFA]

Hmmm.....I see what you mean. Kind of a "chill out, God is your buddy", type attitude.

I don't think it's terrible, since God knows what's in our hearts, but they shouldn't be calling that the Lord's Prayer. Also, the opening line, before the prayer, is utter garbage. Christians casting disparaging remarks about other Christians, really gets under my skin.

I won't be getting "The Message".

The Message is a paraphrase, not true translation.  It's okay for what it is.

Consider God's Word Translation:

"This is how you should pray:

Our Father in heaven,
    let your name be kept holy.
Let your kingdom come.
    Let your will be done on earth
        as it is done in heaven.
Give us our daily bread today.
Forgive us as we forgive others.
Don't allow us to be tempted.
    Instead, rescue us from the evil one.

"If you forgive the failures of others, your heavenly Father will also forgive you."

Or the New Living Translation:

"Pray like this:

Our Father in heaven,
    may your name be kept holy.
May your Kingdom come soon.
May your will be done on earth,
    as it is in heaven.
Give us today the food we need,
and forgive us our sins,
    as we have forgiven those who sin against us.
And don't let us yield to temptation,
    but rescue us from the evil one.
"If you forgive those who sin against you, your heavenly Father will forgive you."

It can be done in contemporary and very understandable language (without the paraphrase that attempts to "fill in the gaps" of understanding).