Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 123 (8765 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2017 4:55 PM
387 online now:
Asgara (AdminAsgara), caffeine, PaulK, Tangle, Tanypteryx, vimesey (6 members, 381 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: aristotle
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 812,251 Year: 16,857/21,208 Month: 2,746/3,593 Week: 213/646 Day: 91/62 Hour: 2/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1234
5
67
...
10Next
Author Topic:   Superiority of the 'Protestant Canon'?
jar
Member
Posts: 29040
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 61 of 146 (671563)
08-27-2012 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Artemis Entreri
08-27-2012 2:06 PM


Re: Jude *quotes* Enoch
you know the sort of crazy that isn't-allowed-in-Europe-Christians.

Then that is Europe's loss.

But it is also unrelated to the question under discussion it seems.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2012 2:06 PM Artemis Entreri has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2012 4:02 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9434
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 62 of 146 (671570)
08-27-2012 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Artemis Entreri
08-27-2012 2:06 PM


Re: Jude *quotes* Enoch
quote:
I am mostly talking about the "i read the bible all by myself and now I am going to create my own faith" christians. I think "most" evangelical protestants fall into this category (Baptists, Pentacostals, 7th day adventist); aka the American Christians. you know the sort of crazy that isn't-allowed-in-Europe-Christians.

I never understood why a so called "professional" church guy had any more of a mind to understand scripture than a layman.

And while I agree that some can read what they want into scripture, this goes for churches as well as individuals.

Finally, it is my belief that if one searches for truth with a sincere heart, truth will find them.

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2012 2:06 PM Artemis Entreri has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2012 4:10 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1672 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 63 of 146 (671575)
08-27-2012 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by jar
08-27-2012 2:51 PM


Re: Jude *quotes* Enoch
you are very wierd.

1st you quote me on the silliest of semantics because you obviously think in absolutes, and because not ALL protestants.

:: Roll Eyes::

jar writes:

But it is also unrelated to the question under discussion it seems.

then you quote me to tell me that i am off topic (from your POV). why would you even respond at all?

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 08-27-2012 2:51 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by AdminPD, posted 08-27-2012 4:21 PM Artemis Entreri has acknowledged this reply

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1672 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 64 of 146 (671576)
08-27-2012 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Phat
08-27-2012 3:39 PM


Re: Jude *quotes* Enoch
I never understood why a so called "professional" church guy had any more of a mind to understand scripture than a layman.

gee i don't know, maybe because it wasn't one guy. Maybe because its an apostolic tradition, you know started by 12 guys who followed Jesus around. because it predates the bible by almost 400 years. Maybe because it doesn't get its legitamacy from a book that was translated into German or English in the 16th century. Maybe because it realizes that the bible is only part of the answer. Maybe because it predates the whole idea of "denominations". Maybe you are just missing the point.

I dunno it could be a lot of reasons now that I think about it.

And while I agree that some can read what they want into scripture, this goes for churches as well as individuals.

hmmm less so with groups. I prefer stuff that is peer reviewed by a larger audience of aherents so that the idea can be discussed, and challeged, and even refuted, rather than one german guy who created a "faith" after reading one book in german in the 16th century, but that is me.

Finally, it is my belief that if one searches for truth with a sincere heart, truth will find them.

well...good luck with that.

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Phat, posted 08-27-2012 3:39 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 65 of 146 (671577)
08-27-2012 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Artemis Entreri
08-27-2012 4:02 PM


Rule Violation
Rule #2: Stay on topic
Rule #10: Argue the position and not the person.

Stick to revealing the errors or omissions in your opponents facts or logic.

This isn't a chat page. Please debate and move the discussion forward.

Stick to the topic. Reread Message 1 for a refresher.

Please do not reply to this message.

Thanks
AdminPD


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2012 4:02 PM Artemis Entreri has acknowledged this reply

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1672 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 66 of 146 (671578)
08-27-2012 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by NoNukes
08-27-2012 2:20 PM


Re: Jude *quotes* Enoch
You seem to be using the term "Protestant" to refer to a class of worshippers that excludes Lutherans. Such a usage would be ... non-standard, and it should not be too terribly surprising if someone did not pick up on that usage without some help.

no. let me break it down again

I was commenting on a fellow catholic (catholic scientist) and his amusing observation on a protestant poster who seems to not know what he/she thinks he/she knows. Which is a common thread here amongst the pro-creationist Christians (amusingly also protestant). And this very strange poster chimes in with the most junior-high school semantic response of not ALL protestants.

So like a fool I respond to the "juvenile semantics guy" (I should know better by now), and explain which protestants I think fit into this category that I and Catholic Scientist where amused by, and I said that Lutherans and Anglicans are not in this group. Not that they are not protestants (because they are the original ones), but that they are not sort I was referring to. For instance I know quite a few Lutherans, and I dont think any of them are creationists, I also know a decent number of Baptists and I dont know any of them who arent creationists. So when I say those crazy Christians who believe in creationism, I am not talking about the Christians who know creationism is bullshit (like the Lutherans).

Does this make sense or is it more confusing?

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by NoNukes, posted 08-27-2012 2:20 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-27-2012 4:39 PM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded
 Message 68 by NoNukes, posted 08-27-2012 6:46 PM Artemis Entreri has acknowledged this reply

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11443
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 67 of 146 (671582)
08-27-2012 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Artemis Entreri
08-27-2012 4:23 PM


Re: Jude *quotes* Enoch
So like a fool I respond to the "juvenile semantics guy" (I should know better by now), and explain which protestants I think fit into this category that I and Catholic Scientist where amused by, and I said that Lutherans and Anglicans are not in this group. Not that they are not protestants (because they are the original ones), but that they are not sort I was referring to.

For what its worth; when I think "protestants", I don't really include the Lutherans in that imagery either (they're more like Catholic-Lights). I did go back and edit my post to qualify it as Evangelical Protestants, which I think the Lutherans could be discounted from, because when I reread it as just protestants, it did seem a little overreaching and this is the internet... where grammer and semantic nazis reign supreme.

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2012 4:23 PM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9653
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 68 of 146 (671593)
08-27-2012 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Artemis Entreri
08-27-2012 4:23 PM


Re: Jude *quotes* Enoch
and explain which protestants I think fit into this category that I and Catholic Scientist where amused by,

Here is your original statement

Protestants never seem to stop amazing me with everything they think they know, compared to the reality of the situation. I eagerly await an answer to yet another "house of cards" scenario like this one.

My point is that your surprise when somebody does not know that Protestant in the statement above does not include Lutherans is misplaced. The above statement looks to me like an inside joke between Catholics.

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own. George Bernard Shaw


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2012 4:23 PM Artemis Entreri has acknowledged this reply

    
badder2
Junior Member (Idle past 1657 days)
Posts: 1
From: Delta
Joined: 09-13-2012


Message 69 of 146 (673093)
09-13-2012 5:46 PM


Translating exercise
Though completely unscientific it would an interesting exercise to take a quote from the bible, and using babelfish or google translate translate the quote through 4 or 5 languages and then back to english. I would imagine it lose most if not all its initial meaning.

My guess is that if their ever was an original "version" it bears little resemblance (at least in context) to the english versions of today.

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by jar, posted 09-13-2012 5:57 PM badder2 has not yet responded
 Message 71 by NoNukes, posted 09-13-2012 6:23 PM badder2 has not yet responded
 Message 73 by dwise1, posted 09-14-2012 1:32 AM badder2 has not yet responded
 Message 74 by PaulK, posted 09-14-2012 2:27 AM badder2 has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29040
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 70 of 146 (673094)
09-13-2012 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by badder2
09-13-2012 5:46 PM


Re: Translating exercise
Welcome home. Pull up a stump and set a spell.

While that's true it also is irrelevant to the topic since what is questioned here is NOT the contents of the stories but rather the list of what should be included.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by badder2, posted 09-13-2012 5:46 PM badder2 has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9653
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 71 of 146 (673095)
09-13-2012 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by badder2
09-13-2012 5:46 PM


Re: Translating exercise
My guess is that if their ever was an original "version" it bears little resemblance (at least in context) to the english versions of today.

What would be the original version of the Bible? Although individual chapters may be old, the Bible as a collection is not as old as some of those Books. I suspect that some parts of the Bible, for example, the letters attributed to Paul, are likely to be accurate renditions of the originals.

But for other books of the Bible, it may be difficult to define what would constitute an original version. For example, Genesis describes events are alleged to have happened long before anyone wrote them down. Whoever wrote down the version from whom the Book of Genesis descends does not claim to have interviewed any eyewitnesses. So is the original version related to the oral tradition, or to one particular account put into writing?

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own. George Bernard Shaw


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by badder2, posted 09-13-2012 5:46 PM badder2 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by jar, posted 09-13-2012 6:46 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29040
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 72 of 146 (673096)
09-13-2012 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by NoNukes
09-13-2012 6:23 PM


Re: Translating exercise
So is the original version related to the oral tradition, or to one particular account put into writing?

That really varies.

For example there are at least two different traditions of the flood myths just smushed together with no attempt to make redaction, and it's likely that many parts such as Joshua and Judges are two different traditions but describing similar periods.

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by NoNukes, posted 09-13-2012 6:23 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2801
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 73 of 146 (673113)
09-14-2012 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by badder2
09-13-2012 5:46 PM


Re: Translating exercise
Not on-topic.

But everyone who has done any translating knows that every act of translation is an act of interpretation. Of fallible human interpretation. You read the original, try to understand what it's saying, and then try to think of a way to express the same thing in the target language. Through fallible human interpretation.

One of my major problems with biblical literalism is that I just cannot bring myself to believe in human infallibility.

But the real topic here is what that "original" source is.

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by badder2, posted 09-13-2012 5:46 PM badder2 has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12769
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 74 of 146 (673115)
09-14-2012 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by badder2
09-13-2012 5:46 PM


Re: Translating exercise
As far as I am aware most modern Bible translations have only gone through a single translation, so multiple translations through an automated system (which will not do as well as a good human translator) will greatly exaggerate the problem. That isn't to say that the translations are perfect and sometimes it is a good idea to compare multiple translations to get a better understanding - but generally translations should be mostly correct (although we should certainly be very, very cautious about trying to dig big meanings out of little details, and I can remember some arguments here that made that mistake)

The problems with the Bible (excepting dubious micro-analyses) are more likely to be from errors in the original texts and corruption over time (everything from copyists mistakes to major additions - as in the case of Isaiah).

OFF TOPIC
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by badder2, posted 09-13-2012 5:46 PM badder2 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by caffeine, posted 09-14-2012 4:55 AM PaulK has not yet responded

    
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1289
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 75 of 146 (673118)
09-14-2012 4:55 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by PaulK
09-14-2012 2:27 AM


Re: Translating exercise
As far as I am aware most modern Bible translations have only gone through a single translation

A single translation from what, though? From the Vulgate, itself a translation from some not-clearly identified Hebrew source with the help of some Greek commentary? Or from the Septuagint, translated possibly more than once from an unclear source? Or from the Masoretic text, claimed to be the 'original' version but actually more recent than either the Vulgate or the Septuagint and containing parts that may have been translated from Greek?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by PaulK, posted 09-14-2012 2:27 AM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Prev1234
5
67
...
10Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017