|
Author
|
Topic: Politcally Correct Christ
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
Message 5 of 301 (346399)
09-04-2006 10:35 AM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
09-03-2006 2:08 PM
|
|
nemesis_juggernaut writes: There have been a number of subtle attacks on the divinity of Christ throughout the ages, however, in recent times it seems that the best way to undermine Jesus is just to invent ones' own cushy version of the Bible. I don't see where any of the examples "change the meaning of the text", let alone attack the divinity of Christ.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 09-03-2006 2:08 PM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 10 by Phat, posted 09-04-2006 11:25 AM | | ringo has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 23 of 301 (346459)
09-04-2006 2:19 PM
|
Reply to: Message 10 by Phat
09-04-2006 11:25 AM
|
|
Re: Eclectics of the world rejoice!
Phat writes: I still get irked when people call God a "she" though! And to me, "Father-Mother" just sounds silly. But on the other hand, it's probably a better depiction of the reality of God.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 10 by Phat, posted 09-04-2006 11:25 AM | | Phat has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 26 of 301 (346476)
09-04-2006 3:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 25 by Phat
09-04-2006 3:28 PM
|
|
Re: On translation
Phat writes: ... Christ is male. Interesting that we have another thread, How Likely Is It Jesus' got Married, where the same people are trying to argue that Jesus was essentially sexless. 
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 25 by Phat, posted 09-04-2006 3:28 PM | | Phat has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: The Epic
nemesis_juggernaut writes: Now, if Lynch decided to print this as the actual gospel I would have a big problem with it. Isn't "the actual gospel" the message behind the words, not the words themselves? If the "original" Hebrew and Greek can be translated into English, why not into hip-hop?
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 49 by Hyroglyphx, posted 09-05-2006 2:45 PM | | Hyroglyphx has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 53 of 301 (346806)
09-05-2006 7:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 52 by Phat
09-05-2006 6:03 PM
|
|
Re: The Epic
Phat writes: The authors of the epic were careful to not merely use the current street slang in their prose. I think that's where it falls down - it's too Olde Tyme to resonate with its intended audience. And I wonder what you mean by "merely" using the current street slang? Most of the modern translations would be just as street-slangy to a King-Jamesian ear, wouldn't they?
What are the motives of the translators? I can only say what their motivations "should" be. 
Do they seek to change the popular perception of the Bible...? Why else would they offer a new version? If the Bible has timeless value, then it has to be presentable in a timeless fashion. As language changes its clothes, the Bible "should" keep in step.
... or do they seek to add to the rich tapestry and elaborate on the sweet meaning behind communion with our Creator? Why else would anybody read the Bible?
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 52 by Phat, posted 09-05-2006 6:03 PM | | Phat has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: On translation
nemesis_juggernaut writes: Mutual submission is required by both parties for a helathy marriage and family. Here you're projecting your "politically correct" beliefs onto the bible.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 70 by Hyroglyphx, posted 09-06-2006 2:36 PM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: On translation
robinrohan writes: I guess he's "modernizing" as you suggested. Since nemesis_juggernaut is the one who's against "modernizing", I was just pointing out his self-inconsistency.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 77 by robinrohan, posted 09-06-2006 5:32 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: On translation
robinrohan writes: So as long he admits that he's modernizing, that's ok as far as you're concerned? I couldn't care less whether he admits anything or not, as long as the lurkers know he's shot down his own argument.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 79 by robinrohan, posted 09-06-2006 6:12 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: On translation
robinrohan writes: When I said "ok with you," I meant in a logical not in an emotional sense. Logically, he's shot down his own argument. Whether he admits it or not is irrelevant logically, Biblically, locally, territorially, emotionally, loudly, definitely, equivocally, dispensationally, metamorphically, metaphorically, metaphysically....
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 81 by robinrohan, posted 09-06-2006 6:19 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: On translation
robinrohan writes: ... do you think it is proper for him to interpret those Biblical passages the way he did? What does "proper" mean in Biblical interpretation?
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 83 by robinrohan, posted 09-06-2006 7:44 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Re: On translation
nemesis_juggernaut writes: How am I against modernizing? My first clue was in the OP:
quote:
There have been a number of subtle attacks on the divinity of Christ throughout the ages, however, in recent times it seems that the best way to undermine Jesus is just to invent ones' own cushy version of the Bible. Few instances better illustrate the point than a recent translation offered by the Oxford University Press's release of a "culturally sensitive" version of the Bible.
You suggested that a "culturally sensitive" version of the Bible is a "subtle attack on the divinity of Christ". "Cultural sensitivity" is a modern concept. The writers of the Bible made no bones about what culture was "in" and which were "out". Gender-inclusive language is also a modern concept. Most languages don't have it built in, which is why the "modernized" terminology sounds clumsy. Now, I don't know what any of that has to do with the divinity of Christ, but it certainly sounds to me like you don't want those modern concepts "imposed" on the Bible.
Logically, he's shot down his own argument. How exactly have I accomplished this? If you had responded to Message 74, you would know that I was referring back to Message 70, where you said:
quote:
Mutual submission is required by both parties for a helathy marriage and family.
That too is a modern concept, which goes hand-in-hand with gender-inclusive language. By accepting equal marriage (which is non-Biblical) and rejecting gender-inclusive language (which is an accident of language), you contradict yourself. At least, that's the way I understood your posts. Please feel free to clarify. Edited by Ringo, : Promoted myself to "I", First Class.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 87 by Hyroglyphx, posted 09-06-2006 9:49 PM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 91 of 301 (347160)
09-06-2006 11:26 PM
|
Reply to: Message 89 by robinrohan
09-06-2006 11:08 PM
|
|
Re: On translation
robinrohan writes: ... your (and Jar's) "interpretations" are even further from some fairly obvious meanings that the authors had in mind. If the Bible was "God-breathed" into the shell-like ears of the authors, then what they "had in mind" is irrelevant - just as what my computer "has in mind" is irrelevant to this post.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 89 by robinrohan, posted 09-06-2006 11:08 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 93 of 301 (347168)
09-06-2006 11:42 PM
|
Reply to: Message 92 by robinrohan
09-06-2006 11:29 PM
|
|
Re: On translation
robinrohan writes: If the Bible was "God-breathed" into the shell-like ears of the authors.... Do you believe that? It doesn't matter if I believe it or not. If God dictated the Bible, He can also dictate an interpretation to each and every one of us. The authors' cultural milieu is no more significant than our own. The message is what He speaks to us, just as He spoke it to them. The words are secondary. On the other hand, if the authors just made it all up out of thin air, the "message" has more relevance to their culture than it does to ours. We can take out of it what we find relevant to our culture and minimize the rest. Either way, from our point of view, our cultural context is more important than that of the authors.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 92 by robinrohan, posted 09-06-2006 11:29 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
robinrohan writes: What Jesus is saying is that this old idea that God expects payment for "sins" is nonsense. Exactly. (You didn't think you made that up, did you? It's what I've been saying all along.)
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 95 by robinrohan, posted 09-07-2006 9:14 AM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
robinrohan writes: I just made that up. You really ought to read a few posts around here. I've said the exact same thing, in almost those exact words, probably a hundred times. You feel free to criticize other people's views, but now you reveal the fact that you don't have a clue what those views are.
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 99 by robinrohan, posted 09-07-2006 1:08 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2