Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-26-2019 8:18 AM
22 online now:
Percy (Admin), Pressie, RAZD, Theodoric, vimesey (5 members, 17 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,247 Year: 5,284/19,786 Month: 1,406/873 Week: 302/460 Day: 2/52 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123456
7
8Next
Author Topic:   Only one version?
Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 5688 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001


Message 91 of 106 (20497)
10-22-2002 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Wordswordsman
10-22-2002 7:10 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
[B][QUOTE]I would suggest you try finding a bona fide Jewish Hebrew scholar who has gone on record as interpreting elohim as an acknowledgement of actual living beings qualified as gods like their god Jehovah, sitting equal to Him in some cosmic courtroom. I am not aware of any.[/B][/QUOTE]

I noticed the attempt at bait and switch - now it is show other gods "sitting equal to Him." Nice try, but I'm not falling for it.

Meanwhile, you would do well to read some Jewish scholars who comment on the polytheistic interpretation of Elohim ...

Jon Levenson, Albert A. List Professor of Jewish Studies at Harvard, in his book "Creation and the Persistence of Evil."

Diana Edelman in her book "The Triumph of Elohim: From Yahwisms to Judaisms"

Tzvi Howard Adelman of the The Department for Jewish Zionist Education in Jerusalem.

and so on ...

You might even like to check good old Gensenius on this, where he says that bene 'elohÓm "properly means not sons of god(s), but beings of the class of 'elohÓm of 'elim"

Again and again you take the attitude that your ignorance of opposing scholarship has some significance in favour of your viewpoint - again and again we show that in fact you are simply ignorant. If only you would do more studying and less pronouncing, you might get somewhere.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-22-2002 7:10 AM Wordswordsman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-22-2002 9:00 PM Mister Pamboli has responded

  
Wordswordsman
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 106 (20518)
10-22-2002 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Mister Pamboli
10-22-2002 11:43 AM


quote:
Again and again you take the attitude that your ignorance of opposing scholarship has some significance in favour of your viewpoint - again and again we show that in fact you are simply ignorant. If only you would do more studying and less pronouncing, you might get somewhere.

What dedicated Jewish Hebrew scholar would openly accept the trinity? You think you have uncovered something? Idiotic. I've tried to be civil, but that is really impossible with people as ignorant, moronic as yourself about these matters. Obviously you will ignore truth no matter how tall it is. The Bible has you well pegged as a fool. Go hug your idols, your tin gods. The living God loved you enough to share the blood of His Son to remit your sins. I find no point in discussion with your ilk. It is actually sin for me to continue with you past this point, having to depart from the company of a fool.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Mister Pamboli, posted 10-22-2002 11:43 AM Mister Pamboli has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Mister Pamboli, posted 10-22-2002 9:23 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded
 Message 98 by Admin, posted 10-23-2002 11:05 AM Wordswordsman has responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 876 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 93 of 106 (20519)
10-22-2002 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Wordswordsman
10-22-2002 7:10 AM


quote:

WWM The true God is reality.

A truism. Unwitting on your part perhaps, but a truism nonetheless.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-22-2002 7:10 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 876 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 94 of 106 (20520)
10-22-2002 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Wordswordsman
10-21-2002 8:22 PM


quote:
WWM "Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations."

What? God isn't a self starter?! He has to be encouraged to "arise"?

From whom is he going to "inherit all nations"?
Does he not already own them?
And why would he want to "inherit all nations"?
Sounds rather like a human ambition to me.

db


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-21-2002 8:22 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 876 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 95 of 106 (20522)
10-22-2002 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Wordswordsman
10-21-2002 8:22 PM


quote:

WWM GOD had called them gods in that Scripture, in the context of men of power, of judgment, not deity.

What has context to do with it? Is a god a god? Can a man be a god? Was not Jesus a god/man?

db

[This message has been edited by doctrbill, 10-22-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-21-2002 8:22 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 5688 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001


Message 96 of 106 (20523)
10-22-2002 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Wordswordsman
10-22-2002 9:00 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
What dedicated Jewish Hebrew scholar would openly accept the trinity?

You think accepting the plurality of elohim means accepting the Trinity? Well I suppose you would, given the simplistic scholarship you tout. I don't suppose you have any understanding of henotheism? Look it up.[B][QUOTE]people as ignorant, moronic as yourself about these matters.[/B][/QUOTE]

I see. Well, myself and other morons have corrected you on numerous factual matters over the last few days, especially in those areas where you profess to some scholarship. As one of the root meanings of idiot in Greek is a layperson lacking the specialized knowledge to represent an argument in court, I am surprised you point the insult at us. You protest too much.[B][QUOTE]It is actually sin for me to continue with you past this point, having to depart from the company of a fool.[/B][/QUOTE]

It's a shame your commitment is as weak as your scholarship, but not surprising. You have shown only a veneer of learning, and an utter lack of that agape that the Corinthians were told is the very hallmark that distinguishes Christian thought.

pantote manqanonta kai mhdepote eis epignwsin alhqeias elqein dunamena


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-22-2002 9:00 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 876 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 97 of 106 (20524)
10-22-2002 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Wordswordsman
10-21-2002 8:22 PM


quote:
WWM Ye are gods ... But ye shall die like men,

If they are already "men" this doesn't make much sense. Unless - men can be gods as well. Like Jesus was?

An alternative possiblity might be that there were class distinctions at work here. Some men being so far elevated above the rest that they are no longer called "men".

Eh?

db


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-21-2002 8:22 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12591
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 98 of 106 (20570)
10-23-2002 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Wordswordsman
10-22-2002 9:00 PM


Wordswordsman writes:
You think you have uncovered something? Idiotic. I've tried to be civil, but that is really impossible with people as ignorant, moronic as yourself about these matters. Obviously you will ignore truth no matter how tall it is. The Bible has you well pegged as a fool. Go hug your idols, your tin gods. The living God loved you enough to share the blood of His Son to remit your sins. I find no point in discussion with your ilk. It is actually sin for me to continue with you past this point, having to depart from the company of a fool.

Rule 3 of the Forum Guidelines requests that you treat other members with respect. Perhaps another way of saying the same thing is, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

------------------

--EvC Forum Administrator


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-22-2002 9:00 PM Wordswordsman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by gene90, posted 10-23-2002 7:33 PM Admin has not yet responded
 Message 101 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-23-2002 9:54 PM Admin has not yet responded

    
John
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 106 (20598)
10-23-2002 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Wordswordsman
10-22-2002 6:59 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
The Bible doesn't acknowledge any other real god than the one true God.

That's nice, but your rendering still does not make sense in context. How about hitting the argument head on? Come on! You can do it!

quote:
The one true God doesn't acknowledge any other god of men as real.

You have been shown passages in the Bible which suggest the contrary. What you are actually saying is : "WS does not believe that the Bible has any mention of other Gods as real, hence the Bible does not mention any other Gods as real." Doesn't this set YOU up above God's word? Rather than honestly search it for the truth you interpret it to meet your own ends. There has got to be a level of Hell reserved for that crime. Once again, I must thank you for amusing me by mutilating your faith in its defense.

quote:
Bible scholars are almost universally agreed on that.

Translation: Bible Scholars that WS accepts are al universally agreed o that. Hurrah for selective learning!!!! You have been shown that not all scholars agree. Continuing to make this assertion is is quite simply lying.

[quote]The condusion is due to pantheists trying to justify many gods by misuse of the Hebrew elohim.[/b][/quote]

Right..... still more unsupported assertion. Yet another conspiracy perhaps?

quote:
Here's an excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia, a rather complete rendering of the word that is in agreement with all the Bible dictionaries and references I have:

Ever wonder whether the Catholic Church has any ulterior motive for erasing the patheism from the Bible? Really, you need to consider your sources and try looking at sources that do not have an a priori conclusion to defend.

Someone has already pointed you to some dissenting opinions so I won't bother.

quote:
If you remain confused about the uses of the word, try http://www.bibleprophet.com/Doctrine/ABC030.html

I am not confused. I am aware of the typical rendering of the word by BIBLICAL apologists.

Gee.... bible prophet ? Could that be an objective source?

quote:
There is the pantheistic view of many gods like the one true God, then there is the Judeo/Christian view of only: The one (plural:three-person) God is Elohim; the heavenly accompanyment of the One God- angels, other created beings; men with powers of gods permitted by the One God- judges.

Hmm..... if this were any other religion one would be tempted to call it pantheism.

quote:
Nowhere in the Bible does any other being emerge as credible as being a god other than Jehovah. Any attempt by men to promote any other god met with total failure, as when the prophets of Baal tried to conjure up Baal in the face of Elijah's challenge.

Superficially.... it is the undertones that didn't quite get whitewashed away that we are discussing.

quote:
No god ever once has sttod before the One true God. People attracted to Greek mythology can't seem to appreciate that fact, insisting somehow other gods are acknowledged in the Bible. They will have to settle for Homer's imaginations.

And this came from where?

quote:
It is merely one of the failures of the English language. It is impossible to substitute one English word (god) to suitably render the full meaning and use of elohim.

The same is true for many words in many languages when you try to translate them. This is why I am a believer in reading the originals as much as possible. But the KJV is near perfect and you have no need for the originals.

quote:
Among the learned the use is implied, taken for granted, understood.

Then how is it that you understand?

quote:
This is one reason for early objections to the Bible being offered in English, rather than in more scholarly languages such as Latin and French. One must go to the Hebrew scholars to determine its proper meaning, though the Christian concept of the triune godhead is lost there.

Aren't you now arguing for the idea that translations fall short of the original? And in another thread you put much effort into arguing that the KJV is near perfect? This is self-contradictory.

And once again you dodge and ignore the issues raised .....

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-22-2002 6:59 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 1934 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 100 of 106 (20618)
10-23-2002 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Admin
10-23-2002 11:05 AM


'By their fruits you shall know them. '
This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Admin, posted 10-23-2002 11:05 AM Admin has not yet responded

  
Wordswordsman
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 106 (20640)
10-23-2002 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Admin
10-23-2002 11:05 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Admin:
Rule 3 of the Forum Guidelines requests that you treat other members with respect. Perhaps another way of saying the same thing is, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

I returned the insults back about word for word collectively, not accepting their gifts. It's the language they understand. They relate to those words, Administrator. Those words are very high on their vocabulary, common on almost all evolutionist-dominated forums, emerging when they are faced down, frustrated. I note that you again passed on comment on THEIR name-calling and overt personal insults. It isn't proper to just let it go by then jump on me, AGAIN chastised for dropping to their pack level. Is it because you expect more of me? They can't help themselves, being poor sinners? Whatever your agenda is, I won't be part of it.
I've made as much comment here in this website as I intended, finding the whole thing quite fruitless past this point. I didn't come here hoping to change minds. I came to point out their reprobate thinking that other Christians will know to avoid their ideas. Now they can see the truth about people who will accept ANYTHING except Jesus Christ, be it atheism, or polytheism, mythology, ANYTHING but the very widely held truth of the gospel of Christ. A sane person should ask why. Why the concerted opposition to the Son of God, excluding NO other religious claim? It's pages of the Bible being re-lived over and over. Amazing. Bye.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Admin, posted 10-23-2002 11:05 AM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by wj, posted 10-23-2002 10:48 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded
 Message 104 by Mammuthus, posted 10-24-2002 5:54 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded
 Message 106 by Percy, posted 10-27-2002 5:06 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 102 of 106 (20644)
10-23-2002 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Wordswordsman
10-23-2002 9:54 PM


One can only get the feeling that wordswordsman is spitting the dummy because he has not been able to argue his position.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-23-2002 9:54 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by doctrbill, posted 10-24-2002 2:11 AM wj has not yet responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 876 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 103 of 106 (20668)
10-24-2002 2:11 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by wj
10-23-2002 10:48 PM


quote:
Originally posted by wj:
One can only get the feeling that wordswordsman is spitting the dummy because he has not been able to argue his position.

Hear Ye, Hear Ye!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by wj, posted 10-23-2002 10:48 PM wj has not yet responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 4587 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 104 of 106 (20679)
10-24-2002 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Wordswordsman
10-23-2002 9:54 PM


M: Let's set the record straight here...

WS:
I returned the insults back about word for word collectively, not accepting their gifts. It's the language they understand. They relate to those words, Administrator.Those words are very high on their vocabulary, common on almost all evolutionist-dominated forums, emerging when they are faced down, frustrated.

M: Actually Mister Pamboli was EXTREMELY patient and polite in his posts whereas WS was immediately insulting. John was also very patient and was rewarded by WS with equally hostile and unprovoked attacks. So WS's statement is untrue.

WS:
I note that you again passed on comment on THEIR name-calling and overt personal insults.

M: I was warned, nos482 was warned when we used insults directed towards you so this statement is a lie.

WS:
It isn't proper to just let it go by then jump on me, AGAIN chastised for dropping to their pack level. Is it because you expect more of me? They can't help themselves, being poor sinners? Whatever your agenda is, I won't be part of it.

M: This is the second time I have heard the accusation that WS was attacked by a pack. However, most interactions were between him and one or two individuals. Of course he reduced this to 0 in my case and Mister Pamboli's as soon as he was unable to refute our claims by claiming it was a sin for him to communicate with us further.

WS:
I've made as much comment here in this website as I intended, finding the whole thing quite fruitless past this point. I didn't come here hoping to change minds. I came to point out their reprobate thinking that other Christians will know to avoid their ideas.

M: Interesting...originally he state he was here to demonstrate the truth. Also that it was cowardly not to stand for your principles.

WS:
Now they can see the truth about people who will accept ANYTHING except Jesus Christ, be it atheism, or polytheism, mythology, ANYTHING but the very widely held truth of the gospel of Christ. A sane person should ask why. Why the concerted opposition to the Son of God, excluding NO other religious claim? It's pages of the Bible being re-lived over and over. Amazing. Bye.

M: I will miss you and the many hours of humorous posts you provided me with


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-23-2002 9:54 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
NimLore
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 106 (20758)
10-24-2002 11:21 PM


well I am not going to comment on any of the past replies.. but rather to go back to the original issue this thread is based on...
I am rather interested in biblical translation, or palology to be more correct.
I certainly believe that all english renditions of the bible fall somewhat short of the orignal as all translated texts do, this is why I believe it to be very important for us to do our study... Do any of us just take a text book and say it is good cause it has been called a text book.. no.. we research.
Now to look at the Kjv, I think it is a very good translation but it lacks because it used far inferior translations of ancient scripture than that of what we have today found, eg.. the Dead Sea Scrolls and other findings... makes me wonder how many ancient manuscripts sit in attics and basements just waiting for the palologist to get there hands on.
One must also look at the reasoning that a particular translation is being translated, is it a study book? is it a reading book? what element do the translators need to work towards.. there are many factors inside of the translations.. but one thing that must be held as tantamount to us christians comes from scripture itself, James 1:5 to 8.. let us ask God.. after all we know of our personal relationship with him... and Proverbs 3 verse 5 and 6.
  
Prev123456
7
8Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019