Subject:
|
Re: New Stories from the New Testament
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Feb 2002 01:24:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1171 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Hietbrink writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> > In which case, should
> > Christians be like Moslems and declare that only an original Bible, not
> > a translation, is valid? Which language then?
>
> Obviously the only valid Bible is in the original KJV. :)
> Okay, I know, only Christians got that joke.
Depends. I get the joke, but I'm not sure it's the joke you were
intending. :) (I presume you're making fun of the highly suspect
circumstances of the KJV's translation?)
> Anyway, on to the main topic of the debate here. Three things.
>
> 1. The tone is definitely mocking, self-admittedly so.*
> 2. I'm a pretty hard-core Christian.
> 3. I enjoy Brendan's work quite a bit. Perhaps I'm less easily offended
> than I should be, but there you go.
>
> *Quoting Brendan in the Spin article he reproduces on his site: "If there's
> an unspoken intention to the site . . . it's to have those who believe in an
> all-loving and merciful, family-values supporting God be confronted with the
> barbaric, heinous, and grotesque stories from the divinely inspired book
> their religion is based on.** Plus it's a cool Lego project and stuff."
>
> **In that I am wholly in accord with Brendan. We (speaking to Christians
> here) need to confront and try to understand the real God, not some
> caricature based on half-remembered Sunday School lessons. I suspect that I
> come to very different conclusions from that confrontation than Brendan
> would, but I'd really rather not go further in debating the aspects of
> religion in this forum. Debating the use of Lego to depict those aspects is
> already off-topic enough for me for today.
And the strength of Christianity and Christians should be in the
ability to accept discord in readings. That's what made Christianity
so strong and so easy to spread--grey areas were negotiated around.
Literalists have to engage in discourse with allegorists, and so forth.
Any belief system that cannot search itself, that fears dissent, and
that attacks that which offends it is suspect. (This holds true for
radical-left philosopies just as surely as for "far-right" religion.)
Still, whatever the religious value of the Bible to a given reader,
one can be in no doubt as to its importance as a piece of *literature*.
And if you want to depict literature that everyone knows, you may find
yourself terribly constricted--maybe we should toss out "titles of books
that everyone should/would know" to see. I'd bet that the Bible would
be in very sparse and august company.
But hey, we're in America, so if Brendan wants to be an ideologue, he
can be an ideologue. ;) Me, I'm just enjoying the stories (and I have
five or six Bibles to read if I think something's missing).
best
LFB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: New Stories from the New Testament
|
| (...) There are those Christians who think that the KJV is the only valid translation, and that all more recent translations (NIV, NASB, RSV, etc) are suspect. Some of them elevate the KJV so much that it seems they even find the original Hebrew, (...) (23 years ago, 13-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New Stories from the New Testament
|
| (...) Obviously the only valid Bible is in the original KJV. :) Okay, I know, only Christians got that joke. Anyway, on to the main topic of the debate here. Three things. 1. The tone is definitely mocking, self-admittedly so.* 2. I'm a pretty (...) (23 years ago, 13-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
47 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
