Subject:
|
Re: The god debate again... sigh (Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Nov 2000 23:25:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1106 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
> > I could parry that by asking which revision of the Bible we're considering
> to have predicted them? Are you reading the Aramaic, Koine Greek, the
> Vulgate, Old English, or Modern English version? Which Word is *the* Word,
> because they are *not* all the same.
> You're avoiding the personal aspects here - and the 'versions' are all pretty
> much the same (contrary to your statement otherwise). I don't have time to go
> into how you're attempting to twist things.
> There aren't different versions as you state.
Now, now. When I get home (or perhaps tomorrow, if I don't have time
tonight) I'll post examples for you, and we'll see how identical they are.
For that matter, what do you mean by "personal aspects" in this case? Is
the Bible a different document for each reader? Is God a different entity
for each Believer? I don't understand your statement.
> There are orignal languages and then there are translations due to the
> antiquity of the documents through the prevailing tongues used throughout
> history. Every ancient document has that happen to it.
Even ineffable documents? How does God feel about His Word being tweaked
to suit linguistic trends? The Qur'an, at least, acknowledges the
authenticity only of the original text; translations have been made, but
these are subordinate to the original.
> I don't know which or what comes when - many would claim one way or another.
> But of this I'm sure (and I think you can agree), the Bible predicts the end
> of the world order as we know it.
What *is* "the world order as we know it?" Who is "we?" Larry and I, for
instance, have different perceptions of the current "world order," as I'm
sure you do also. Get me a sampling of twenty people and I'll show you at
least twenty different concepts of "the world order" as they know it.
Anyway, the "world order" has ended countless times before, and will
probably end countless times again.
> That combined with the record surrounding Jesus should give any man cause to
> stop and re-consider the claims it makes about the event.
The Bill Clinton autobiography (or written by someone else's hand exactly
as Bill dictates) will probably paint him in a more favorable light than
sensible historians might bear out. By comparison, a person of outstanding
(if not actually Divine) character, would also understandably be described
in glorifying text.
Each time The Bible is used to certify God's presence or the history of
God's actions, we must take a step back and consider the source.
Help me out, Larry: does mentioning Clinton also count as forfeiting the
argument? 8^)
Dave!
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
231 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
