God = Scapegoat?

[diablopilot 2]

Think about it, humankind seems to use whatever version of god they choose as the recipiant of blame.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[kallend 2,159]

Quote

Think about it, humankind seems to use whatever version of god they choose as the recipiant of blame.

Not true. The blame lies with non-believers who interpret the god's words according to the normal rules of the language.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[tbrown 26]

Quote

Think about it, humankind seems to use whatever version of god they choose as the recipiant of blame.

Do you mean like "It's God's will" that this or that catastrophe happened ? I think that's just the way a lot of people buck up and accept something that's already happened and can't be changed. Believers don't believe that God CAUSES things to happen, but there are arguments that God ALLOWS things to happen for any of a number of reasons that would include Original Sin and/or preserving mankind's free will. God for instance didn't cause the Holocaust, but allowed it to happen because a.) all people are sinful, and b.) Hitler and the German people had thhe free will to not commit that mass atrocity if they'd chosen not to. I don't mean to be flippant about something so grave as murdering an entire people simply for who they are, but it does stand as THE test case of the 20th century for "And where was God in all this ?". And in fact a lot of people lost their faith in God as a direct result of the enormity and depravity of the Holocaust. Elie Wiesel said so himself, that he no longer believed in God after his survival in the camps.

But if you believe in a God, or ever did believe, that's about the only way you can "punish" God, by turning away and renouncing your belief. It certainly doesn't hurt God a whit. And if you don't believe in God, or never did in thhe first place, then it hardly matters at all, does it ?

I remember when we were kids we'd say things like "God punished you !" if a bad kid fell off his bike and skinned his knee. It felt good to see a known a-hole hurt himself, and if we could tie in a little divine retribution to the accident, then so much the better. But grownups should know better. Unless you lose an entire family to forces of nature or man's cruelty that are beyond your control and then I suppose it's understandable. But it's not God's doing.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[BDashe 0]

Yes.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

Think about it, humankind seems to use whatever version of god they choose as the recipiant of blame.

Not true. The blame lies with non-believers who interpret the God's words according to the normal rules of conversational English language instead of looking into the original languange the Bible was written in, either Greek or Aramaic, and into the historical and literal contexts that the texts were written in, in order to ascertain the actual meaning of said texts.

Fixed it for you, Professor.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[kallend 2,159]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Think about it, humankind seems to use whatever version of god they choose as the recipiant of blame.

Not true. The blame lies with non-believers who interpret the God's words according to the normal rules of conversational English language instead of looking into the original languange the Bible was written in, either Greek or Aramaic, and into the historical and literal contexts that the texts were written in, in order to ascertain the actual meaning of said texts.

Fixed it for you, Professor.

Are you claiming that King James couldn't translate? Horrors - Chuteless will get you for that.

PS some of the claims for Aramaic translations by Roman Catholics (such as supporting the perpetual virginity) don't stand up to scholarly scrutiny.

And there's no way the laws of Leviticus could have all been so badly mistranslated, nor the various creation myths in Genesis.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

And there's no way the laws of Leviticus could have all been so badly mistranslated, nor the various creation myths in Genesis.

Mistranslated, probably not. Misinterpreted, yes? Misapplied in light of JC's teaching and NT theology, absolutely!

steveOrino

[micro 0]

Quote

PS some of the claims for Aramaic translations by Roman Catholics (such as supporting the perpetual virginity) don't stand up to scholarly scrutiny.

well, whip 'em out prof, i'd like to see 'em.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[kallend 2,159]

Quote

Quote

PS some of the claims for Aramaic translations by Roman Catholics (such as supporting the perpetual virginity) don't stand up to scholarly scrutiny.

well, whip 'em out prof, i'd like to see 'em.

There are hundreds to choose from - here is one:

www.bible.ca/cath-mary-had-many-children.htm

Of course, Roman apologists can always find a way of mistranslating for themselves, but the fact remains that Roman Catholics are almost alone among the Christian churches in claiming their particular mistranslation.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

PS some of the claims for Aramaic translations by Roman Catholics (such as supporting the perpetual virginity) don't stand up to scholarly scrutiny.

well, whip 'em out prof, i'd like to see 'em.

There are hundreds to choose from - here is one:

www.bible.ca/cath-mary-had-many-children.htm

Of course, Roman apologists can always find a way of mistranslating for themselves, but the fact remains that Roman Catholics are almost alone among the Christian churches in claiming their particular mistranslation.

i'll review it...

but for starters, you're already starting w/ an assumption that roman catholics are going to mistranslate. also, the fact that we're "almost alone" really doesn't lend much, as if this is somehow a popularity contest. it's quite possible for many people to get something wrong, esp. something that doesn't fit what they don't want it to fit...

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[kallend 2,159]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

PS some of the claims for Aramaic translations by Roman Catholics (such as supporting the perpetual virginity) don't stand up to scholarly scrutiny.

well, whip 'em out prof, i'd like to see 'em.

There are hundreds to choose from - here is one:

www.bible.ca/cath-mary-had-many-children.htm

Of course, Roman apologists can always find a way of mistranslating for themselves, but the fact remains that Roman Catholics are almost alone among the Christian churches in claiming their particular mistranslation.

i'll review it...

but for starters, you're already starting w/ an assumption that roman catholics are going to mistranslate. also, the fact that we're "almost alone" really doesn't lend much, as if this is somehow a popularity contest. it's quite possible for many people to get something wrong, esp. something that doesn't fit what they don't want it to fit...

Since no-one alive, including Pope Benedict, speaks Aramaic or ancient Greek as a first language, I'd suggest that when it comes to translation, your church cannot claim any more authority than the others.

And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS, Matthew 1:25, King James Bible

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

PS some of the claims for Aramaic translations by Roman Catholics (such as supporting the perpetual virginity) don't stand up to scholarly scrutiny.

well, whip 'em out prof, i'd like to see 'em.

There are hundreds to choose from - here is one:

www.bible.ca/cath-mary-had-many-children.htm

Of course, Roman apologists can always find a way of mistranslating for themselves, but the fact remains that Roman Catholics are almost alone among the Christian churches in claiming their particular mistranslation.

i'll review it...

but for starters, you're already starting w/ an assumption that roman catholics are going to mistranslate. also, the fact that we're "almost alone" really doesn't lend much, as if this is somehow a popularity contest. it's quite possible for many people to get something wrong, esp. something that doesn't fit what they don't want it to fit...

Since no-one alive, including Pope Benedict, speaks Aramaic or ancient Greek as a first language, I'd suggest that when it comes to translation, your church cannot claim any more authority than the others.

speaking either of them as a first language is not a pre-requisite for validly or "authoritatively" interpreting (as this website you referenced claims to do) the text in question. If that WAS the case, why should anyone really bother, since it would open up the possibility of various MIS-interpretations. Onthe other hand, I firmly believe that the texts of the Bible ARE possible to be read and interpreted properly, taking into consideration the original language, as well as the context and literation of the text in question.

I find it interesting that you are calling this particular site one in which my roman catholic beliefs don't stand up to "scholarly scrutiny."

you're citing a fundamentalist-protestant biblical website one as "scholarly?

John, are telling us you've been.... SAVED???

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[kallend 2,159]

Don't try to misrepresent what I said, it won't work.

The ONLY way perpetual virginity can be true is for a number of highly unlikely coincidences of mistranslation to have occurred in a number of different parts of the NT. And the dogma only originated in the 2nd Century.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[micro 0]

Quote

Don't try to misrepresent what I said, it won't work.

The ONLY way perpetual virginity can be true is for a number of highly unlikely coincidences of mistranslation to have occurred in a number of different parts of the NT. And the dogma only originated in the 2nd Century.

I'm not misrepresenting a think you said John. Your excuses are as old as you are. Same shit, different day.

And you post here belies a fundamental misunderstanding of what "dogma" (versus doctrine or belief) actually is.

Oh how fun it is to play w/ you.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[SkyDekker 1,465]

God and Jesus must be the worst communicators ever. WHy would they not have written the bible themselves if they thought their teachings were so important? Obviously they were omnipotent. Why would they rely on third party writers and translators? Since God knows everything, he must know what happens when you play "telephone".

[micro 0]

Quote

God and Jesus must be the worst communicators ever. WHy would they not have written the bible themselves if they thought their teachings were so important? Obviously they were omnipotent. Why would they rely on third party writers and translators? Since God knows everything, he must know what happens when you play "telephone".

It really isn't that hard. Time consuming and tedious sometimes, but most important things often are.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[kallend 2,159]

Quote

Quote

God and Jesus must be the worst communicators ever. WHy would they not have written the bible themselves if they thought their teachings were so important? Obviously they were omnipotent. Why would they rely on third party writers and translators? Since God knows everything, he must know what happens when you play "telephone".

It really isn't that hard. Time consuming and tedious sometimes, but most important things often are.

Why not just answer his question. There must be a LOGICAL answer as to why the so-called "word of god" is so ambiguous that there is no uniform agreement as to what it means even among believers.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


God and Jesus must be the worst communicators ever. WHy would they not have written the bible themselves if they thought their teachings were so important? Obviously they were omnipotent. Why would they rely on third party writers and translators? Since God knows everything, he must know what happens when you play "telephone".

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


It really isn't that hard. Time consuming and tedious sometimes, but most important things often are.

That doesn't answer my question. Religous people are worse than politicians when it comes to dancing around a question.

[kallend 2,159]

Quote

Quote

Don't try to misrepresent what I said, it won't work.

The ONLY way perpetual virginity can be true is for a number of highly unlikely coincidences of mistranslation to have occurred in a number of different parts of the NT. And the dogma only originated in the 2nd Century.

I'm not misrepresenting a think you said John. Your excuses are as old as you are. Same shit, different day.

And you post here belies a fundamental misunderstanding of what "dogma" (versus doctrine or belief) actually is.

Oh how fun it is to play w/ you.

Try answering the questions instead of trying to divert attention.
Explain how a most unlikely number of mistranslations were made by the KJ translators, all contradicting your doctrine. How come they got it wrong SO MANY times, whereas your version of events requires curious (and unsupported by many independent scholars) interpretations of Aramaic words. It's not like the KJ scholars had an axe to grind.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Don't try to misrepresent what I said, it won't work.

The ONLY way perpetual virginity can be true is for a number of highly unlikely coincidences of mistranslation to have occurred in a number of different parts of the NT. And the dogma only originated in the 2nd Century.

I'm not misrepresenting a think you said John. Your excuses are as old as you are. Same shit, different day.

And you post here belies a fundamental misunderstanding of what "dogma" (versus doctrine or belief) actually is.

Oh how fun it is to play w/ you.

Try answering the questions instead of trying to divert attention.
Explain how a most unlikely number of mistranslations were made by the KJ translators, all contradicting your doctrine. How come they got it wrong SO MANY times, whereas your version of events requires curious (and unsupported by many independent scholars) interpretations of Aramaic words. It's not like the KJ scholars had an axe to grind.

KJ scholars didn't have an axe to grind? Where the hell did you learn history? Holy cow John!

Just b/c I don't answer your questions as you WANT me to doesn't mean I can't... rather, I get tired of arguing w/ someone whose ears are closed.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


God and Jesus must be the worst communicators ever. WHy would they not have written the bible themselves if they thought their teachings were so important? Obviously they were omnipotent. Why would they rely on third party writers and translators? Since God knows everything, he must know what happens when you play "telephone".

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


It really isn't that hard. Time consuming and tedious sometimes, but most important things often are.

That doesn't answer my question. Religous people are worse than politicians when it comes to dancing around a question.

here's the answer to your question and your other silly comment:

HOW THE HELL SHOULD I KNOW WHY GOD CHOSE THE METHOD HE DID TO WRITE THE BIBLE? I'M NOT GOD AND I DON'T CLAIM TO BE!

There. Happy? Probably not... but then again, not much would make you happy in a discussion like this, as contentious as you are about things religious.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

HOW THE HELL SHOULD I KNOW WHY GOD CHOSE THE METHOD HE DID TO WRITE THE BIBLE? I'M NOT GOD AND I DON'T CLAIM TO BE!

I don't know. I would think that the founder of a religion would want to be a decent communicator, specially when you call yourself omnipotent.

[JackC 0]

Quote

Not true. The blame lies with non-believers who interpret the God's words according to the normal rules of conversational English language instead of looking into the original languange the Bible was written in, either Greek or Aramaic, and into the historical and literal contexts that the texts were written in, in order to ascertain the actual meaning of said texts.

For an omnipotent author, it's a bit piss poor to expect your readership to be expert tranlators of several ancient and long dead languages and be experts in bronze age history, geography, sociology and politics to understand what the fuck it means. No wonder people can't get the story straight, even after 2000 years of trying. God's PR department must really suck.

[kallend 2,159]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Don't try to misrepresent what I said, it won't work.

The ONLY way perpetual virginity can be true is for a number of highly unlikely coincidences of mistranslation to have occurred in a number of different parts of the NT. And the dogma only originated in the 2nd Century.

I'm not misrepresenting a think you said John. Your excuses are as old as you are. Same shit, different day.

And you post here belies a fundamental misunderstanding of what "dogma" (versus doctrine or belief) actually is.

Oh how fun it is to play w/ you.

Try answering the questions instead of trying to divert attention.
Explain how a most unlikely number of mistranslations were made by the KJ translators, all contradicting your doctrine. How come they got it wrong SO MANY times, whereas your version of events requires curious (and unsupported by many independent scholars) interpretations of Aramaic words. It's not like the KJ scholars had an axe to grind.

KJ scholars didn't have an axe to grind? Where the hell did you learn history? Holy cow John!

Just b/c I don't answer your questions as you WANT me to doesn't mean I can't... rather, I get tired of arguing w/ someone whose ears are closed.

What axe were they grinding wrt perpetual virginity? The realization that it was just bunk didn't really come until later.

And more recent translations based on better scholarship tend to agree. You really have to screw (pun intended) with the language to deny Matthew.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[hairyjuan 0]

Not True- Intelligent people who examine all archelogical evidence, historical facts, religious history, and mytholgy according to the rules of logic reason and critical thinking. Yahweh Aboath-the god who gathers armies

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish