Why So Many Viewpoints?

[goodlife]

Why there are such varying views as to what is a Christian is that many do not understand why God has permitted evil or wickedness and so they are taken in by the arguments of atheists. (1 Cor. 1: 27)

[jake-the-peg]

No I'm not saying that locusts

I'm saying that it's ironic that goodlife argues about varying points of view by people who don't understand God

When Christians have so many different bibles

Especially JW who's bible seems quite a bit different!

Compae those you've mentioned with the original

I make no statement of truth or lies other than to point out the differences between Christians!

[locusts]

Jake, //perhaps you should explain why your Bible is at odds with that that proper Christians use // 

naomi24/Idiosyncrasy went some way to explaining that on another thread earlier today. Some bits, it seems, are “spurious and not part of the actual inspired text.” I wonder how they know which bits are 'inspired' and which are not? Goodlife? 


As I Wright be for /is all these bible scorer /Copier/ are they wrong in what they have Written
http://www.biblegateway.com
these scorer of the bible writer are very/ prefect /in there translation' for they would invalidate god word. /changing into days modern time/ the world /I/you know /English is changing
so these scorer try to keep up with the modern Language/ of to day
the bible s ,are not wrong its your interpretation which is wrong . 2.Tim .3 16 .17

[vulcan42]

locusts, why do you assume, and it is only an assumption for you have no proof, that all the translations and interpretations carried out by the various religious groups are, to use your word,perfect, and everybody else is completely wrong?

[mibn2cweus]

Why does it need translation to begin with? Why doesn't it just portray the message He wants to convey in words the reader can understand each time they open it at random? Better yet . . . why don't He just speak when He's spoken to?

Answer on a postcard will do nicely.

[goodlife]

Hi locusts@ If you know who the translators or the publishers of a particular Bible translation are, does it help us to decide whether that translation is good or bad? Not directly. There is no substitute for examining the characteristics of each translation itself.

[jomifl]

/There is no substitute for examining the characteristics of each translation itself/ ie. trying to make it fit your preconceptions
So would this be the greek translation of the hebrew or the latin translation of the greek?

[goodlife]

jomifl@ Have you not heard at least half of the world’s languages have disappeared.

A language dies when it no longer has native speakers. In that sense, Latin is usually defined as “a dead language,”

Also the language of some of the first and foremost Bible translations

Now even though Latin is no longer commonly spoken, the Bible in Latin has had both a direct and an indirect influence on millions of readers. It has shaped religious terminology in many languages. Regardless of the language in which it is produced, however, God’s Word continues to exert power, changing the lives of millions of people who obediently strive to act in harmony with its precious teachings.(Hebrews 4:12)

[naomi24]

//God’s Word continues to exert power, //

'God's word' doesn't exert power - self-obsessed religious fanatics exert power and they exert it over the gullible, the weak, and the vulnerable.

[Peter Pedant]

Fantastic ! Thank you good life
A piece of news that is not about Nelson Mandela

Paul was writing to Corinthian Christians wasnt he ?

so using it to convert those pesky atheists may be DOOMED. Anyway the alternative at that time was worship of other gods - paganism, and they would not be averse to the 'obvious' argument of evil is brought about by evil gods

Just a thought

we should look at a text in the context that it was written and then whether or not it has relevance to ourselves...

[jomifl]

GL, I think you will find it is rather more than half, what thas that got to do with anything though?

[vulcan42]

goodlife please explain how the bible in latin has had an indirect influence on millions of readers. Also, if the words of the bible are sacrosanct why did the JW rewrite it? Do they consider their interpretation is more accurate then the "word of God"?

[goodlife]

The wisdom of reading, studying, and applying with understanding the Word of God, can better appreciate the directive of Revelation 1:3. “Happy is he who reads aloud and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and who observe the things written in it; for the appointed time is near.”—Rev. 1:3.Simple for some.

[Peter Pedant]

Goodlife - you are slipping into error - serious error....

GL: There is no substitute for examining the characteristics of each translation itself.

actually there is - learning Greek and seeing what the text says itself.
I must confess I have misplaced my Gk NT so I cant look at the text myslef altho I have to say your track record on this is not good GL

Jomifl - we know the NT and letter of Paul were written in Greek
so you dont have to do the Latin (Vulgate around 400AD) or Aramaic which Paul didnt use....

[Peter Pedant]

No GL you are quoting out of context

The Revelations were written in the expectation that the end would come soon - the time is near.

There is no evidence the time is near in 2012 - except a document written 2000 years ago.

[Peter Pedant]

Vulcan - the Bible in latin ia a late construct around 400AD - translated by Jerome. Originally OT Hebrew and NT - was first in Greek.

Metzger has written extensively and lucidly on where did the Bible come from (dead white theologian)

[jomifl]

PP, just trying to cover all the bases :o)

[vulcan42]

Simple for some,but obviously my question wasn't simple enough for goodlife who,once again, fails to answer a question relating to a statement he's written.

[Peter Pedant]

Jomifl - other peoples ideas maybe good ideas.
Your comment led me to goggle Aramaisms in Paul
and at least got me to think about it

( consensus is he obviously wrote in Greek )

[atalanta]

There wasn't just one bible - there were thousands of versions. When printing was invented, one of the first things to be printed was the bible. The first european printers had literally thousands of manuscript versions to choose from - and that's only the accepted books and gospels. ( Never mind the stuff like the gospel of Thomas, for instance ). Manuscript writers had varied the words and spellings, translators had varied the translations, copiers had copied mistakes and added mistakes of their own, some had tried to correct original mistakes and got them wrong - so the printers did the best they could and came up with just one or two versions of the mish-mash.
Take just one example - the greek word in the gospels used for "betray" to describe what Judas did is not commonly translated as "betray", but simply as " hand over". If that is all that Judas actually did, the crucifixion itself needs a complete re-think.

[goodlife]

Vulcan@ Although Latin is a dead language now there was a time when it was spoken not only in all parts of Italy but also in Gaul (France), Spain and northern Africa due to the Romans.

Because Latin was the language of imperial Rome and thus the official language of Palestine at the time of Christ, it is not surprising to find some Latin expressions and idioms in the Christian Greek Scriptures. The word “Latin” is found once in the modern Bible translations, where we are told that the inscription placed above Jesus on the torture stake was also written in Latin.

When you look at modern European languages the alphabets actually come from latin, which also came from greek. And in fact a lot of English words are derived from Latin.