DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Phoenix87x on June 07, 2023, 06:38:23 AM
-
So I started reading the Bible, Qua-ran, Lotus sutra and Bhagavad Gita in an interest to better relate to and understand the people of the world.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/95/51/5f9551452e2350d2dfd381bf3de27974.png)
It's all very interesting, but I need guidance. This stuff is not that easy to interpret.
I know there's religious discussion in the religion section, but that's kind of locked away and reserved for fierce debate. This I wanted to be a thread just to learn and understand better, not to fight.
Mods, let me know if this accommodation is too much, but could we have a thread we just learn about stuff from scripture? And not argue?
If not that's find too. But if this thread does get locked or moved, anyone feel free to DM me who would like to continue the discussion privately.
Thanks
-
This should really be in P/R.
-
So I started reading the Bible, Qua-ran, Lotus sutra and Bhagavad Gita in an interest to better relate to and understand the people of the world.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/95/51/5f9551452e2350d2dfd381bf3de27974.png)
It's all very interesting, but I need guidance. This stuff is not that easy to interpret.
I know there's religious discussion in the religion section, but that's kind of locked away and reserved for fierce debate. This I wanted to be a thread just to learn and understand better, not to fight.
Mods, let me know if this accommodation is too much, but could we have a thread we just learn about stuff from scripture? And not argue?
If not that's find too. But if this thread does get locked or moved, anyone feel free to DM me who would like to continue the discussion privately.
Thanks
First and foremost, kudos for taking on such a massive goal with a somewhat altruistic motivation as your guide.
That said, I find it super interesting that you are going to read these concurrently (at least according to the picture?)
Finally, I wonder if a series of prompts might be a better way to proceed, especially if you are looking for some focused guidance.
As for me, former alter-boy, lifelong catholic here, so while I've dabbled in the other texts you've outlined, the bible is the only thing I have any working familiarity with.
-
The only way that I can see something like this working NOT in P/R is by examining these works only as literary works, like in a comparative religions course at a university.
But I am afraid the chances of something like that staying within those parameters and succeeding are close to nil.
Just my two cents. What does everyone else think?
But either way, kudos to you for undertaking this study.
-
For what it's worth, I'm good with a literary debate about these works. I know I'm going to be reading, with some curiosity. I think we're fine as long as it doesn't devolve into what religious conversations often do, and that is debates on faith and the differences/misundertandings between narrative and allegory.
-
Lots to take in at once, especially with a sandwich to eat concurrently.
I'm interested and will follow, though.
There are "quite a few" Bible in a Year podcasts. I'd recommend one from Fr Mike Schmitz personally.
-
No Dianetics? Tsk tsk tsk.
But as others have alluded to, maybe start with one. I'd imagine one would take considerable time to properly look into, doing multiple at once just feels like it'll drive you crazy.
-
But I am afraid the chances of something like that staying within those parameters and succeeding are close to nil.
Just my two cents. What does everyone else think?
Agreed, I'd let the conversation flow naturally, and if it dips into P/R territory, just move it there.
-
You should follow a couple of people:
Aron Ra
Seth Andrews
They are Atheists but I guarantee you they know these books better than anyone.
-
About that and actually "knowing" the books... I wonder how many people actually have done with these religious texts what you would do with any other book, i.e. reading them properly, from the first page to the last. I know I haven't, we all know more or less a lot of stuff that is in the book of the religion we were raised into (and suprisingly, a lot of stuff that isn't even there), and we all must have had as children some "easy" and condensed version to read, but I wonder how many people actually ever read those books from the first page to the last. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers would be very small.
-
About that and actually "knowing" the books... I wonder how many people actually have done with these religious texts what you would do with any other book, i.e. reading them properly, from the first page to the last. I know I haven't, we all know more or less a lot of stuff that is in the book of the religion we were raised into (and suprisingly, a lot of stuff that isn't even there), and we all must have had as children some "easy" and condensed version to read, but I wonder how many people actually ever read those books from the first page to the last. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers would be very small.
Why would this be "reading them properly", though? The Bible, for example, is a compilation of many previous books, writings, histories, letters, etc., which was compiled by the Church some 300+ years into Christianity. Sure, there is some chronology to it, and a logic to how it's been ordered, but I don't think anyone ever intended for it to be read the same way that you'd read a Stephen King novel.
-
I have read it that way, and it's NOT easy. You pointed out the main point: it's not really a narrative, more like a book of essays or short stories, but even then, it's - or can be - wildly disjointed and requires a level of attentiveness to pick up on the subtle and not-so-subtle shifts in tone, intent and style.
-
About that and actually "knowing" the books... I wonder how many people actually have done with these religious texts what you would do with any other book, i.e. reading them properly, from the first page to the last. I know I haven't, we all know more or less a lot of stuff that is in the book of the religion we were raised into (and suprisingly, a lot of stuff that isn't even there), and we all must have had as children some "easy" and condensed version to read, but I wonder how many people actually ever read those books from the first page to the last. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers would be very small.
Why would this be "reading them properly", though? The Bible, for example, is a compilation of many previous books, writings, histories, letters, etc., which was compiled by the Church some 300+ years into Christianity. Sure, there is some chronology to it, and a logic to how it's been ordered, but I don't think anyone ever intended for it to be read the same way that you'd read a Stephen King novel.
While I agree that it's not intended to be read as a novel (The Bible as least), I think Mirrormask point still stand. The number of people who have read even one book within the Bible from beginning to end is probably a lot lower than one might think. Maybe "reading them properly" is not the correct term, but we know selective reading is a thing when it comes to the Bible.
-
The only way that I can see something like this working NOT in P/R is by examining these works only as literary works, like in a comparative religions course at a university.
But I am afraid the chances of something like that staying within those parameters and succeeding are close to nil.
This. Happy to let this go on for the moment, but if it veers off into P/R territory it will move there.
-
About that and actually "knowing" the books... I wonder how many people actually have done with these religious texts what you would do with any other book, i.e. reading them properly, from the first page to the last. I know I haven't, we all know more or less a lot of stuff that is in the book of the religion we were raised into (and suprisingly, a lot of stuff that isn't even there), and we all must have had as children some "easy" and condensed version to read, but I wonder how many people actually ever read those books from the first page to the last. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers would be very small.
Why would this be "reading them properly", though? The Bible, for example, is a compilation of many previous books, writings, histories, letters, etc., which was compiled by the Church some 300+ years into Christianity. Sure, there is some chronology to it, and a logic to how it's been ordered, but I don't think anyone ever intended for it to be read the same way that you'd read a Stephen King novel.
While I agree that it's not intended to be read as a novel (The Bible as least), I think Mirrormask point still stand. The number of people who have read even one book within the Bible from beginning to end is probably a lot lower than one might think. Maybe "reading them properly" is not the correct term, but we know selective reading is a thing when it comes to the Bible.
Just the very nature of biblical references - "John 3:16!" - lends itself and promotes a selective reading of relevant clauses. Not arguing anything here, just making an observation.
-
Oh wow.
I got a little busy and wasn't able to log back in for a while.
Glad to see this thread is still up and going.
I've really enjoyed the reading so far and look forward to chatting with everyone.
Thank you so much everybody :smiley:
-
I can't speak to any of the religious texts except the bible but doesn't it matter which version you are using.
I seem to recall some pretty heated debates between some of my Christian friends about different verses meaning different things depending upon which translation you were using.
-
Ok so first question,
for your scripture of choice, how do you read it?
do you start at the beginning or jump around?
-
About that and actually "knowing" the books... I wonder how many people actually have done with these religious texts what you would do with any other book, i.e. reading them properly, from the first page to the last. I know I haven't, we all know more or less a lot of stuff that is in the book of the religion we were raised into (and suprisingly, a lot of stuff that isn't even there), and we all must have had as children some "easy" and condensed version to read, but I wonder how many people actually ever read those books from the first page to the last. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers would be very small.
Why would this be "reading them properly", though? The Bible, for example, is a compilation of many previous books, writings, histories, letters, etc., which was compiled by the Church some 300+ years into Christianity. Sure, there is some chronology to it, and a logic to how it's been ordered, but I don't think anyone ever intended for it to be read the same way that you'd read a Stephen King novel.
Skeever is right. Reading the Bible front to back like any other book is probably not the best way, in and of itself.
Ok so first question,
for your scripture of choice, how do you read it?
do you start at the beginning or jump around?
I do it book by book, if I'm interested in a particular book, or theme by theme, i.e. seeing how a particular theme is examined by the various authors.
It sounds like a simple question, but it isn't really a simple answer unfortunately lol
-
Sounds good
probably 3 separate times I tried to do it front to back and failed. Thanks, I will try and approach it different this time.
Stumbled accross a long, but very good docu-drama of Jesus's life starting right at John the Baptist. Very informative
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mgUPt2KI08&ab_channel=Jesus.net
-
About that and actually "knowing" the books... I wonder how many people actually have done with these religious texts what you would do with any other book, i.e. reading them properly, from the first page to the last. I know I haven't, we all know more or less a lot of stuff that is in the book of the religion we were raised into (and suprisingly, a lot of stuff that isn't even there), and we all must have had as children some "easy" and condensed version to read, but I wonder how many people actually ever read those books from the first page to the last. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers would be very small.
I know that by "from the first to the last page" you mean "read the whole text".
But to clarify and maybe to help the OP, the authors of the Hebrew Bible never intended their work to be read "from first page to the last" in the same way a novel or a business strategy book is read. First of all, "complete" copies were almost non-existent. Nobody had a complete Hebrew Bible on their nightstand. There were scrolls intended to be read aloud as a community, not in a private setting (see for example the passages in Exodus and Nehemiah were the books are read to the people, or in Chronicles were the scrolls are read to the King by the scribes, or the instructions in the letter to the Colossians to read the letter to the church and then to send it to other churches).
Second, the scriptures are obviously intended to be meditative reading or hymns for celebrations (e.g. Psalms). And the recurrence/circularity/repetition of themes leads you to believe that people were supposed to carefully meditate on a passage and find the "hyperlinks" to other Scriptures. For example, the theme of "salvation on an ark from the waters" appears in Genesis 6-9 and Exodus 2 in completely different stories. Joseph (Genesis 37-50) and Daniel (Daniel 2-12) carry the theme of "young Hebrew leader that gained a prominent position in a foreign court by interpreting dreams". You'll also find four different instances of "young man finds a beautiful and helpful woman in a well" four times, starting on Genesis 26. So don't be afraid on keep finding these interlinked stories and make sense of their overall message.
At the same time, as you read through the books there's a sense of "progression" in the overall history of redemption, in the sense that there is progress in the cycle of promise-fulfillment: Adam and Eve's descendants are the fruit of God's creation and his command to humankind to rule the earth, Exodus is read as the fulfillment of the promises to the patriarchs and matriarchs in Genesis, the Covenant in the Pentateuch is an expansion of that original promise, King David receives a promise that is fulfilled in Solomon and that is expanded in the Prophets, the Babylonian captivity is seen not as the destruction of the people of Israel but as an opportunity to re-affirm the promises to David and Abraham, etc. That's why Christians in the first century went back to read the Old Testament and they saw Jesus Christ as the culmination of that promise-fulfillment cycle.
-
So there are four background resources that have helped me a lot in understanding the Bible as literature. I'm a Christian so I'm definitely biased but I think these resources can help people even if they are not committed to the Christian faith:
1. Watch the Bible Project Youtube videos that introduce and summarize every book. These are short videos that provide a lot of perspective and guidance on what to look for in the book, what the author's message is, etc. See for example their video on the book of Daniel and you'll appreciate how it guides your reading of an otherwise symbolic/cryptic book. It's an evangelical project so you can expect the videos to assume that the Bible is the revelation from God and that Christ is the Son of God and Savior of men.
2. The Youtube series "Introduction to the Old Testament" with Yale prof. Christine Hayes. When you start feeling that reading is a slog, these lectures can give you a big-picture view and motivate you to keep going. This is a non-religious college course focused on providing a complete overview of the Old Testament, a summary of each book's themes, and the main theories about the composition of the Bible. I would consider these theories "liberal" since they essentially deny any Divine authorship or intended meaning, but they're representative of the mainstream in Bible studies.
3. If you want a concise commentary to consult when there's something you don't understand (and there's a lot to not understand, especially in the OT) I'll recommend the NIV Compact Bible Commentary by John Sailhamer. I bought my copy for $6 at Thriftbooks and it's a very valuable resource.
4. If you want to be amazed at how intricate, deliberate and sophisticated the Bible literature is, read the Art of Biblical Narrative by Robert Alter. This is an academic book and a little bit heavier, but it provides an excellent perspective on the Bible as literature. He is an American Jewish scholar (although I don't think he writes from a conservative perspective).
-
3. If you want a concise commentary to consult when there's something you don't understand (and there's a lot to not understand, especially in the OT) I'll recommend the NIV Compact Bible Commentary by John Sailhamer. I bought my copy for $6 at Thriftbooks and it's a very valuable resource.
I agree, this is a good concise commentary.
Personally, I get a lot of use from the Oxford Bible Commentary. However, it is not what I would call "concise," as it weighs approximately 15 pounds lol
-
3. If you want a concise commentary to consult when there's something you don't understand (and there's a lot to not understand, especially in the OT) I'll recommend the NIV Compact Bible Commentary by John Sailhamer. I bought my copy for $6 at Thriftbooks and it's a very valuable resource.
I agree, this is a good concise commentary.
Personally, I get a lot of use from the Oxford Bible Commentary. However, it is not what I would call "concise," as it weighs approximately 15 pounds lol
Plus the smallest font size ever plus trying to say a lot in as little space as possible.
-
3. If you want a concise commentary to consult when there's something you don't understand (and there's a lot to not understand, especially in the OT) I'll recommend the NIV Compact Bible Commentary by John Sailhamer. I bought my copy for $6 at Thriftbooks and it's a very valuable resource.
I agree, this is a good concise commentary.
Personally, I get a lot of use from the Oxford Bible Commentary. However, it is not what I would call "concise," as it weighs approximately 15 pounds lol
Plus the smallest font size ever plus trying to say a lot in as little space as possible.
It's pretty small.
-
So I am failing miserable at reading the NKJ version of the bible. Do you guys know of a version that has more modern language that is easier to comprehend, but also retains the original message as much as possible?
Thanks
-
So I am failing miserable at reading the NKJ version of the bible. Do you guys know of a version that has more modern language that is easier to comprehend, but also retains the original message as much as possible?
Thanks
There are a ton of companion guides that will essentially give you a 'layman's terms' explanation as you make your way through it.
I think, if the NKJ version of the bible is giving you an issue, I'd advise finding a reference guide so that you can contextualize what you are reading (as opposed to going with a whole new translation). I'm biased here (lifelong Catholic), but if I'm going to read the bible, I want to read the bible (not some modern fan-fiction interpretation).
That said, it's your exercise, so it's really up to you how you choose to proceed. Hop on Amazon and you will find all sorts of modern translations to choose from (let the user reviews be your guide).
-
I like the New Living Translation for getting a more modern version of a verse, even if it isn't the best for learning.
-
So I am failing miserable at reading the NKJ version of the bible. Do you guys know of a version that has more modern language that is easier to comprehend, but also retains the original message as much as possible?
Thanks
First of all, if the letters KJV are in it, put it aside. It's not written/translated for you, it was written/translated for people of previous times.
Some more readable versions include the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), the New International Version (NIV), and the NET (New English Translation). These versions do a good job of balancing formal equivalence translation (word-for-word translation) with dynamic equivalence translation (phrase-for-phrase or idea-for-idea translation) with good readability. I use all three regularly. The NET actually has extensive notes from the translators at the bottom of each page which go into great detail as to why they made the translation decisions they did (because all translation is interpretation).
-
Thank you so much everyone.
I ordered two versions which are supposed to use more modern wording.
-
Thank you so much everyone.
I ordered two versions which are supposed to use more modern wording.
:tup
-
I like my New Jerusalem Bible.
And no, not just because JRR Tolkien is credited as one of the translators. Promise. :biggrin:
-
I like my New Jerusalem Bible.
And no, not just because JRR Tolkien is credited as one of the translators. Promise. :biggrin:
It's not one of my go-to versions, but it is very interesting, and I do like it.
-
Ok here goes a question,
Did Lucifer fall before adam and eve? If so, what exactly was his grievance. Or was it more just that he thought he could be above God?
I guess all these years I thought he rebelled as he felt man was favored more over the angels?
-
How far along are you in reading the Bible? reading it is interesting not only to find out what's actually in there, but what actually isn't. I'm probably not qualified to answer since I'm one of the many who did not read the entire thing, but as far as I remember, there's surprisingly very little about the devil in the actual Bible.
In the beginning there's the infamous talking snake of course, but I don't think it's ever identified as the devil. And then "Satan" shows up to tempt Jesus in the desert where "satan" in the context means "adversary", and somehow became a proper name for the devil.
I would not be surprised if what we know, or what we think we know about the fall of Lucifer, comes also from Milton's Paradise Lost, and not the Bible. There are many things about religion that we assume from common knowledge or, dare I say, "pop culture". There's probably way more about Hell in Dante's Divine Comedy than in the actual Bible, where if I remember correctly there's just a mention of the Genna as a place of hellfire and torment and not much more.
Also the appearance of the devil himself - if you picture him with hooves, horns and a pitchfork, that's just because they gave him the trait of old pagan gods that were meant to be eradicated from people's ways and culture once christianity took over. The horns are really the ones of the god Cernunnos, which in turn got them from the deer, one of the most important animals of the forest. The pitchfork is Poseidon's trident, and the hooves are the hooves of Pan. All pagan gods that were associated with the devil to eradicate them, or at the very least, give negative connotations to those symbols.
Again, I'm one of those who never read the Bible front to back so probably I'm missing something, but as far as I remember, what we know about "the devil" comes 20% from the actual religious texts, and 80% from "pop culture" for lack of a better term.
-
How far along are you in reading the Bible? reading it is interesting not only to find out what's actually in there, but what actually isn't. I'm probably not qualified to answer since I'm one of the many who did not read the entire thing, but as far as I remember, there's surprisingly very little about the devil in the actual Bible.
In the beginning there's the infamous talking snake of course, but I don't think it's ever identified as the devil. And then "Satan" shows up to tempt Jesus in the desert where "satan" in the context means "adversary", and somehow became a proper name for the devil.
I would not be surprised if what we know, or what we think we know about the fall of Lucifer, comes also from Milton's Paradise Lost, and not the Bible. There are many things about religion that we assume from common knowledge or, dare I say, "pop culture". There's probably way more about Hell in Dante's Divine Comedy than in the actual Bible, where if I remember correctly there's just a mention of the Genna as a place of hellfire and torment and not much more.
Also the appearance of the devil himself - if you picture him with hooves, horns and a pitchfork, that's just because they gave him the trait of old pagan gods that were meant to be eradicated from people's ways and culture once christianity took over. The horns are really the ones of the god Cernunnos, which in turn got them from the deer, one of the most important animals of the forest. The pitchfork is Poseidon's trident, and the hooves are the hooves of Pan. All pagan gods that were associated with the devil to eradicate them, or at the very least, give negative connotations to those symbols.
Again, I'm one of those who never read the Bible front to back so probably I'm missing something, but as far as I remember, what we know about "the devil" comes 20% from the actual religious texts, and 80% from "pop culture" for lack of a better term.
Pretty much all of this.
As for the question: "Did Lucifer fall before adam and eve?"
Presumably, yes. But, this brings up a much larger (and previously unmentioned point)–I , like a lot of churchgoers, had the benefit of additional contextualizing via Sunday morning sermons, 12 years of religious studies (in school), etc.
The bible, in and of itself, is best thought of as a foundational text. Without the benefit of all the times a Priest would speak about a specific passage for twenty minutes, I fear much of what I read would've failed to register.
To that point, in addition to this thread, I would strongly recommend you check out one of the numerous resources that have been mentioned in this thread. Be it a podcast or a youtube series, some sort of companion program may really help ensure that your mission is a success.
-
Ok here goes a question,
Did Lucifer fall before adam and eve? If so, what exactly was his grievance. Or was it more just that he thought he could be above God?
I guess all these years I thought he rebelled as he felt man was favored more over the angels?
This is getting close to a theological question, a belief question, not a "Bible as a piece of literature" question, and as such would be better served in P/R. This is not really the right place to discuss matters of belief, as there is no one answer, there is only what different people believe.
MirrorMask makes a great point on what the Bible DOESN'T include.
-
Sorry
-
Sorry
What are you apologizing for? This is a compelling thread :)
-
How far along are you in reading the Bible? reading it is interesting not only to find out what's actually in there, but what actually isn't. I'm probably not qualified to answer since I'm one of the many who did not read the entire thing, but as far as I remember, there's surprisingly very little about the devil in the actual Bible.
In the beginning there's the infamous talking snake of course, but I don't think it's ever identified as the devil. And then "Satan" shows up to tempt Jesus in the desert where "satan" in the context means "adversary", and somehow became a proper name for the devil.
I would not be surprised if what we know, or what we think we know about the fall of Lucifer, comes also from Milton's Paradise Lost, and not the Bible. There are many things about religion that we assume from common knowledge or, dare I say, "pop culture". There's probably way more about Hell in Dante's Divine Comedy than in the actual Bible, where if I remember correctly there's just a mention of the Genna as a place of hellfire and torment and not much more.
Also the appearance of the devil himself - if you picture him with hooves, horns and a pitchfork, that's just because they gave him the trait of old pagan gods that were meant to be eradicated from people's ways and culture once christianity took over. The horns are really the ones of the god Cernunnos, which in turn got them from the deer, one of the most important animals of the forest. The pitchfork is Poseidon's trident, and the hooves are the hooves of Pan. All pagan gods that were associated with the devil to eradicate them, or at the very least, give negative connotations to those symbols.
Again, I'm one of those who never read the Bible front to back so probably I'm missing something, but as far as I remember, what we know about "the devil" comes 20% from the actual religious texts, and 80% from "pop culture" for lack of a better term.
^There's a great deal more than the examples you mention, but you are essentially correct on the bigger point that, relatively speaking, there isn't much, and most of what people think they know about Satan and Hell are from other literature and pop culture myth. But those two topics aren't really the subject of any of the Biblical writings, and aren't important to the purpose of the narratives, so although we might sometimes be tempted to wonder why there isn't more, it's just not the focus.
Going to Phoenix87x's actual question in the prior post, the "fall" isn't really a thing, for the most part. Going back to my previous paragraph, there's a pop-culture mythology (or several) that arose out of a couple of passing statements, but no real detail in the Biblical texts. (there's a bit more to it than that, but that's the 30 second version)
I'll try to pop in in the next few days and give some more detailed thoughts on the original topic, as it is something that deserves detailed response, and I'm more knowledgeable than most here about that.
-
Sorry
What are you apologizing for? This is a compelling thread :)
Exactly, nothing for which to apologize.
-
Re: Satan
People here are forgetting the first two chapters of Job which are highly pivotal.
-
Re: Satan
People here are forgetting the first two chapters of Job which are highly pivotal.
I don't know about "people" but I'm not forgetting anything.
But IMO, it goes to what I said earlier about interpretation and beliefs.
-
Re: Satan
People here are forgetting the first two chapters of Job which are highly pivotal.
Forgetting? Nope. As I said, "here's a great deal more than the examples you mention..." and that was one of the examples I had in mind. Doesn't detract from my overall point.
As far as "highly pivotal," I'm not so sure I agree with that because I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Yes, they provide some great insight, and there are some great takeaways. But still, in the grand scheme of the story of who/what he is, that still isn't a lot. So, again, not sure how this somehow changes what has already been said.
-
“Skin in behalf of skin, and everything that a man (notice…not singling out Job…but “a man”…any man) has he will give in behalf of his soul.”
God had this included because it was important. Satan’s challenge involves ALL of us. He implies in these first two chapters that Job only serves God, not out of love, but because of what he gets in return. In essence, accusing God of buying off Job and accusing Job (and by implication, ANY man) of not loving God at all.
It also shows that the source of bad things is NOT God, but Satan’s. Job 2:7 points out that Satan (not God) was the one causing the horrible things to happen and make it look like it was coming from God in order to try and get Job to curse God.
He uses many of the same tactics today. He causes trials and implicates God as the cause in an effort to turn people against God. And he’s actually been largely successful at that. This is harmony with James 1:13 which states that God doesn’t “tempt” anyone. (Although it’s interesting to note that in the original Greek, the literal meaning is “tries” (i.e. “he tries no one”)
So ya…I would call that very pivotal.
-
1. That discussion is not appropriate to this thread and belongs in PR.
2. It has very little to do with the point at hand.
-
1. That discussion is not appropriate to this thread and belongs in PR.
2. It has very little to do with the point at hand.
Ugh…ok. Fine.
I love you Bosk, I’m just frustrated because I feel like I tried to stick to the facts of the narrative. But you are the boss here and I respect your leadership to this forum.
-
1. That discussion is not appropriate to this thread and belongs in PR.
2. It has very little to do with the point at hand.
Ugh…ok. Fine.
I love you Bosk, I’m just frustrated because I feel like I tried to stick to the facts of the narrative. But you are the boss here and I respect your leadership to this forum.
Just from my perspective, when you throw in asides like "and by implication, ANY man", you are no longer sticking to the facts of the narrative, and introducing personal interpretation. Which is one of the things that would belong in P/R instead of in this thread.
IMO and with all due respect (which is a lot, my friend).
-
1. That discussion is not appropriate to this thread and belongs in PR.
2. It has very little to do with the point at hand.
Ugh…ok. Fine.
I love you Bosk, I’m just frustrated because I feel like I tried to stick to the facts of the narrative. But you are the boss here and I respect your leadership to this forum.
Just from my perspective, when you throw in asides like "and by implication, ANY man", you are no longer sticking to the facts of the narrative, and introducing personal interpretation.
Not sure how that was a personal interpretation. He was just stating what the first couple of chapters in Job sais. Very interesting part of the scriptures if you ask me.
I also find it fascinating how the Bible has survived the test of time. There have been countless efforts to try and
supress it throughout the ages, yet it is now the world's number 1 best seller and also the most widely and freely distributed book in the world. That's quite remarkable in itself.
To the original poster, It's definitely worth checking into even from a literary perspective.
-
1. That discussion is not appropriate to this thread and belongs in PR.
2. It has very little to do with the point at hand.
Ugh…ok. Fine.
I love you Bosk, I’m just frustrated because I feel like I tried to stick to the facts of the narrative. But you are the boss here and I respect your leadership to this forum.
Just from my perspective, when you throw in asides like "and by implication, ANY man", you are no longer sticking to the facts of the narrative, and introducing personal interpretation.
Not sure how that was a personal interpretation. He was just stating what the first couple of chapters in Job sais. Very interesting part of the scriptures if you ask me.
Of course it's interesting. Job is one of my favorite books of the Bible.
But it's his personal interpretation that it implies that it applies to any, or every, man. In the actual text, it's a story about Job, not everyone. It's not a general book, but a very specific one.
-
Well, that’s why I was pointing to the exact narrative. Satan didn’t single out Job in his claim. That is a fact of the narrative.
EDIT - when I used the term “implied”… I wasn’t implying anything into the narrative. The text itself uses the term “a man”…thus it is the speaker himself, not the reader, making the implication.
-
I may have misunderstood which point you were making.
-
I'll say it because it hasn't been mentioned, but much of what we have seen about demons and a revolt against God comes from the Book of Enoch, a very early apocryphal book (book not included in the Bible) that both ancient Jews and Christians were aware of but rejected. Still its a very interesting ancient source of literature dealing with this topic at length (maybe the earliest?)
-
I'll say it because it hasn't been mentioned, but much of what we have seen about demons and a revolt against God comes from the Book of Enoch, a very early apocryphal book (book not included in the Bible) that both ancient Jews and Christians were aware of but rejected. Still its a very interesting ancient source of literature dealing with this topic at length (maybe the earliest?)
The Book of Enoch is an interesting read. I'm not sure that I would agree that "much" about demons and revolt against God comes from there, just because probably less than 1% of all Christians have even heard of it, much less actually read it, so I don't see it as being all that influential.
But there is definitely something there.
-
Interesting. I would assume that it was one of the sources that Milton, etc., would have been drawing from. But maybe not.
-
Interesting. I would assume that it was one of the sources that Milton, etc., would have been drawing from. But maybe not.
Milton was largely enamored with himself.
-
Does anyone know if the Bible is available in the original language it was written? And if so, what language was it?
Thanks
-
Does anyone know if the Bible is available in the original language it was written? And if so, what language was it?
Thanks
The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, with parts in Aramaic. The New Testament was written in Greek.
I have an inter linear version that does a side by side comparison with an English translation next to a word for word Greek translation. But it only highlights the challenges in translation. Syntax and sentence structures are often completely different between languages.
There’s a fantastic book called Truth in Translation by Jason DeBuhn (a Professor at Northern Arizona University) where he discusses the challenges in translation and compares the original languages vs a few modern English texts as examples. Excellent book. Highly recommended.
-
very interesting. Thank you
-
Does anyone know if the Bible is available in the original language it was written? And if so, what language was it?
Thanks
The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, with parts in Aramaic. The New Testament was written in Greek.
I have an inter linear version that does a side by side comparison with an English translation next to a word for word Greek translation. But it only highlights the challenges in translation. Syntax and sentence structures are often completely different between languages.
There’s a fantastic book called Truth in Translation by Jason DeBuhn (a Professor at Northern Arizona University) where he discusses the challenges in translation and compares the original languages vs a few modern English texts as examples. Excellent book. Highly recommended.
I would like to add that yes, the New Testament was translated into Greek because most of the population around the area of the events could not read or write. In fact, there are original manuscripts of the writings but they are far from complete as Father Time has withered them away to dust and ashes. How do we know this? The story of "let he who cast the first stone" was likely made up by some scribe who when translating an incomplete passage thought, 'yeah this is what Jesus would do' because the story literally doesn't exist.
If you want to review accurate information of the contents of the bible and how it was assembled then look into - Bart Ehrman, Robert Price or Richard Carrier - for starters.
-
Very nice service this morning. The topic was psalm 66
My take away was that although we may find it difficult to endure the test of suffering and sacrifice, ultimately it forges us into a stronger person. If anyone else has any other thoughts they would like to contribute, I would enjoy reading them.
Also, does has anyone here read the Bhagavad Gita, The Verdas or the Lotus sutra? If not cool, I just was looking for some guidance on those as well.