I Can Only Conclude That God Doesn't Care

[Skwim]

The prevailing claim of the Abrahamic religions is that through either direct construct or divine inspiration god saw to it that his message was recorded, and recorded correctly. And my guess is that, being god, he would have seen to it that this message was both understandable and unambiguous. Moreover, he would never be so derelict and inefficient as to fill it with inconsequentials or irrelevancies. He said what had to be said, and nothing more and nothing less.

Yet, today we have nearly a couple hundred versions of the Bible in English alone. Why so many? Because people disagree as to what the Bible should say and/or how. Take Isaiah 45:7 where the Hebrew word רַע ra` is translated as

evil
disaster
calamity
doom
trouble(s)
bad times
discord
woe
hard times​

depending on which version of the Bible one reads.

So, which is right? And how would one know? Thing is, they don't mean the same thing. Evil is hardly a synonym for hard times, nor is woe synonymous with doom. I doubt that god would ever have penned such confusion in his original, permitting his followers to fumble over his words or mistake what he was trying to get across. Consider: as a history teacher would you hand out a different reason for the origin of WWI to each student? Of course not. So one has to wonder why god went to the trouble having his word recorded and then not care how it was passed along. Either it wasn't meant to impact anyone other than those who read the original text, or he simply doesn't care what later readers get out of it. In effect, it doesn't matter today if one Christian believes he created evil and another gets the impression he only created hard times. If it did matter, then one would expect god to set things straight, making sure that the message he took the trouble to set forth was clear and unambiguous; that every English Bible said the very same thing, either literally or by implication. There wouldn't be nine English versions of רַע ra` meaning very different things. God would make sure that in Isaiah 45:7 every reader knows he had created evil, or whatever, and not something else.

Because of the preceding I can only surmise that god doesn't really care what the Christian does with his word. "Believe this or believe that, I really don't care. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by works? Fine. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by my grace? Fine. It really doesn't matter. Believe whatever you like."


So, how close to the truth am I here?

.

 

[savagewind]

The prevailing claim of the Abrahamic religions is that through either direct construct or divine inspiration god saw to it that his message was recorded, and recorded correctly. And my guess is that, being god, he would have seen to it that this message was both understandable and unambiguous. Moreover, he would never be so derelict and inefficient as to fill it with inconsequentials or irrelevancies. He said what had to be said, and nothing more and nothing less.

Yet, today we have nearly couple hundred versions of the Bible in English alone. Why so many? Because people disagree as to what the Bible should say and/or how. Take Isaiah 45:7 where the Hebrew word רַע ra` is translated as

evil
disaster
calamity
doom
trouble(s)
bad times
discord
woe
hard times​

depending on which version of the Bible one reads.

So, which is right? And how would one know? Thing is, they don't mean the same thing. Evil is hardly a synonym for hard times, nor is woe synonymous with doom. I doubt that god would ever have penned such confusion in his original, permitting his followers to fumble over his words or mistake what he was trying to get across. Consider: as a history teacher would you hand out different reasons for the origin of WWI to each student? Of course not. So one has to wonder why god went to the trouble having his word recorded and then not care how it was passed along. Either it wasn't meant to impact anyone other than those who read the original text, or he simply doesn't care what later readers get out of it. In effect, it doesn't matter today if one Christian believes he created evil and another gets the impression he only created hard times. If it did matter, then one would expect god to set things straight, making sure that the message he took the trouble to set forth was clear and unambiguous; that every English Bible said the very same thing, either literally or by implication. There wouldn't be nine English versions of רַע ra` meaning very different things. God would make sure that in Isaiah 45:7 every reader knows he had created evil, or whatever, and not something else.

Because of the preceding I can only surmise that god doesn't really care what the Christian does with his word. "Believe this or believe that, I really don't care. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by works? Fine. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by my grace? Fine. It really doesn't matter. Believe whatever you like."


So, how close to the truth am I here?

.

Very, very close I think.

 

[savagewind]

So, which is right? And how would one know?

.

One knows by asking.

Luke 11:10-12

Does anyone know that the original meaning of Matthew 5:3 means BEG? Beg for the meaning and you will be happy.

 

[Skwim]

One knows by asking.

Luke 11:10-12

Does anyone know that the original meaning of Matthew 5:3 means BEG? Beg for the meaning and you will be happy.

But shouldn't we assume that those who penned the different versions did just that, ask? Yet, we still don't have any kind of consensus.

 

[savagewind]

But shouldn't we assume that those who penned the different versions did just that, ask? Yet, we still don't have any kind of consensus.

Funny. Why assume anything? *** U Me. LOL If I am left to assume meaning then I skip it. I do not reject it. I wait till the proper time. And it always comes.

 

[savagewind]

How can the English Bible be right when they all say the poor are happy? The poor are not happy.

 

[savagewind]

I am amazed that in this world of confusion and lies anyone would "assume" that the Bible, the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible has been understood, and therefore, copied correctly.

 

[savagewind]

http://biblehub.com/matthew/5-3.htm

I have observed that people have begged for the truth, got it and then went on their own way. BUT happy are those who keep begging. I am not poor, not in any way. But I keep asking God, begging God, for the right way.

 

[RRex]

I don't accept any religious text as definitive. Too much time has passed since the originals were "written". There is no doubt their messages have been polluted and perverted over the centuries.

We will never know, and I leave it at that.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

This is the sort of tack I end up on a lot - mind you I don't start out this way, and it isn't me who brings up the topic and get myself into these situations - but when asked and (ultimately) confronted by someone who challenges how I could ever possibly not have a belief-in and/or reverence-for God - I turn to: "Okay - let's assume God does exist, and He's exactly who you say He is... here are the reasons I believe He still isn't worth following." That's always the point that their face attempts to convey that I am a monster of the most egregious sort, and I simply shrug my shoulders and ask if there's anything else they'd like to know.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

One knows by asking.

Luke 11:10-12

Does anyone know that the original meaning of Matthew 5:3 means BEG? Beg for the meaning and you will be happy.

Do you mean the original "MEANING" of that verse, or the "interpretation" of that verse? How do you get "BEG" from those words?

 

[savagewind]

Do you mean the original "MEANING" of that verse, or the "interpretation" of that verse? How do you get "BEG" from those words?

http://biblehub.com/greek/4434.htm
The translators erroneously believed that only poor people should beg.

 

[savagewind]

Keep seeking keep asking......happy are those who do not get satisfied but keep following the shepherd for life. Matthew 5:3

 

[buddhist]

Yes, it's irrational to believe that an "almighty god" would pen its message in a medium as fallable as human words. It is fraught with innumerous problems, including problems with preservation, interpretation, transmission, translation, and so forth.

 

[Skwim]

This is the sort of tack I end up on a lot - mind you I don't start out this way, and it isn't me who brings up the topic and get myself into these situations - but when asked and (ultimately) confronted by someone who challenges how I could ever possibly not have a belief-in and/or reverence-for God - I turn to: "Okay - let's assume God does exist, and He's exactly who you say He is... here are the reasons I believe He still isn't worth following." That's always the point that their face attempts to convey that I am a monster of the most egregious sort, and I simply shrug my shoulders and ask if there's anything else they'd like to know.

Yes, it is sometimes difficult dealing with people who find it absurd that you can't believe they're right.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

The prevailing claim of the Abrahamic religions is that through either direct construct or divine inspiration god saw to it that his message was recorded, and recorded correctly. And my guess is that, being god, he would have seen to it that this message was both understandable and unambiguous. Moreover, he would never be so derelict and inefficient as to fill it with inconsequentials or irrelevancies. He said what had to be said, and nothing more and nothing less.

Yet, today we have nearly couple hundred versions of the Bible in English alone. Why so many? Because people disagree as to what the Bible should say and/or how. Take Isaiah 45:7 where the Hebrew word רַע ra` is translated as

evil
disaster
calamity
doom
trouble(s)
bad times
discord
woe
hard times​

depending on which version of the Bible one reads.

So, which is right? And how would one know? Thing is, they don't mean the same thing. Evil is hardly a synonym for hard times, nor is woe synonymous with doom. I doubt that god would ever have penned such confusion in his original, permitting his followers to fumble over his words or mistake what he was trying to get across. Consider: as a history teacher would you hand out different reasons for the origin of WWI to each student? Of course not. So one has to wonder why god went to the trouble having his word recorded and then not care how it was passed along. Either it wasn't meant to impact anyone other than those who read the original text, or he simply doesn't care what later readers get out of it. In effect, it doesn't matter today if one Christian believes he created evil and another gets the impression he only created hard times. If it did matter, then one would expect god to set things straight, making sure that the message he took the trouble to set forth was clear and unambiguous; that every English Bible said the very same thing, either literally or by implication. There wouldn't be nine English versions of רַע ra` meaning very different things. God would make sure that in Isaiah 45:7 every reader knows he had created evil, or whatever, and not something else.

Because of the preceding I can only surmise that god doesn't really care what the Christian does with his word. "Believe this or believe that, I really don't care. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by works? Fine. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by my grace? Fine. It really doesn't matter. Believe whatever you like."


So, how close to the truth am I here?

.

Sounds about right.

 

[RRex]

I Can Only Conclude That God Doesn't Care

As a Deist, I agree absolutely.

He made the universe, then sat back in his La-Z-Boy to watch his story unfold.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

So, how close to the truth am I here?.

Not very I don't think.

Doctrines in Christianity carry differing levels of importance. Whether God created evil or calamity perhaps is not as important as whether you are saved by grace or works. I would say it is quite the leap to go from God not caring about evil or calamity in Isaiah 45:7 to not caring about the fundamental doctrine of salvation. Perhaps He doesn't care that much about the translation in Isaiah 45:7 simply because all of the possible translations hold true, or they are simply secondary less important truths. I don't claim to know.

Or perhaps if you're that perplexed by the differences then God expects you to go and learn the ancient Hebrew and Greek and determine for yourself. The Christian faith is not devoid of all mental exertion (though I'm sure many opponents would say it is), we should research translations, how literal they are, the intentions of the translators etc. I don't expect God to drop the perfect translation into my lap.

To jump to the conclusion that God doesn't care is easy but I would suggest also a bit lazy, when there are a number of possible explanations as I have just highlighted.

 

[Thana]

The prevailing claim of the Abrahamic religions is that through either direct construct or divine inspiration god saw to it that his message was recorded, and recorded correctly. And my guess is that, being god, he would have seen to it that this message was both understandable and unambiguous. Moreover, he would never be so derelict and inefficient as to fill it with inconsequentials or irrelevancies. He said what had to be said, and nothing more and nothing less.

Yet, today we have nearly a couple hundred versions of the Bible in English alone. Why so many? Because people disagree as to what the Bible should say and/or how. Take Isaiah 45:7 where the Hebrew word רַע ra` is translated as

evil
disaster
calamity
doom
trouble(s)
bad times
discord
woe
hard times​

depending on which version of the Bible one reads.

So, which is right? And how would one know? Thing is, they don't mean the same thing. Evil is hardly a synonym for hard times, nor is woe synonymous with doom. I doubt that god would ever have penned such confusion in his original, permitting his followers to fumble over his words or mistake what he was trying to get across. Consider: as a history teacher would you hand out different reasons for the origin of WWI to each student? Of course not. So one has to wonder why god went to the trouble having his word recorded and then not care how it was passed along. Either it wasn't meant to impact anyone other than those who read the original text, or he simply doesn't care what later readers get out of it. In effect, it doesn't matter today if one Christian believes he created evil and another gets the impression he only created hard times. If it did matter, then one would expect god to set things straight, making sure that the message he took the trouble to set forth was clear and unambiguous; that every English Bible said the very same thing, either literally or by implication. There wouldn't be nine English versions of רַע ra` meaning very different things. God would make sure that in Isaiah 45:7 every reader knows he had created evil, or whatever, and not something else.

Because of the preceding I can only surmise that god doesn't really care what the Christian does with his word. "Believe this or believe that, I really don't care. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by works? Fine. Think my word tells you you can get into my heaven by my grace? Fine. It really doesn't matter. Believe whatever you like."


So, how close to the truth am I here?

.

I don't think it means He doesn't care, I just think it means He did His best according to the limits He set Himself (ie - Free will). And most of the things that are fallible in the bible are rather inconseqential. Grace or works, Evil or woe, either way you're expected to love God and your neighbour. Everything vitally important in the bible is repeated numerous times so you won't be given a free pass if you consider the fallibility of the bible an excuse.

 

[Skwim]

Not very I don't think.

Doctrines in Christianity carry differing levels of importance. Whether God created evil or calamity perhaps is not as important as whether you are saved by grace or works. I would say it is quite the leap to go from God not caring about evil or calamity in Isaiah 45:7 to not caring about the fundamental doctrine of salvation. Perhaps He doesn't care that much about the translation in Isaiah 45:7 simply because all of the possible translations hold true,

Sorry, but "evil" simply isn't the same as "hard times."

or they are simply secondary less important truths.

Maybe, but in light of the mess translators have made of one simple word, רַע ra`, then one has to question what other words they've bollixed. Perhaps very crucial words, and, in turn, very important concepts.

I don't claim to know.

Acknowledging you don't know is a humble and wise attitude.

Or perhaps if you're that perplexed by the differences then God expects you to go and learn the ancient Hebrew and Greek and determine for yourself.

You mean spend years and years of study to match the education of the translators would lead to a better understanding of ancient Greek and Hebrew? It's doubtful. But my point isn't that I'm perplexed, but rather that it appears that god doesn't care what his message says. He went to all the trouble to make certain his word was recorded exactly (so it's been asserted), only to abandon it later on.

The Christian faith is not devoid of all mental exertion (though I'm sure many opponents would say it is), we should research translations, how literal they are, the intentions of the translators etc. I don't expect God to drop the perfect translation into my lap.

Then you must expect god not to care if some people get it right and others don't.

To jump to the conclusion that God doesn't care is easy but I would suggest also a bit lazy, when there are a number of possible explanations as I have just highlighted.

Explanations, but hardly convincing.