Is being gay a sin according to your religion?

[Shadow Wolf]

If translations are "notoriously difficult" why do they always come out essentially the same ?

Many times they don't. Translations are difficult because of the way words are used in different cultures, different expressions and colloquialisms, and words for concepts that don't even exist in another culture. From religious texts to philosophy and even Japanese animations, translations are not always the same, and though the gist of it is always the same, the details are often varied and can easily end up giving a different implication of the text or even make a character seem a bit different. Grammar itself is also another issue, because to make a sentence complete in one language, it may be necessary to add in entire clauses that are not a part of the original text.

The Bible does NOT claim the earth is flat and fixed.

1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.”
Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm …”
Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable …”
Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.”
Isaiah 45:18: “…who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast…”

I don't recall ever reading an exposition of the Greek mathematical concept of pi. If I missed it, please tell me where it is

According to 1 King 7:23, we have a circumference of 30 and a diameter of 10; because you divide the circumference of a circle by the diameter, so we have 30/10, which equals 3. Except it should not equal 3, but rather 3.14159265....
Or, we should be able to take Pi * Diameter, and get the circumference, but it doesn't work because the King math would have the circumference being 31.4159....
The Greeks had this down. Archimedes is one of the first to work out a functional approximation of pi.

I think you need to reread the first chapter of Genesis

I didn't mention Genesis 1. And, yes, I grasp it. But even if you don't take it as a literal seven days as we know them, there is still the issue of the Bible presenting the Earth as being created before the Sun, moon, other planets, and the stars.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As to scientific method and rationality, it has nothing to offer re the first cause of creation,

Your position has nothing to offer beyond what you want to assume is the first cause. What if God was created? What if God has a God?

 

[shmogie]

Your position has nothing to offer beyond what you want to assume is the first cause. What if God was created? What if God has a God?

There is nothing that can be known outside the universe, we are captives of the universe, we don't know, and will never know if there is anything outside the universe. We know there was a first cause, that came before the universe, so speculation about it is worthless, we can only believe by faith what has been revealed of the creation. So we can play "what if " games all day. My faith tells me that God was he first cause. My faith is based upon evidence that is reasonable to me.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

My faith tells me that God was he first cause. My faith is based upon evidence that is reasonable to me.

But yet you admit that we know and never will know? How can you have faith in that which cannot be known? When I don't know something, I don't know. I don't try to attach a label to something that I know nothing of, and I realize the only way to be honest is to profess ignorance.

 

[shmogie]

Many times they don't. Translations are difficult because of the way words are used in different cultures, different expressions and colloquialisms, and words for concepts that don't even exist in another culture. From religious texts to philosophy and even Japanese animations, translations are not always the same, and though the gist of it is always the same, the details are often varied and can easily end up giving a different implication of the text or even make a character seem a bit different. Grammar itself is also another issue, because to make a sentence complete in one language, it may be necessary to add in entire clauses that are not a part of the original text.

1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.”
Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm …”
Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable …”
Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.”
Isaiah 45:18: “…who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast…”

According to 1 King 7:23, we have a circumference of 30 and a diameter of 10; because you divide the circumference of a circle by the diameter, so we have 30/10, which equals 3. Except it should not equal 3, but rather 3.14159265....
Or, we should be able to take Pi * Diameter, and get the circumference, but it doesn't work because the King math would have the circumference being 31.4159....
The Greeks had this down. Archimedes is one of the first to work out a functional approximation of pi.

I didn't mention Genesis 1. And, yes, I grasp it. But even if you don't take it as a literal seven days as we know them, there is still the issue of the Bible presenting the Earth as being created before the Sun, moon, other planets, and the stars.

All of your OT quotations attest to one thing, the earth is a stable, firm structure, it is neither a planet of gas, or intense constant violent geological activity. Since I don't have great familiarity with the OT, I will have to do a little research to re your pi reference. You, nor anyone else was alive when creation took place, you think you know the order of creation, you have faith that you know the order of creation, you believe you know the order of creation, but that is as far as you can go. As to translations, I wasn't speaking of Japanese cartoons, I was speaking solely of the translations of the Bible from Hebrew/Greek to English. Translations that have been going on for close to 500 years, everyone of which is essentially the same. I'll get back to you on the other

 

[shmogie]

But yet you admit that we know and never will know? How can you have faith in that which cannot be known? When I don't know something, I don't know. I don't try to attach a label to something that I know nothing of, and I realize the only way to be honest is to profess ignorance.

You do not understand the concept of faith. If you go to a doctor, who discovers a life threatening illness that requires immediate surgery, do you select any surgeon , or do you research the surgeons find the best one who tells you it is no problem the surgery will be a success, do you then state to her, "I can never know for sure the outcome of this surgery, so rather than consider what you have said, and believe it, and have faith in you that I will survive, I want to be honest, so I wish I was ignorant of your words, I do not want to believe anything I can't know so I will not be comforted, I will remain terrified till it is over, I will tell my family that no one knows if I will survive"

 

[Shadow Wolf]

All of your OT quotations attest to one thing, the earth is a stable, firm structure, it is neither a planet of gas, or intense constant violent geological activity.

"Immovable," "fixed," perched upon "foundations" so it can "never be shaken." The Earth does indeed move, it is not in any fixed position, and it indeed shakes all the time.

or intense constant violent geological activity.

There are about 20,000 detected earthquakes a year, with the USGS estimating that millions of them happen every year.

I will have to do a little research to re your pi reference

There's nothing to research. C/D = pi. (or piC=D or piD=C) That is a constant, never changing fact. The circle mentioned in Kings gives us measurements for a circle that cannot be, meaning the math is wrong. But how could it be wrong if it's the "true and inspired" word of god? But what if it was just measured wrong because the cubit itself isn't a good standard of measurement? But, even if a cubit only gives an "in the ball park" number, there is still the issue of just how tiny Noah's Ark still would have been, which is just too small for at least two of every animal.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As to translations, I wasn't speaking of Japanese cartoons, I was speaking solely of the translations of the Bible from Hebrew/Greek to English. Translations that have been going on for close to 500 years, everyone of which is essentially the same. I'll get back to you on the other

I was speaking of translations in general, which is why I also mentioned religious texts and philosophy. They all have, inherently, the same problems when being translated.

You do not understand the concept of faith.

Actually, I do.

If you go to a doctor, who discovers a life threatening illness that requires immediate surgery, do you select any surgeon , or do you research the surgeons find the best one who tells you it is no problem the surgery will be a success, do you then state to her, "I can never know for sure the outcome of this surgery, so rather than consider what you have said, and believe it, and have faith in you that I will survive, I want to be honest, so I wish I was ignorant of your words, I do not want to believe anything I can't know so I will not be comforted, I will remain terrified till it is over, I will tell my family that no one knows if I will survive"

First, if a doctor promises something like that, beware. If it's a terminal illness and they say it will be a success, they are probably not wise.
Second, if it is a terminal illness, it can be known that it exists, based on symptoms and lab-results. However, diagnosing is not an exact science. Tons of disorders, diseases, and conditions share many overlapping and similar symptoms. The very act of going to a doctor means you have faith in their confidence to properly diagnose you and choose what will hopefully be an effective treatment option, because many people also put faith in the assumption nothing bad will go wrong when they are put on a medication. But, for a surgeon, we don't have to have as much faith in a surgeon because their work is of a line that can speak for itself. If a surgeon is a patent holder with specialized treatments, is ranked highly by credible sources, is frequently cited, makes frequent speaking appearances, then you know you're dealing with someone who has proven they are capable. But even then there are still mistakes that can happen and, as you have to acknowledge any time you are put under, "unforeseen circumstances" may complicate things. But if the surgeon has few reviews, isn't well known, and seems to be just another surgeon, then you are placing an elevated amount of faith in them.
And there are things that you are more likely to survive, such as being diagnosed with early melanoma, which is generally very survivable, compared to being diagnosed with pancreas cancer, which only has about 50% six-month survival rate, which drops to 20% by one-year. It's not usually an "I don't know if I'll survive," but rather varying degrees of "likely" and "not likely." And doctors don't make promises, but rather "do everything they can" and "do they best they can." (which is how you know it's not looking likely).

 

[Ingledsva]

I'm surprised that you really don't see the contradiction in what you post.

There is no contradiction.

They had real slaves from the time the law was written (probably before,) and continued to buy and sell slaves from other nations right up until the Civil war.

This is the way The Torah .com translates it.

"Such male and female slaves that you shall have, it is from the nations round about you that you shall acquire male and female slaves. And also of the children of aliens resident with you of them shall you buy and also of their families that are with you whom they beget in your land; these shall become your property. You may keep them as a possession for your children after you to inherit as property; you may use them as slaves forever, but over your brethren the children of Israel no one shall rule ruthlessly over another."

*

 

[sojourner]

There is virtually no doubt that the Gospels were written around 100 AD, and it is stated that 500 people saw the resurrected Christ, and many were still alive, now if that wasn't true, a really unbelievable thing, don't you think that some record of someone rebutting the statement would exist ?

It's also widely-accepted that none of the gospel writers either knew Jesus, or were present at the crucifixion/resurrection. It's not so odd that no dissenting statements exist; it was an overwhelmingly oral society. There is consensus that even the gospels were originally told and not written.

 

[shmogie]

I was speaking of translations in general, which is why I also mentioned religious texts and philosophy. They all have, inherently, the same problems when being translated.

Actually, I do.

First, if a doctor promises something like that, beware. If it's a terminal illness and they say it will be a success, they are probably not wise.
Second, if it is a terminal illness, it can be known that it exists, based on symptoms and lab-results. However, diagnosing is not an exact science. Tons of disorders, diseases, and conditions share many overlapping and similar symptoms. The very act of going to a doctor means you have faith in their confidence to properly diagnose you and choose what will hopefully be an effective treatment option, because many people also put faith in the assumption nothing bad will go wrong when they are put on a medication. But, for a surgeon, we don't have to have as much faith in a surgeon because their work is of a line that can speak for itself. If a surgeon is a patent holder with specialized treatments, is ranked highly by credible sources, is frequently cited, makes frequent speaking appearances, then you know you're dealing with someone who has proven they are capable. But even then there are still mistakes that can happen and, as you have to acknowledge any time you are put under, "unforeseen circumstances" may complicate things. But if the surgeon has few reviews, isn't well known, and seems to be just another surgeon, then you are placing an elevated amount of faith in them.
And there are things that you are more likely to survive, such as being diagnosed with early melanoma, which is generally very survivable, compared to being diagnosed with pancreas cancer, which only has about 50% six-month survival rate, which drops to 20% by one-year. It's not usually an "I don't know if I'll survive," but rather varying degrees of "likely" and "not likely." And doctors don't make promises, but rather "do everything they can" and "do they best they can." (which is how you know it's not looking likely).

 

[shmogie]

It's also widely-accepted that none of the gospel writers either knew Jesus, or were present at the crucifixion/resurrection. It's not so odd that no dissenting statements exist; it was an overwhelmingly oral society. There is consensus that even the gospels were originally told and not written.

this is simply untrue. There is absolutely no reason to doubt that three of the Gospel writers knew Christ. The letters that were circulated throughout the Apostolic Christian congregations, they were, uh, you know, letters i.e. written. The book of Revelation from the very beginning speaks of it being written down. If it is "widely accepted" the width of it is pretty narrow, probably limited to the "Jesus project" where I think you get most of your talking points. The idea's you present as "widely accepted" are not accepted by the overwhelming majority of Biblical scholars

 

[sojourner]

Absolute nonsense

So's your baseless skepticism.

What agendas have driven the multiple translations from Wycliffe to today ?

Any number of agendas -- dating back to the gospel writers, themselves! Each writer had a different agenda for telling the story of Jesus the way he did. And as translating committees make decisions concerning transliteration vs. meaning retention and readability, those decisions are also agenda-driven.

You have an agenda driving your revisionism, to change perhaps three or four paragraphs in the NT to say what you want them to say.

The same could be said of you, revising what was meant by the author to say what you want them to say. In fact, the exegetical process works to weed out such "revisions" based on misunderstanding. You ought to try it sometime.

 

[sojourner]

this is simply untrue. There is absolutely no reason to doubt that three of the Gospel writers knew Christ.

Shows what you know. The Anchor Commentary and the Sacra Pagina collection of commentaries (possibly two of the most scholastic) both present valid arguments against the writers having known Jesus. Stephen Harris, John Kloppenborg, David Rhoads, John Dominic Crossan, Brandon Scott, Robert Tannehill, Warren Carter, Luke Timothy Johnson, and other notable scholars also agree.

The idea's you present as "widely accepted" are not accepted by the overwhelming majority of Biblical scholars

See above.

 

[sojourner]

Using the rules of evidence, there is ample evidence for the truth of a Bible. In your example of the unicorn, I would counter with light conditions. weather conditions, distances, any and all factors that could allow me to ask that under these conditions, and the frame of mind and condition of the witness, could a reasonable and prudent person see something that looked like a pink unicorn to him. Is reality a perception, or an absolute ?

So far, you've been arguing for an absolute. And you know as well as I do that "frame of mind" doesn't magically make pink unicorns a reality.

 

[shmogie]

Yep, and in many cases attached to that, rape as well. "If you can't wipe them out, breed them out". There are so many things we ourselves view as immoral and think universally bad, that are just... absolutely not universally immoral. Especially the further back you go in time.

You are again missing the point, every society has restrictions on what are considered unjustified murder, rape, mass killings etc. There may be circumstances where they justify these things on the basis of religion, war, etc., however, there are also defined situations when these things are absolutely wrong.. Certainly mass slaughter is absolutely wrong in the American psyche, but yet since Japan would not surrender in WW2, and an estimated 200,000 American soldiers would be killed in conventional attacks on the Japanese home islands, nuclear weapons were used killing thousands and thousands of innocents. My question has been, and still is, why do societies have these moral/legal distinctions ?

 

[sojourner]

There is nothing more to discover.....the book has been written....reinterpreting it to misrepresent what it said is not scholarship...

That same thing was said when the Nag Hammadi library was unearthed. And the Dead Sea scrolls. And when form criticism was introduced by the Germans....

 

[sojourner]

The text is unambiguous in its meaning.....anal sex is not right according to the Divine..

No, anal sex is not right according to the writers, writing from their cultural context.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You have every right to believe what you choose

I guess don't see what reason anyone would have to believe that the writers of the Bible were not "like everyone else, trapped in space and time, and limited to the knowledge available at their point in time."
And I'm not sure how anyone would be able to demonstrate or know if they weren't. I mean, they were human like the rest of us, right?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I can't demonstrate to any soul what I am aware of.....for to try using conceptual language is foolishness....words are not real in the sense that the reality that the words are meant to represent are real... In fact the reason those who are unaware directly of the divine are frustrated with true religious practice is that they imagine it is something that their mind must be able to grasp.... Fyi, the human mind in all eternity will never know God conceptually....it is an mystical union alone that will do away with belief...

Okey dokey.