Pastor Creflow Dollar is asking for 60 million to purchase new G6 to spread the gospel across the gl

[blastercombo]

I'm not saying anything about homosexuality; I am interested in the fact that the English translation deviates from what the verses are (likely) saying. This is a significant error in translation that leads to misunderstanding the verses. 

How does one study the bible without significant background information? 

Not to mention

1. Their are words that HAVE NO DIRECT translation

2. Their vocabulary of then is not as broad as it is now. What does that mean?

3. Descriptions of events would be more primitive since it could only be done so using relatable occurrences

 

[mrgrapes85]

My dude typed all that about CHRIST only to end it with threats

Gotta love Christians

Defending something with threats isn't contradictory? Just cause someone believes in Christ, doesn't mean they have to a hippie, or submit to everyone around them. Christ himself whipped those when they were sinning in his temple.

I served a mission for two years and believe if someone was trying to hurt me physically I wasn't bout to back down.

 

[SC kid]

Being religious is not a bad thing imo but its just wat being religious means to someone is where it gets murky

Pretty much how i feel

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed. This insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms— this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness. In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men." 

 

[darthska]

My dude typed all that about CHRIST only to end it with threats

Gotta love Christians

Defending something with threats isn't contradictory? Just cause someone believes in Christ, doesn't mean they have to a hippie, or submit to everyone around them. Christ himself whipped those when they were sinning in his temple.

I served a mission for two years and believe if someone was trying to hurt me physically I wasn't bout to back down.

False.

He whooped nobody's tail. He was angry and overturned tables and what not, but there's no account of him bodying people.

Secondly, one of his nicknames is Prince of Peace. He spoke of turning the other cheek. The only way to gather that he condoned violence is because that's what's comfortable to believe.

 

[sea manup]

wait so if a woman is unfaithful should i forgive her or throw rocks at her? 

 

[darthska]

According to the OT, you should throw rocks at her.

According to Christ/NT, you should forgive her. The OT doen't count.

I mean, unless we're talking about the Ten Commandments and parts of the OT that are supposed to count for whatever conversation we're having; then the OT counts.

 

[boris]

 

I'm not saying anything about homosexuality; I am interested in the fact that the English translation deviates from what the verses are (likely) saying. This is a significant error in translation that leads to misunderstanding the verses. 

How does one study the bible without significant background information? 

But your source is taking on a position and has an agenda of being in favor of homosexuality not being a sin as long as it is in the boundaries of loving relationship correct?

As far as studying the Bible I would say to start with a few practices. First, through prayer and humility, we must rely on the Holy Spirit to give us understanding. Second, we should always study Scripture in its context, recognizing that the Bible explains itself. Third, we should respect the efforts of other Christians, past and present, who have also sought to properly study the Bible. Remember, God is the author of the Bible, and He wants us to understand it.

No, that's not the agenda of the source. The source is making the point that the English translation is different than what the (likely) actual translation is. You're getting too focused on the subject and not the overall implication. How do you study the English translation of the bible when I'm demonstrating that the English translation is unreliable? 

I'm only interested in how you can objectively study it without significant background information. You're telling me to study the bible in its context, but how do you do that without both understanding its original languages and the historical context? 

 

[retro707]

just donated. always for a good cause.

 

[mrgrapes85]

wait so if a woman is unfaithful should i forgive her or throw rocks at her? 

Forgive her.

 

[girlthatsblanco]

No, that's not the agenda of the source. The source is making the point that the English translation is different than what the (likely) actual translation is. You're getting too focused on the subject and not the overall implication. How do you study the English translation of the bible when I'm demonstrating that the English translation is unreliable? 

I'm only interested in how you can objectively study it without significant background information. You're telling me to study the bible in its context, but how do you do that without both understanding its original languages and the historical context? 

Rather you see it or not, your source has an agenda. The title is Bible Abuse Towards Homosexuals. Every link I clicked on from that site focused on homosexuality in the Bible. How can I not focus on the subject? Once again, this was the source you provided.

And I already answered your second question on how I study the Bible in a few of my post. What I have yet to understand is what is your position on how you study and your position on homosexuality in the Bible?

 

[boris]

 

No, that's not the agenda of the source. The source is making the point that the English translation is different than what the (likely) actual translation is. You're getting too focused on the subject and not the overall implication. How do you study the English translation of the bible when I'm demonstrating that the English translation is unreliable? 

I'm only interested in how you can objectively study it without significant background information. You're telling me to study the bible in its context, but how do you do that without both understanding its original languages and the historical context? 

Rather you see it or not, your source has an agenda. The title is Bible Abuse Towards Homosexuals. Every link I clicked on from that site focused on homosexuality in the Bible. How can I not focus on the subject? Once again, this was the source you provided.

And I already answered your second question on how I study the Bible in a few of my post. What I have yet to understand is what is your position on how you study and your position on homosexuality in the Bible?

I'm just disagreeing with what you claim the agenda is. I think you grossly oversimplified what the entire website is discussing. The points that they make can be applied to any verse, not just those relating to homosexuality.

The issue is that the English translation contains errors and it is very different from what the bible is (likely) actually saying. Homosexuality is irrelevant to the points that I am making. I am not trying to discuss homosexuality here, I am trying to discuss biblical translations. 

You didn't really answer my question though. Your answers suggest that people need to accept the bible as truth before they begin to study it (prayer, humility, accepting of others). I don't think you can begin to study the bible without significant background information. It would be like jumping into calculus without a firm understanding of algebra. 

Just out of curiosity, what do you think Leviticus 18:22 is actually saying? 

 

[wayniac211]

Defending something with threats isn't contradictory? Just cause someone believes in Christ, doesn't mean they have to a hippie, or submit to everyone around them. Christ himself whipped those when they were sinning in his temple.

I served a mission for two years and believe if someone was trying to hurt me physically I wasn't bout to back down.

One thing I respect about the LDS church is the way they handle their financials. Church is always clean and whenever members are in a rut they always lend a helping hand. Idk bout the other stuff

 

[blastercombo]

Ole boy trying to say Jesus was throwing dem hands

 

[darthska]

"Come get this work, cuh."
- Jesus Christ

 

[sea manup]

"Meet me in Jerusalem"
- Jesus Christ

 

[girlthatsblanco]

I'm just disagreeing with what you claim the agenda is. I think you grossly oversimplified what the entire website is discussing. The points that they make can be applied to any verse, not just those relating to homosexuality.

The issue is that the English translation contains errors and it is very different from what the bible is (likely) actually saying. Homosexuality is irrelevant to the points that I am making. I am not trying to discuss homosexuality here, I am trying to discuss biblical translations. 

You didn't really answer my question though. Your answers suggest that people need to accept the bible as truth before they begin to study it (prayer, humility, accepting of others). I don't think you can begin to study the bible without significant background information. It would be like jumping into calculus without a firm understanding of algebra. 

Just out of curiosity, what do you think Leviticus 18:22 is actually saying? 

I'm just disagreeing with what you claim the agenda is. I think you grossly oversimplified what the entire website is discussing. The points that they make can be applied to any verse, not just those relating to homosexuality.

The issue is that the English translation contains errors and it is very different from what the bible is (likely) actually saying. Homosexuality is irrelevant to the points that I am making. I am not trying to discuss homosexuality here, I am trying to discuss biblical translations. 

You didn't really answer my question though. Your answers suggest that people need to accept the bible as truth before they begin to study it (prayer, humility, accepting of others). I don't think you can begin to study the bible without significant background information. It would be like jumping into calculus without a firm understanding of algebra. 

Just out of curiosity, what do you think Leviticus 18:22 is actually saying? 

I am in no way saying anyone should just read the Bible and trust it. How anyone comes to the conclusion on if they believe the text or not is not a question I can answer. I can tell you only the reasons why I believe what is in the Bible. Plus, I was stating how I study/read the Bible because I thought the question was directed towards my own personal practices. Sorry for the confusion.

As far as translation, when translating from one language to another, choices must be made. Should it be the more exact word, even if the meaning of that word is unclear to the modern reader? Or should it be a corresponding thought, at the expense of a more literal reading?

As an example, in Colossians 3:12, Paul says we are to put on "bowels of mercies" (KJV). The Greek word for "bowels," which is literally "intestines," comes from a root word meaning "spleen." The KJV translators chose a literal translation of the word. The translators of the NASB chose "heart of compassion""the "heart" being what today's reader thinks of as the seat of emotions. The Amplified Bible has it as "tenderhearted pity and mercy." The NIV simply puts "compassion."

So, the KJV is the most literal in the above example, but the other translations certainly do justice to the verse. The core meaning of the command is to have compassionate feelings.

So, that goes back to the comment I made yesterday about the same meaning still being there in different translations.

And to me, Leviticus 18:22 is giving an example of one form of sex that God has regarded as sinful.

Plus, you still haven't answered either of my earlier questions.

 

[RustyShackleford]

"Come get this work, cuh."
- Jesus Christ

Another one of my favorite from the Bibble, the Street Cat Version

John 18:

Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" .

Jesus answered, "You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. And if you don't believe me pheighboi, you can see me, wit thy hands."

 

[doublemesh96]

[h1]John 2:15New International Version (NIV)[/h1]
[sup]15 [/sup]So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.

 

[Quincy McCall]

 

Two classics in one day 

 

[fontaine]

Hood Jesus has me rolling right now...

Christ is plexing with everybody!

 

[sfc415]

I went to a Catholic high school with mandatory religion class for 4 years... never once have I heard of street cat Jesus I'm atheist but damn if he really got down like this, I might have to reconsider

 

[dathbgboy]

According to the OT, you should throw rocks at her.

According to Christ/NT, you should forgive her. The OT doen't count.

I mean, unless we're talking about the Ten Commandments and parts of the OT that are supposed to count for whatever conversation we're having; then the OT counts.

That's my taking of it. If we focus solely on the OT, everybody aside from the Jews aren't worthy of God's grace, and you shouldn't dine on the swine. In the NT, it's changed......But if we're talking about the Torah, in which Revelations, which represents the indication of all things being made clean to eat, isn't even in it.

The Bible is coincidentally enough open to interpretation the same way law is. One thing that isn't though is the warning to beware of false prophets.

 

[mrgrapes85]

One thing I respect about the LDS church is the way they handle their financials. Church is always clean and whenever members are in a rut they always lend a helping hand. Idk bout the other stuff

The biggest issue people have is the idea of "the restoration"

Which I believe ties in with what the bible teaches, if there were other civilizations on the earth at the time of Christ, why wouldn't they keep record? That's just me though, I was converted btw.

You're right though, I know for a fact the tithes go to apropiate causes, take a look at the home of the president of the church. (a church that is noted by Forbes to be the same worth as a medium sized country)

View media item 1456231

 

[hashus clay]

I don't know much about the prices of jets, but it seems like he can get a plane for way less than 65 million. Is he trying to get one of the nicer ones?
Dude is trynna hit a lick.

 

[boris]

As far as translation, when translating from one language to another, choices must be made. Should it be the more exact word, even if the meaning of that word is unclear to the modern reader? Or should it be a corresponding thought, at the expense of a more literal reading?

Correct. It's incredibly difficult to translate between two languages. It's especially difficult to translate between two time periods. That's why I'm being critical of translations.

So, that goes back to the comment I made yesterday about the same meaning still being there in different translations.

Sure, so let's go back to the link I posted. All of the translations contain the same errors which lead to an incorrect understanding of what the verse is saying. 

And to me, Leviticus 18:22 is giving an example of one form of sex that God has regarded as sinful.

Which form? What led you to that conclusion?

Plus, you still haven't answered either of my earlier questions.

I think you should have a working understanding of the languages used in the Bible. I also think you should have a good understanding of that time period and the culture. Even trying to translate between modern day Japanese and modern day English can be confusing, and you have the advantage of being in the same time period. 

I don't think my views on homosexuality in the Bible are relevant to this discussion.