Pope Francis changes prayer Our Father the words of Jesus himself

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Woodcarver

So God didn't do it. Thanks.

In the story, god enters a petty bet between two of his own creations to prove that one of them will come back no matter how badly it is beaten. God has full power in this story. He should have nothing to prove to satan.

The moral of the story is that, even following all of the rules won’t save you from the wrath of of a mirthful god.

It’s very greek in it’s origins, i’ll look for a version of this story from an earlier culture. I’m sure there are several.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: TheLead

All the evil sin pain deaths suffering the afflictions are all attributed to Satan dummy, and God won because Job held onto his faith and trusted in the Lord without fail... So Job won too dummy...
And Satan therefore failed lost the bet proved what a dickhead he is a complete and utter failure...
Go read it again...

Nope Satan won that bet. He tricked god into hurting Job and his entire family, proving that God is petty and not to be trusted. Which is basically the entire moral story of the bible.

And really, who tempted Satan by being all smug and self important and narcissistic about his godly duties? I don't blame Satan one bit for trying to open god's eyes and teach him humility.

originally posted by: Sheye
a reply to: 2012newstart

What do you think about the changing of "Our Father"?

I think it is a wise and good change. The original implied that it was the heavenly Father who led us into temptation . I think “abandon us not” is much more appropriate.

the problem in that way of thought is, the original one was told by Jesus...

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: Sheye
a reply to: 2012newstart

What do you think about the changing of "Our Father"?

I think it is a wise and good change. The original implied that it was the heavenly Father who led us into temptation . I think “abandon us not” is much more appropriate.

That’s my two cents on the matter.

I don't see anything wrong with the words, especially if it is a translation. IDK what the original words are (Aramaic, Greek, etc) but it would be interesting to know.

All Gospels were written in Greek, except Matthew in Hebrew.

a reply to: Woodcarver

I bet you can convince yourself of anything...
Too bad you can’t make me believe you...
Woodcarver... You should change your nick to blockhead...
Bring that hate for God and those who believe in him, just try harder though because you kind of suck at this so far...
I’m younger than you most likely and I think you are simple, so nice try there too...

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: 2012newstart

Surprisingly or maybe not
Jesus probably spoke Galilean Aramaic not English or any of its derivatives

It’s crazy people, mostly fundamentalists who act the way the OP is acting

It could be as easily translated to “ lead us away from temptation”

Making a storm where no student of language would see a storm
The pope is not the first person to note this issue

Even Tertullian some two thousand years ago noted the anomaly

"Crazy people like OP" didn't actually write the Gospels. They were written mostly in Greek, one or two centuries after Jesus. Yes Jesus spoke Aramaic. But he didn't write anything, at least we don't have anything preserved.

There are many screwed translations of other verses, in the name of the "modern understanding" it goes farther from the original. That;s why I prefer King James version for English.


And..besides the linguistic issues...for what reason this pope who FAILED in the trumped by him reform, would want now to fix the Lord's prayer? Why the need for that?

a reply to: Woodcarver

If that's your takeaway then it's because it's what you want to be true, since literally none of that is true.

My takeaways are that God allows free will and faith won't stop bad things from happening, but God does not allow more than we can endure. God does not cause these things to happen. If we keep our faith good things can come from the suffering.

a reply to: 2012newstart

What does he think "not" means? Lead us not. What a goofy bastard. "Abandon us not" sounds like the Pope is asking to be lead into temptation. Is this guy for real or is this a satire story?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Oh look here’s another hater who’s guess what confused...
God blessed Satan more than all other Angels, then pride set in Satan believed his own lie and thought he was so good that he was better than God... Then he found out that all he had was because of God when he lost all he had.... He’s a lot like you guys angry and confused and believes his own lies...

Try to stick to what really happened according to the bible instead of making up your own versions...

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: Woodcarver

I bet you can convince yourself of anything...
Too bad you can’t make me believe you...
Woodcarver... You should change your nick to blockhead...
Bring that hate for God and those who believe in him, just try harder though because you kind of suck at this so far...
I’m younger than you most likely and I think you are simple, so nice try there too...

Careful your Stockholm syndrome is showing.

originally posted by: djz3ro
a reply to: 2012newstart

It's not like the words are universal, the one I grew up being forced to recite said "Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" which I find sounds a lot better than "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespassed against us" debtors is less of a mouthful

But those are just words of mortal men, much like the bible....

And your choice whether or not you choose to follow them. I'll take my chances and follow them. Worst case scenario we all end up in the same spot anyways.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

That would be a sin, and well God does not sin

I guess you forgot all the killing your god did (according to a certain book)?

Maybe read it from time to time?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Are you my captor?
What kind of drugs are you on?

a reply to: TerryDon79

Cmon tell me all about it...

a reply to: TerryDon79

Killing isn't a sin, murder is.

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: TerryDon79

Cmon tell me all about it...

Why? Do you not know what’s written about your god in your special book?

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: Sheye
a reply to: 2012newstart

What do you think about the changing of "Our Father"?

I think it is a wise and good change. The original implied that it was the heavenly Father who led us into temptation . I think “abandon us not” is much more appropriate.

That’s my two cents on the matter.

I agree and it has always stuck out in my mind. My thought was always "why would he have been lead there" but that means there are no outside influences which act upon us which can lead us there.

I don't see anything wrong with the words, especially if it is a translation. IDK what the original words are (Aramaic, Greek, etc) but it would be interesting to know.

How do you get that from "lead us not into temptation"?

a reply to: TerryDon79

I just know anything you say is nothing of importance...
I just love drawing out those who hate the Lord...
It’s not my book there lil terry, it’s God’s book...
Let’s start off there...

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: TzarChasm

Oh look here’s another hater who’s guess what confused...
God blessed Satan more than all other Angels, then pride set in Satan believed his own lie and thought he was so good that he was better than God... Then he found out that all he had was because of God when he lost all he had.... He’s a lot like you guys angry and confused and believes his own lies...

Try to stick to what really happened according to the bible instead of making up your own versions...

Satan and Lucifer are two different people in the biblical narrative. But where did either of them get all that pride and mischief from? Was their character beyond an omnipotent deity to anticipate and control? Or perhaps they were so difficult to manage because they represent the parts of god even he cannot master?

a reply to: 5StarOracle

That doesnt jive for me. I would argue the one who both allocated the potential and allowed the atrocities to prove something to a supposedly moral inferior being would at least share responsibility?