It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Reading the Bible: 'They thought you knew'.

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucius Driftwood
reply to post by Jordan River
 





Well, if you believe that man and dinosaur existed together then by all means believe on


The word dinosaur didn't exist until 1842 so I'm not sure what you mean.


am not sure your thought process either, so were the same.You said that Job said the word monster,which you try to attribute it towards an allosaurus or something. (dinosaur). I do not follow, so I am just gonna let this go.




posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucius Driftwood
 


It would be good to have examples of what you mean about the Bible and those quoting it. But I know what you are meaning. I have studied the Holy Books a long time. And I have learned some simple tests which discern exactly who has done their research and hence respects the Bible for both what it is and what it is not. Such a person (who passes) is always going to respect your view and debate as long as fair play rules. The others will not. Vitriolic threats may soon issue forth from those who fail : for they will recognise their failure through your test. Most tests apply to beleivers.
There are several such tests but remember you have to play their game at first :

Example 1. Has the person quoted a_Pauline_ scripture (at all)?
(ie was it written by Paul//most of New Testament/Galatians/ Ephesians etc etc etc)
If yes : this person is a Christian of some sort , likely to be highly indoctrinated and ultra radical about Jesus without caring one jot about what Jesus said or not :avoid
If no : this person retains some credence/not a sheep. Advice
aul the Imposter should be his real name

Example 2 : Has the person read the Qu'ran (at all, ever)?
(ie did they ever pick the book up and read any of it ever at all?)
Its a yes/no answer you want. Any wobbles of the lips other than this y/n answer will not do, immediate fail.
If answer yes : which bit did they read when (the liars!) and at what point did they decide it was wrong/right?
If answer no : by experience you'll hear excuses other than admissions from those with a hidden agenda over a bias towards open minded research. Disrespect these agendas : avoid .

Example 3 : Is the person a 'BiBle - o phile' ? Ie do they quote 'The Bible _The C4 Christian Compilation' or
do they quote ''The Books' according to the names of 'The Books' ?
If Bible : the person will quote nonsense.
If Books : the person will usually have something of interst of value to contribute to the wider community regarding their research.

Throwing all that aside , I have just read Immanuel Velikovsky's Worlds In Collision and quite frankly the genius has told me everything I have long wanted to hear about the words of the old testament. I cant recommend reading it enough it explains so much and would answer your questions too. The truth is shouting from the pages of the prophets but nobody wants to hear things written in plain english! It becomes some parable that you need a dogcollar and a license to understand! *stops before fiery anti-ignorant-purile-christian rant begins*



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   
I gave you all scholar information on pg 1 and everyone dismisses it and rather have opinions rather than facts. Plus I had an opinion as well

ats+real information=poop
edit on 19-6-2011 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Jordan River
 


Jordan, I read your scholarly input. I thank you for your input. I have no desire to cause issue and friction. I brought forth a supposition based on my own studies and I welcome dialogue. I have received such from yourself and others. I by no means dismiss or belittle it. I wanted this to be a forum of expression of beliefs and ideas based around the premise I laid down. As long as people will approach from that angle, ALL are welcome. Your input is welcome, sir.
If we disagree, no matter. Variety is a celebration of differences. As long as we can keep short of name calling and mud slinging, the dialogue can continue between us all.
I pleaded ignorance to one of your earlier references regarding Lilith. I am aware of her via Babylonian Talmud, reference in Gilgamesh (as his other I believe) and some other sources that tend to date MUCH later on in history and from the field of Jewish mysticism that developed much later.
You know more about this than I do, so I admit it is something I will need to look into deeper for myself.
I am aware of how the bible we have today has been used by a studious minority to influence and manipulate a larger, ignorant, superstitious body of people over many, many years. The reason for starting my thread is as much to do with them as to do with the ignorant hearers, the hearers who think they hear, the ignorant hearers who want to hear, and the rivers of people who don't know don't care and bend with every whim as life around the decrees. There are so few forums around these days where people can be civil and curious and welcome without alterior agenda.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucius Driftwood
reply to post by Jordan River
 
so few forums around these days where people can be civil and curious and welcome without alterior agenda.


Yes, I agree many christians come in here with an agenda, although If someone is moved by my post, by all means PM me, I feel that trying to christianizing ats members is like christianizing a cactus. So I just leave it. Thx, just wanted to know if someone knew that I existed or not. Nor do I really want an arguement



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucius Driftwood
reply to post by Badgered1
 


Somewhere in the Song of Solomon, there is a verse that has been (accurately) translated as 'Your/her belly is as a heap of wheat.' What does that mean to the western mind? It has been acurately translated, but it conveys nothing to my mind! To the middle eastern reader, he reads the verse and sees that the writer is describing the object of his affection as being 'fertile'.
Read Song of Solomon 4:2. This is interpreted/translated beautifully, and yet it means nothing to the western mindset! What does it mean to you?
I'll do my best to explain my understanding of it in the next post


I know exactly what a heap of wheat looks and feels like : because the world has farmers, and a western ones. Taken in context the meaning still comes out beautifully when put in English. See if your girlfirend likes to hear the song of solomon . This east west mindset thing has loads of flaws : its rubbish : can you not put yourself insomeone else's shoes to understand? Someone who lived a long time before anyone here alive today? No you want it served hot on a plate . Thats your western mindset you are sticking in front of your own face.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I've used this analogy in other threads, but I feel that it is valid here:

The fables of Aesop the slave feature stories where foxes talk to crows, scorpions to foxes etc. At the end of the story there is a moral. Taken in the correct context, the moral is valid. However, foxes do not communicate directly with crows (especially in any human language). Therefore, the story as written never happened. The moral still has validity, and is written in a way to aid the audience (not the reader...) to remember the moral.

It is extremely possible that many of the Biblical stories - as currently translated - may contain conversation and quotes that are attributed to certain parties, but were never actually spoken. The meaning - the moral if you will - is preserved, but the actual conversation (if it ever happened) is lost to history, or corrupted to the agenda of the writer.

As we saw with the recent FamilyRadio/Rapture incident, one man was convinced that he read in the words of the Bible a certain event. He spent a lot of money, and effort convincing others he was correct. I'm not entering a "false messiah" debate here, but if after a lifetime of study he came up with one version, it's quite possible that many other false assumptions can have been made by those in all walks of life studying the same texts. This goes for the established churches too.

I guess my point is that blindly using the texts as the basis of your life creates many crossroads. Whose version of events are you following, and will they lead you to another fork in the road?



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucius Driftwood
reply to post by Badgered1
 


You make some excellent points. Some of it you capture and explain better than I managed to!
A guy I knew worked for Wycliffe bible translators many years ago in Papua New Guinea. He was telling me about a passage in Revelation where Jesus was speaking to the church in Laodicea and it says 'Behold, I stand at the door and knock'. He said that this would make no sense to the natives, and in their culture would not be an appropriate idiom. Aparrently, they would introduce themselves/ make rheir prescence known to their guests/visitors by giving a cough at the doorway. So he said that in translating this piece, he wrote it as: 'Behold I stand at the door and cough'.
I think that is wonderful. The fact is, he recognizes an idiom that is alien to the people and translates it in a way that is meaningful to them. This does raise issues of interpreting the bible. Knowledge and study is the key. You can't translate something into a language other people can understand if you don't know what the writer was trying to convey in the first place. Herein lies the key to ignorance, (or as you so rightly and 'darkly' put it,) manipulation and control.

I'm enjoying talking with you guys. Glad you're all here


This is a good translation when "knock" is taken in its form as a way to let folks know you are at the door. "cough" and "knock" them become the same function. Maintains the real issue here of someone seeking a responce. Gaining attention in a form to be noticed as outside seeking to be allowed to enter. Nothing lost in that translation.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by Lucius Driftwood
reply to post by Badgered1
 


You make some excellent points. Some of it you capture and explain better than I managed to!
A guy I knew worked for Wycliffe bible translators many years ago in Papua New Guinea. He was telling me about a passage in Revelation where Jesus was speaking to the church in Laodicea and it says 'Behold, I stand at the door and knock'. He said that this would make no sense to the natives, and in their culture would not be an appropriate idiom. Aparrently, they would introduce themselves/ make rheir prescence known to their guests/visitors by giving a cough at the doorway. So he said that in translating this piece, he wrote it as: 'Behold I stand at the door and cough'.
I think that is wonderful. The fact is, he recognizes an idiom that is alien to the people and translates it in a way that is meaningful to them. This does raise issues of interpreting the bible. Knowledge and study is the key. You can't translate something into a language other people can understand if you don't know what the writer was trying to convey in the first place. Herein lies the key to ignorance, (or as you so rightly and 'darkly' put it,) manipulation and control.

I'm enjoying talking with you guys. Glad you're all here


This is a good translation when "knock" is taken in its form as a way to let folks know you are at the door. "cough" and "knock" them become the same function. Maintains the real issue here of someone seeking a responce. Gaining attention in a form to be noticed as outside seeking to be allowed to enter. Nothing lost in that translation.


But as I mentioned above, when that translation is translated three or four times across other languages and cultures there is possibility of corruption:

Allow me to demonstrate...(and there is no actual real language translation being used here, I'm just trying to show a point).

Sumerian: Waved
Aramaic: Waved = Gesticulated
Greek: Gesticulated = Flipped the bird
Latin: Flipped the bird = Swore
Middle English: Swore = Insulted
Modern English: Insulted = spat in his eye

So, let's say "Bob waved at the stranger."
Becomes, "Bob spat in the strangers eye."
Same story, different ending, same word....
As I said, these are not real translations, but there are possibilities for corruption.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Badgered1
 


Most of the bible, the very larger part, is written in such a way as to make it easy to translate, writen in such a way as is common to man. I have read many coming from the point that the bible is subject to writers and translators to the point that it should be devalued. This sounds good but the truth is this premise is very weak and an idea born more out of suspicious minds and agenda than on any scholarship that should be taken seriously in all but a very few cases. The issue at hand cannot be even hoped to be resolved without some case by case in depth look. What we have here on this thread amounts to what we can learn about sports from the back of a Wheaties box.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Badgered1
 


Ok this would be a good example if one were dealing with moron translators. And there is some of that literal word translation that is isolated from the meaning intended and is rather clumsy. But not a whole lot. We do find in the King James some translation that are now thought to be weak but even now it is hard to understand the full meaning of these words in there time to understand just how they were intended to be used in the translation.

But to suggest that the bible is a total work of crap translation is just like the guy said "rubbish". In fact all one does when they study word translation is learn.....all the way around. I personaly consider it very bad taste to say the least to disuade the ignorant from looking into any writen work based on your ideas about how translation works.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Reply to post by ZIPMATT
 


Please show me how Paul is an imposter.

By claiming as such, you are doing EXACTLY as the OP is describing.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


my post here should give you an idea re paul the liar
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucius Driftwood
"They don't talk like us". We need to go one major step further here though. Not only do they not talk like us, they don't THINK like us either! The western mindest comes from a Greek/Hellenistic background in terms of thinking.


Err, wrong answer. The whole Greek worship by Academia didn't begin until the late 1800's when Greece was fighting for Independence against the Ottoman Empire and needed help from the West(they launched a kind of propaganda campaign highlighting Ancient Greece).

If anything the Greeks have been the Jesters in the Court of Western thinking, an example of what not to be or do.
The problem with people in the West is we forget our ancestors where by and large barbarians. The Ancient Romans and Greeks are extinct. Not even the same race(they where Mediterranean Caucasians, I think there is only 800 or so of them left in the world so pretty much extinct).

It cracks me up when western feminist's go into a rant and use Ancient Rome and Greece to to justify their Patriarchy theory while ignoring the truth, or ancestors wiped out those people(Germanic peoples where fairly egalitarian).

And what did our Ancestors believe? Might makes right. It may not sound nice or pleasant, but it is the truth. Over the years we may have picked up a few tricks by raiding the graves of the Roman and Greek Ancient civilizations, but at the heart of western civilization we are new to all of this. We took what worked and tried to forget what didn't work. That is the real mindset of Western Civilization, adaptability.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


my post here should give you an idea re paul the liar
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Was Peter a liar in your opinion?

Just asking what you thought of Christ's apostle Peter, would he know Jesus's doctrine?



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


I am referring to thought processes. We look to the Greek greats like Aristotle and Socrates and Plato, etc and tend to view the eyes through these philosophies. This was a big problem in the early Christian church because alot of heresies were coming in 70-100 years or so after Jesus death. Hence gnosticism and such. People were using greek thinking to explain and intrpret the gospel message and drawing different conclusions to the message of Jesus.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pervius
Every Christian who uses the word "God" is a fool.


A fool you say ? ... Even the ones who dont know any better .. cos thats all theyve been taught .. and have not been exposed to the 'real 'truth' as you have ??

Perhaps we should go on to say they should all be shot ? .. For being so foolish as to have not been exposed to this information you are privvy to ...

And instead of just telling us what it is .. you tell all the 'fools' to go search ...

What about teh non Christians who use the term God .... Fools ?? Or is it only Christians you like to pass this judgement onto ?

Whether i call God, God, or Yhwh .. or Yhvh .. or yahweh .. etc etc
I vbery much doubt it matters .. as god can see directly into peopels hearts ... and i dont think he would be calling them fools .. as you do ...

I reckon since God can understand peopels intents, at a level even the individual cannot see (ie, we lie to ourselves daily) .. he goes on peoples intents ... rather than what knowledge they were exposed to ...

But thanks for passing your judgement ..

"GOD" Bless ya



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:39 AM
link   
My step dad was a preacher for a few years til he finally got fed up or whatever. He used to tell me that there were many great books in this world.. He would say from "the Holy Bible" to " the power of One". Each has a good story and teaches good lessons a man should follow. He would say doesn't matter which book you read Because they are all just Roadmaps leading us all home. Some will get lost along the way, Some will be a bit more scenic but in the end we will all get there... I think its the Faith He meant to follow not the Book. He also used to say Belief is a watching a clown push a barrel across a tight rope and believing he can. Faith is being in the Barrel... Good stories meant to show us morals.. You don't pray to a book you pray to Your God/Gods hopefully He/She/They are listening. Sorry think I got way off topic but hey needed to be said...

Therian



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Therian
 


I completely agree with that ... Going from all the NDEs i researched over the years .. It seems God only wants 'all' of his children to find him and come home ... he doesnt mind what religion you use, if any at all .. So long as you do it with love and compassion for those you interact with (all creatures) .. and in doing so, find your way home ...

And preferably acknowledge and love God .. and show thanks for all that you have (the non-egotistic and non-materialistic traits and items) ..

Though it seems an actual belief in God or religion is not necessery as such (but is a huge bonus) .. Unconditional love etc, is necessery .. infact its essential ... You can have this in your heart without an actual belief in God ..



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River
Well, if you believe that man and dinosaur existed together then by all means believe on


Goes for me too ..
I certianly do .. and certainly will ...

Also known by the name dragons ... Im sure they have other names also .. in some of the man fighting monster tales



new topics




 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join