So... If I got this straight:
God sacrificed his son/self to allow us to...
...save ourselves(?)...
...by believing that god sacrificed his son/self.
So why would god require a sacrifice of his son/self when all that is required of us is belief in him, and the good word?
I don't see why this whole process was necessary (or how it makes sense).
Originally posted by TetsujinWas this directed at me?
So... If I got this straight:
God sacrificed his son/self to allow us to...
...save ourselves(?)...
...by believing that god sacrificed his son/self.
So [b]why would god require a sacrifice of his son/self when all that is required of us is belief in him, and the good word?
I don't see why this whole process was necessary (or how it makes sense).[/b]
The problem with a bible discussion is that none of us have actually read it!
The bible I have is English - revamped from an earlier English edition which was translated into English from Latin. That was produced by translating the Greek which was itself a translation of a Hebrew bible. Every translation introduces errors.
In old Hebrew "forty" and "many" were the same word so we've no idea how long Moses was in the desert or how many days Jesus was in the wilderness.
In old Greek "virgin" and "young woman" were the same word so the virgin birth was invented when some careless person translated it into Latin.
We've all laughed at the dodgy translations of instructions that come with Japanese goods. The bible is just as inaccurate - not worth slaughtering the "unbelievers" for is it?
Originally posted by MixoThat's right; none of us really read the Illiad and the Odyssey when we peruse the English versions. Virgil, Cicero, Aristotle and Plato are really pointless to try and understand in English. So all the scholars studying the classics in their non-original languages are really just wasting their time?
The problem with a bible discussion is that none of us have actually read it!
The bible I have is English - revamped from an earlier English edition which was translated into English from Latin. That was produced by translating the Greek which was itself a translation of a Hebrew bible. Every translation introduces errors.
In old Hebrew "forty" and "many" ...[text shortened]... he bible is just as inaccurate - not worth slaughtering the "unbelievers" for is it?
Originally posted by Halitosehey could you do me a favor and check out the writing at the bottom of this page :
That's right; none of us really read the Illiad and the Odyssey when we peruse the English versions. Virgil, Cicero, Aristotle and Plato are really pointless to try and understand in English. So all the scholars studying the classics in their non-original languages are really just wasting their time?
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5226/index.html
See what happens if you try to copy and paste some of the Greek words here.
edit on closer look it's not Greek. lmao
Originally posted by HalitoseFor us non-scholars, reading the translations is the best we can do. Not a waste of time, certainly.
That's right; none of us really read the Illiad and the Odyssey when we peruse the English versions. Virgil, Cicero, Aristotle and Plato are really pointless to try and understand in English. So all the scholars studying the classics in their non-original languages are really just wasting their time?
Someone who claimed to be a “classics” scholar, but couldn’t read the Greek, I would doubt. Same with Biblical scholars, or Koranic scholars, or Vedic scholars...
C.S. Lewis, for example, knew his Greek...