Yawn.
I know the problem. Every year, the ultra-orthodox factions in the
Well, if one doesn't like the King James version of scripture, there
--
Just make sure you run the revisions past the author for approval.
I have a problem with miracles. Ignoring some of my designs, which
To be fair, the Catholic Church hasn't done any better in the areas of
I've learned more about scripture from the translations, than from the
I've read through TLB and the NIV. I somewhat agree. The TLB went
Sorry, but I'm not familiar with that section. My main interest is
Judaism has had to adapt and change radically over the past 5773Christianity is in a somewhat different position than Judaism, I think,
because modern Judaism doesn't closely resemble that of the Torah--no
Temple, no sacrificial cult, no Aaronic priests, no prophets, and so on.
(No pillar of cloud, either.)
The entire priesthood (kohen) are from the tribe of Levi (including
Yep. We continue that to this day as much of the legal establishment
There are plenty of contradictions and oddities in all versions of the
God or me? In both cases, I'm waiting for divine inspiration.Anyway, I've done my part in making Judaism accessible to Unix/Linux
programmers and users:
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.sco.misc/msg/ccef57b1a28ed0fd
Hmmm... I wrote that in 1997. Probably time for another update.
Just make sure you run the revisions past the author for approval.
If God really made the universe from nothing, He can do anything HeOn Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:06:09 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
The modernist template I'm talking about begins by denying the
possibility of miracles, which logically entails that God does not exist
and that the Incarnation is a myth.
I have a problem with miracles. Ignoring some of my designs, which
would require a genuine miracle to function, most miracles eventually
have a mundane explanation. However, what bugs me is the
beatification of various Catholic dignitaries, which requires evidence
of a genuine miracle. Pope John Paul II managed to canonize 483
saints, and beatify 1,300 blessed people at the average rate of one
every 5.5 days. With an unofficial count of over 10,000 canonized
saints and beatified individuals, I submit that the honor is somewhat
oversubscribed. The side effect is a rather substantial stretch of
the imagination in what constitutes a genuine miracle, relegating it
to an almost common occurrence by Catholic standards.
As for the "modernist template", much as I like the term, I believe
you're simply renaming the term "denomination". There are currently
about 40,000 assorted Christian denominations or templates to choose
from, each of which proclaim that their practices and interpretations
are the only ones that are genuinely correct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations
I suspect that the most obvious indication that there is no God is his
unwillingness or inability to clean up the mess left by his followers.
Then through "brilliant
scholarship" they discover that God does not exist and that the
Incarnation is a myth. For which they get paid. Nice work if you can
get it, and are crooked enough to take it, but not very illuminating.
To be fair, the Catholic Church hasn't done any better in the areas of
scholarship and creative finance. The Inquisition, Borgias,
suppression of vulgar translations, molestation scandals, tithe,
indulgences, and rigid insistence on inflexible dogma tend have a
bigger effect than "brilliant scholarship".
My interest in religion is primarily history and archeology, both of
which are constantly changing. When the various Christian
denominations allow change in the same manner, I might be more
interested in theology. Incidentally, to the best of my knowledge,
Judaism is the only religion where the patriarchs were able to argue
with God, and win.
I don't find any of the English translations difficult, at least not
from the POV of language. (Parts of it are very tough reading, but
that's because of my sin and lack of love, not reading comprehension.)
I've learned more about scripture from the translations, than from the
originals. I'm not into estimating the number of angels on the head
of a pin. Just the general story, some of the details, and most
important, the missing justifications and motivations behind the
events in the Bible. The various translations allow me to concentrate
on my interests, rather than getting bogged down in archaic and
idiomatic language.
Some translations are less accurate than others, particularly the ones
where someone tried to simplify them or add context and interpretation
right into the text, rather than in footnotes. Bad examples are the
Living Bible, The Message, and parts of the New International Version.
I've read through TLB and the NIV. I somewhat agree. The TLB went
off the deep end by abandoning the structure of the original American
Standard Bible. There's no way you can do scholarship with such a
rearrangement. "Living" is the correct term as it squirms and
slithers through the events. The NIV is quite different, retaining
both the structure and organization of the original. In most cases,
each sentence is directly translated into the vernacular. The
translations were done by a huge and diverse committee, over a period
of 15 years. With such a large number of translators and experts
involved, there's no way that the result can follow any single
interpretation or style. The result is inevitably a compromise,
guaranteed to irritate everyone that reads it in at least some manner.
The NIV is especially bad on the Pauline epistles, where they cram in
all sorts of Reformed theology that isn't there in the Greek. The
"inclusive language" versions such as the NRSV distort the meaning of
many passages.
Sorry, but I'm not familiar with that section. My main interest is
the five books of Moses.
Christianity is in a somewhat different position than Judaism, I think,
because modern Judaism doesn't closely resemble that of the Torah--no
Temple, no sacrificial cult, no Aaronic priests, no prophets, and so on.
(No pillar of cloud, either.)
Judaism has had to adapt and change radically over the past 5773
years. What was retained over this time is more of a culture than a
religion. From Babylon to the middle ages, numerous rabbis annotated
and merged the original oral and written texts into the Talmud and
Mishnah, which are essentially study guides with explanations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah
http://www.coejl.org/_old/www.coejl.org/learn/pageoftalm.html
While the original 5 books of Moses remain unchanged (and copied by
hand letter for letter), the oral parts and interpretations constantly
change. Parts that are obsolete are generally ignored. For example,
the entire book of Leviticus, which details ritual animal sacrifice,
is generally ignored.
Orthodox Christian theology and practice is a lot closer to the
scriptural standard, and the parts of the OT that are superseded are
clearly delineated in the NT, with careful attention to detail. For
instance, the High Priesthood of Christ is located in the order of
Melchizedek rather than Aaron, as explained in the Epistle to the
Hebrews.
The entire priesthood (kohen) are from the tribe of Levi (including
Aaron). I find it difficult to believe that Christians could make
such a change, since they do not recognize the 12 tribes of Israel as
one of their own organizational divisions. Peter was from the tribe
of Simeon.
There are numerous covenants in the OT, from Adam through
Moses, so the very fact of covenantal development is continuous with the
OT as well.
Yep. We continue that to this day as much of the legal establishment
is Jewish. If you need a contract, you came to the right place.
(Muslims and Mormons claim to supersede Christianity, but their alleged
scriptures flatly contradict both the OT and NT. God does not
contradict Himself.)
There are plenty of contradictions and oddities in all versions of the
Bible. However, I don't want to get into this debate, as I'm neither
qualified or interested.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html
Anyway, I've done my part in making Judaism accessible to Unix/Linux
programmers and users:
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.sco.misc/msg/ccef57b1a28ed0fd
Hmmm... I wrote that in 1997. Probably time for another update.
Just make sure you run the revisions past the author for approval.
God or me? In both cases, I'm waiting for divine inspiration.
He didn't, because He cannot create something unlike Himself (a finite,
You have it exactly backwards. Miracles are impossible, because they would
Where do you get that idea?
Not so. God's eternal will is unchangeable, but we're in the time
Certainly. But "the normal order of things" means what God intends, not
asleep compared to the level of existence...On 3/17/2013 7:21 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:06:09 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
The modernist template I'm talking about begins by denying the
possibility of miracles, which logically entails that God does not exist
and that the Incarnation is a myth.
I have a problem with miracles. Ignoring some of my designs, which
would require a genuine miracle to function, most miracles eventually
have a mundane explanation. However, what bugs me is the
beatification of various Catholic dignitaries, which requires evidence
of a genuine miracle. Pope John Paul II managed to canonize 483
saints, and beatify 1,300 blessed people at the average rate of one
every 5.5 days. With an unofficial count of over 10,000 canonized
saints and beatified individuals, I submit that the honor is somewhat
oversubscribed. The side effect is a rather substantial stretch of
the imagination in what constitutes a genuine miracle, relegating it
to an almost common occurrence by Catholic standards.
As for the "modernist template", much as I like the term, I believe
you're simply renaming the term "denomination". There are currently
about 40,000 assorted Christian denominations or templates to choose
from, each of which proclaim that their practices and interpretations
are the only ones that are genuinely correct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations
I suspect that the most obvious indication that there is no God is his
unwillingness or inability to clean up the mess left by his followers.
Then through "brilliant
scholarship" they discover that God does not exist and that the
Incarnation is a myth. For which they get paid. Nice work if you can
get it, and are crooked enough to take it, but not very illuminating.
To be fair, the Catholic Church hasn't done any better in the areas of
scholarship and creative finance. The Inquisition, Borgias,
suppression of vulgar translations, molestation scandals, tithe,
indulgences, and rigid insistence on inflexible dogma tend have a
bigger effect than "brilliant scholarship".
My interest in religion is primarily history and archeology, both of
which are constantly changing. When the various Christian
denominations allow change in the same manner, I might be more
interested in theology. Incidentally, to the best of my knowledge,
Judaism is the only religion where the patriarchs were able to argue
with God, and win.
I don't find any of the English translations difficult, at least not
from the POV of language. (Parts of it are very tough reading, but
that's because of my sin and lack of love, not reading comprehension.)
I've learned more about scripture from the translations, than from the
originals. I'm not into estimating the number of angels on the head
of a pin. Just the general story, some of the details, and most
important, the missing justifications and motivations behind the
events in the Bible. The various translations allow me to concentrate
on my interests, rather than getting bogged down in archaic and
idiomatic language.
Some translations are less accurate than others, particularly the ones
where someone tried to simplify them or add context and interpretation
right into the text, rather than in footnotes. Bad examples are the
Living Bible, The Message, and parts of the New International Version.
I've read through TLB and the NIV. I somewhat agree. The TLB went
off the deep end by abandoning the structure of the original American
Standard Bible. There's no way you can do scholarship with such a
rearrangement. "Living" is the correct term as it squirms and
slithers through the events. The NIV is quite different, retaining
both the structure and organization of the original. In most cases,
each sentence is directly translated into the vernacular. The
translations were done by a huge and diverse committee, over a period
of 15 years. With such a large number of translators and experts
involved, there's no way that the result can follow any single
interpretation or style. The result is inevitably a compromise,
guaranteed to irritate everyone that reads it in at least some manner.
The NIV is especially bad on the Pauline epistles, where they cram in
all sorts of Reformed theology that isn't there in the Greek. The
"inclusive language" versions such as the NRSV distort the meaning of
many passages.
Sorry, but I'm not familiar with that section. My main interest is
the five books of Moses.
Christianity is in a somewhat different position than Judaism, I think,
because modern Judaism doesn't closely resemble that of the Torah--no
Temple, no sacrificial cult, no Aaronic priests, no prophets, and so on.
(No pillar of cloud, either.)
Judaism has had to adapt and change radically over the past 5773
years. What was retained over this time is more of a culture than a
religion. From Babylon to the middle ages, numerous rabbis annotated
and merged the original oral and written texts into the Talmud and
Mishnah, which are essentially study guides with explanations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah
http://www.coejl.org/_old/www.coejl.org/learn/pageoftalm.html
While the original 5 books of Moses remain unchanged (and copied by
hand letter for letter), the oral parts and interpretations constantly
change. Parts that are obsolete are generally ignored. For example,
the entire book of Leviticus, which details ritual animal sacrifice,
is generally ignored.
Orthodox Christian theology and practice is a lot closer to the
scriptural standard, and the parts of the OT that are superseded are
clearly delineated in the NT, with careful attention to detail. For
instance, the High Priesthood of Christ is located in the order of
Melchizedek rather than Aaron, as explained in the Epistle to the
Hebrews.
The entire priesthood (kohen) are from the tribe of Levi (including
Aaron). I find it difficult to believe that Christians could make
such a change, since they do not recognize the 12 tribes of Israel as
one of their own organizational divisions. Peter was from the tribe
of Simeon.
There are numerous covenants in the OT, from Adam through
Moses, so the very fact of covenantal development is continuous with the
OT as well.
Yep. We continue that to this day as much of the legal establishment
is Jewish. If you need a contract, you came to the right place.
(Muslims and Mormons claim to supersede Christianity, but their alleged
scriptures flatly contradict both the OT and NT. God does not
contradict Himself.)
There are plenty of contradictions and oddities in all versions of the
Bible. However, I don't want to get into this debate, as I'm neither
qualified or interested.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html
Anyway, I've done my part in making Judaism accessible to Unix/Linux
programmers and users:
https://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.sco.misc/msg/ccef57b1a28ed0fd
Hmmm... I wrote that in 1997. Probably time for another update.
Just make sure you run the revisions past the author for approval.
God or me? In both cases, I'm waiting for divine inspiration.
If God really made the universe from nothing, He can do anything He
wants with it, at any time and at any place. That's why denying the
_possibility_ of miracles (as opposed to the veracity of any particular
claim of the miraculous) logically entails that God does not exist.
You seem to be in that camp, unless I'm mistaken.
Everything changes when you know God. May we both know Him better!
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
All that we consider that is currently alive are actually asleep, well
I suppose you are kidding, Jeff, but the problem is that some readers
I think it's better put to say it doesn't closely resemble that part
I'll get to this a little later.
Of course there are still Aaronic priests. I know a few personally.
It's true that prophecy has ended, but that was about 2300 years ago.
I see the smiley but for the sake of others, the Pillar of Cloud wasand so on.
(No pillar of cloud, either.)
Than Orthodox Jewish theology and practice!? Clearly we have
I suppose you are kidding, Jeff, but the problem is that some readers
I think it's better put to say it doesn't closely resemble that part
I'll get to this a little later.
Of course there are still Aaronic priests. I know a few personally.
It's true that prophecy has ended, but that was about 2300 years ago.
I see the smiley but for the sake of others, the Pillar of Cloud wasand so on.
(No pillar of cloud, either.)
Than Orthodox Jewish theology and practice!? Clearly we have
Much to my frustration i have tried very hard numerous times, with no
May God honour your search.