THE WORD OF GOD

Originally posted by kirksey957
I started painting my daughter's room yesterday. She picked out the color. Yellow. Had I come back with a gallon of blue paint she might say, "Hey! I thought I asked for yellow. I want yellow!" To which I could say, "It's exactly the same as yellow. It covers the wall. It has the same chemical make-up. It cost the same as yellow. So it's the same as blue."

That's is what you are sounding like in this argument.

whoa! so the professional preacher here is saying that the bible isn't accurate? that every translation is different? what?!?

as BF101 said-they're all the same. if you get 10 different people to translate a passage of anything from, say, french into english you're gonna get 10 different outcomes, but they're all gonna mean the same thing. blue isn't yellow, but dulux yellow is pretty darn similar to B&Q's own yellow paint.

Originally posted by blindfaith101
Each translation fits to the different understanding.

How is this statement and your previous statement that
'They are all the same' reconcilable?

Different = same ???

Nemesio

Originally posted by genius
whoa! so the professional preacher here is saying that the bible isn't accurate? that every translation is different? what?!?

as BF101 said-they're all the same. if you get 10 different people to translate a passage of anything from, say, french into english you're gonna get 10 different outcomes, but they're all gonna mean the same thing. blue isn't yellow, but dulux yellow is pretty darn similar to B&Q's own yellow paint.

Yes. They are all 'similar.' It was the first passage I found when
skimming.

However 'similar' does not mean 'same.'

If there is only ONE color of yellow that is perfect, then every
other color of yellow is imperfect (but perhaps close to perfect).

If a person wants to make the case that the Bible is without literal error,
then every statement in the Bible needs to be without error. A
translation's similarity to the original is not 'perfect' and, as such,
cannot be said to be 'without literal error.'

That is why any claims that 'it is the Word of God' are necessarily
false; they are editorial reductions of what translators 'think' is the
Word of God.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
Yes. They are all 'similar.' It was the first passage I found when
skimming.

However 'similar' does not mean 'same.'

If there is only ONE color of yellow that is perfect, then every
other color of yellow is imperfect (but perhaps close to perfect).

If a person wants to make the case that the Bible is without literal error,
...[text shortened]... lse; they are editorial reductions of what translators 'think' is the
Word of God.

Nemesio

no no no - the bible itself (untranslated) is the word of God, the translations, however, are -well- yeah, unperfect translations. the divinity department teach greek and hebrew for, i presume, this reason. at our bible study in hall there is a guy who's got the bible in it's original language, and will sometimes use this to help with our interpreatations of it. but this is mainly with ambigious words. generally, with whatever translation you use, the message is the same. it may not be a perfect translation, but if it conveys the same story? the same points?

and can we stop with the yellow paint - no metaphor is ever perfect, so lets stop milking this one 😛

Originally posted by blindfaith101
THE BIBLE SAYS: And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest there of thou shat surely die. GENESIS 2:16,17

Didn't God lie in that sentence? I mean, Adam & Eve didn't die after eating the fruit, did they?

Originally posted by nickybutt
Didn't God lie in that sentence? I mean, Adam & Eve didn't die after eating the fruit, did they?

Yes, they did die after a while. They are now doing a nightclub act in the Heavenly Express Nightclub, he tells jokes, smokes a cigar and she plays the ditz.

Originally posted by genius
no no no - the bible itself (untranslated) is the word of God, the translations, however, are -well- yeah, unperfect translations. the divinity department teach greek and hebrew for, i presume, this reason. at our bible study in hall there is a guy who's got the bible in it's original language, and will sometimes use this to help with our interpreatations o ...[text shortened]... an we stop with the yellow paint - no metaphor is ever perfect, so lets stop milking this one 😛

OK, let's stop talking about yellow paint. I'll give you credit for your studying which is more than most do. The beauty of the Bible occurs when 1) it involves dialogue and 2) when I find MY story in it.

Originally posted by kirksey957
What do you mean they are all the same? Are you saying the Living Bible is the same as the Revised Standard Version?

Yes

Originally posted by blindfaith101
Yes

Why do I even try? Why do I even try?

Originally posted by Nemesio
How is this statement and your previous statement that
'They are all the same' reconcilable?

Different = same ???

Nemesio

It's simple, THE WORD OF GOD, is for all to understand.Some understand the King James Version best. While there are those that understand, let's say The Good News Version best. There is a version of THE WORD, for all understanding.

Originally posted by Nemesio
Yes. They are all 'similar.' It was the first passage I found when
skimming.

However 'similar' does not mean 'same.'

If there is only ONE color of yellow that is perfect, then every
other color of yellow is imperfect (but perhaps close to perfect).

If a person wants to make the case that the Bible is without literal error,
...[text shortened]... lse; they are editorial reductions of what translators 'think' is the
Word of God.

Nemesio

You want it to be false, so to you it is. You look for imperfections, so to you it is perfect. You reject THE WORD OF GOD, so to you it is rejected. That is easy to understand.

Originally posted by nickybutt
Didn't God lie in that sentence? I mean, Adam & Eve didn't die after eating the fruit, did they?

Yes they did. they died in due time. Also that close relationship that they had with GOD, died when they realized their sin.

Originally posted by blindfaith101
You want it to be false, so to you it is. You look for imperfections, so to you it is perfect. You reject THE WORD OF GOD, so to you it is rejected. That is easy to understand.

My theoretical 'wanting' it to be false is not going to change
the Bible's content any more than your 'wanting' it to be true.

The fact is, different translations lead to different interpretations.
Sometimes, different interpretations are not reconcilable (that is
one cannot exist at the same time as the other). In circumstances
such as these, at least one interpretation is wrong.

If two people reading different translations of the Bible come to
different and exclusive conclusions, then how does one conclude
whether or not one has the 'right' reading?

Nemesio

Originally posted by blindfaith101
Yes

OK, I'm a glutton for punishment. I think if you do a little research on the Living Bible you will find that it is NOT the same as the more scholarly translations. The Living Bible is a paraphrase and NOT a translation. It is universally panned by scholars, and if you do a search, you can find side-by-side verses that clearly show this is a paraphrase and one that is not accurate to the original texts most of the time. Interestingly, Kenneth Taylor wrote the Living Bible to keep the interest of children. My theology professor simply called it "the green monster."

Originally posted by kirksey957
OK, I'm a glutton for punishment. I think if you do a little research on the Living Bible you will find that it is NOT the same as the more scholarly translations. The Living Bible is a paraphrase and NOT a translation. It is univers ...[text shortened]... n. My theology professor simply called it "the green monster."

Kind of like eating strawberries with skimmed milk instead of cream.

The only good thing about the bible is the lyrical prose and its wonderful poetic tone. In my opinion, there is nothing to compare with the King James. It is just fun to read, much in the same sense as Willy Shakespeare.

As to keeping the interest of children... I don't buy it. I thought King James was magic when I was seven. He (Taylor) was just trying to "dumb-down" the culture. And it works.