Bible Content 2

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
The omnipotent God was jealous or scared of human accomplishments

Firstly I'd like to say that I have no intention of picking up an small wording inconsitencies or even errors between the historical accounts. I think that is too pedantic and occurs even in real historical work.

I think the stronger discrediting is from the macro-level human errors in the writing of the stories, or to put it another way, the silliness of the whole thing. I was laughing out loud as I approached the end of Exodus, thinking "jesus christ(!) people take this seriously"

Anyway, a jealous or scared omnipotent God?

I'm not even needing to prove whether this story was a reasonable source for our different languages. Im sure if we wanted we could show that the biblical story is very unlikely. I guess DS would poll the top most intelligent language experts and see how many think we built a tower that was too high. Do you think many would think that?

[/ QUOTE ]
"Design and purpose, not height, was the issue at hand."

Here is a great article about The Tower of Babel that will explain a bit more.

Hi txag007,

I wasn't going to, but I am enjoying myself at the moment, so I went and look at the link that you provided. Interestingly, it is a link that emphasises the exegis of the bible. This, to me, means that all those believers that quote and respect the bible (in english or whatever modern language) are and probbaly will be wrong (if you are multilingual that will be obvious).

Your god has a preference for aramaic and hebrew, has it, or does it only knows those two languages?

So, i guess we need be very conversant and knowledgeable about hebrew, for thye OT, and with aramaic, for the new. No wonder some many got it wrong.

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi txag007,

I wasn't going to, but I am enjoying myself at the moment, so I went and look at the link that you provided. Interestingly, it is a link that emphasises the exegis of the bible. This, to me, means that all those believers that quote and respect the bible (in english or whatever modern language) are and probbaly will be wrong (if you are multilingual that will be obvious).

Your god has a preference for aramaic and hebrew, has it, or does it only knows those two languages?

So, i guess we need be very conversant and knowledgeable about hebrew, for thye OT, and with aramaic, for the new. No wonder some many got it wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
The Old Testament was primarily written in Hebrew, and the New Testament was primarily written in Greek. When questions arise as to the meaning or intent of a passage, Biblical scholars go back to the original text for interpretation.

The Bible was written by men inspired by God. What seems to be the problem?

[ QUOTE ]
The Bible was written by men inspired by God. What seems to be the problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that, as any reasonably fluent multi-lingual person will tell you, is that there are no "exact" translation from language to language. In fact, some of the people that have a deeper knowlege about language, will also tell that perception of reality is conditionned by language hence it varies accross cultures. Now, if you say that tyhe bible, the supposed word, of a supposed god, is rooted in each language, it will be different for each culture, and, indeed, for each individual! So there is no standard, unless the bible, or whatever, is read in the original language and in the original cutural environment, of which we have only an approximation.

Sounds like glossolalia (speaking in tongues) to me. But meanwhile don't make any conclusion from your understanding unless you are fluent in hebrew and ancient greek. (I stand corrected about aramaic.. Lets just say that the greek meaning is different from the aramaic, when it comes to the historical Jesus.. as when it comes to tranlating in modern langauges, well it seems we get further and further from the original intentional meaning))



You could say that god got snookered by its reaction to the Babel tower.

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Bible was written by men inspired by God. What seems to be the problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that, as any reasonably fluent multi-lingual person will tell you, is that there are no "exact" translation from language to language. In fact, some of the people that have a deeper knowlege about language, will also tell that perception of reality is conditionned by language hence it varies accross cultures. Now, if you say that tyhe bible, the supposed word, of a supposed god, is rooted in each language, it will be different for each culture, and, indeed, for each individual! So there is no standard, unless the bible, or whatever, is read in the original language and in the original cutural environment, of which we have only an approximation.

Sounds like glossolalia (speaking in tongues) to me. But meanwhile don't make any conclusion from your understanding unless you are fluent in hebrew and ancient greek. (I stand corrected about aramaic.. Lets just say that the greek meaning is different from the aramaic, when it comes to the historical Jesus.. as when it comes to tranlating in modern langauges, well it seems we get further and further from the original intentional meaning))



You could say that god got snookered by its reaction to the Babel tower.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is why, when questions arise, scholars go back to the original text to interpret the Bible's true meaning. The problem is certainly not as drastic as you make it sound, as reasonable translations exist in any language. If you are concerned about it, though, may I suggest you learn Hebrew and Greek.

[David Sklansky]

Did dinosaurs live at the same time as man?

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
Did dinosaurs live at the same time as man?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why?

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did dinosaurs live at the same time as man?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

We already know the answer is no. But, I assume he is asking you how the heck they got on the friggin' Ark.

[txag007]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did dinosaurs live at the same time as man?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

We already know the answer is no. But, I assume he is asking you how the heck they got on the friggin' Ark.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's what I figured, but why is he asking that in this thread?

[David Sklansky]

"We already know the answer is no. But, I assume he is asking you how the heck they got on the friggin' Ark"

Excuse me RJT but his answer is, I believe, NOT no.