Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: July 24, 2025, 4:41 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Biblical Christianity 101, a study of the book of Romans
#75
RE: Biblical Christianity 101, a study of the book of Romans
(October 27, 2015 at 5:04 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: Nice dig, with the "easy to read" version. Personally, I prefer the NASB, though I've been known to dip into the New King James Version for certain poetic elements (like Ecclesiastes or Psalms), because I love the prose of the KJV but not so much the thees and thous.

Now that we have that out of the way, I have a serious issue with your citation of the final verses of Romans 1, which I consider among the most despicable parts of the New Testament.
What most people don't understand is that the bible is translated from one of 4 sources/codices.
The Receptus being the oldest used in english translation/KJV. The Sinaitus, Vanticanus, and the Textus Receptus being the two most modern bibles are translated from. Why the change? Because over the course of several hundred years, more complete, older, manuscripts are found. which make minor contextual changes over time, thus inspiring the creation of a new codex. The changes are not great, and nothing changes any of the elements of salvation. an example of a change would be the command in the Receptus "thou shalt not Kill." In the newer/better vetted codex, the word Kill has been changed to Murder. The difference? Murder is the unauthorized taking of life while Killing is not. the Command thou shalt not Kill puts moses Himself in violation of this command when he order the slaughter of whole soceities. While the word 'murder' would have Moses well with in the confines of God's law.

I use the easy to read because it is a translation like all others and are subject to the same translational issues all translations are subject to, but with one difference. It translates into an active/popular english dilect. What is the point to having a translation that translates into a dead dilect? Then one has to sub-translate the dead dilect into an active one thus submitting the text through another translation matrix further risking the bastardation of the original text. Rather than do all of that, I use the one easiest to understand translation and then use the Vaticanus/Receptus Greek along with a lexicon and concordance to give the text legitmacy when challenged.
Quote:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

You see, we know this is why so many of your kind come here with all their preformed misconceptions about atheists, and all the horrible things they say to us here. But are you really suggesting that we are (unlike Christians, or at least significantly more than them)
murderers?
deceitful?
slanderers?
gossips?
wicked?
greedy?
untrustworthy?
unloving?
unmerciful?

I mean, really, dude?

Strawman.

You are contending All Atheists are subject/responsible to this list Paul gave. When this is not what is being communicated. The Word phrase "to gave them over" means God allowed them to do any of these things. The list is extreme yes, but it is extreme for a reason. The reason being is because under OT law most of these things demanded death, or at the very least to be cut off for soceity. Paul is contrasting the OLD way of doing/thinking with what is to come.

To say all none belivers live by this list means one is guilty of taking this list our of context, whether that be you or some other christian. because like I prefaced this study with, "there were no chapter and verse notations in Paul's letter, so a chapter does not signify the end of a thought. If you or one of your christian judges cares to read chapter 2 Paul quickly puts those people in their place.

I simply stopped at the end of each chapter to discuss and make sure everyone is on board before we continue.
just for you:

Chapter2:
So do you think that you can judge those other people? You are wrong. You too are guilty of sin. You judge them, but you do the same things they do. So when you judge them, you are really condemning yourself. 2 God judges all who do such things, and we know his judgment is right.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Biblical Christianity 101, a study of the book of Romans - by Drich - October 28, 2015 at 10:39 am
Hmmm? - by Hmmm? - October 30, 2015 at 10:08 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  What Luther didn't know about Romans 1,1-17 SeniorCitizen 1 765 November 20, 2023 at 11:02 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Without citing the bible, what marks the bible as the one book with God's message? Whateverist 143 55115 March 31, 2022 at 7:05 am
Last Post: Gwaithmir
  Evangelicals, Trump and a Quick Bible Study DeistPaladin 52 8310 November 9, 2020 at 3:20 pm
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  Bibe Study 2: Questionable Morality Rhondazvous 30 4971 May 27, 2019 at 12:23 pm
Last Post: Vicki Q
  Bible Study: The God who Lies and Deceives Rhondazvous 50 9136 May 24, 2019 at 5:52 pm
Last Post: Aegon
  Atheist Bible Study 1: Genesis GrandizerII 614 105509 March 9, 2019 at 8:38 pm
Last Post: Bucky Ball
  Pedophilia in the Bible: this is a porn book WinterHold 378 75620 June 28, 2018 at 2:13 pm
Last Post: Wyrd of Gawd
  Rebuke on Biblical Prophecy Narishma 12 2284 May 28, 2018 at 11:46 am
Last Post: Minimalist
  Knowing god outside a biblical sense Silver 60 14303 March 31, 2018 at 1:44 am
Last Post: Godscreated
  Record few Americans believe in Biblical inerrancy. Jehanne 184 33441 December 31, 2017 at 12:37 am
Last Post: vulcanlogician



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)