The year of whose lord?

[KnockEmOuttt]

but it doesn't change the fact that the bible as we know it to be written is mostly true to the original translation

Umm,not quite. There is not now and has almost certainly never been a single accurate translation of the original texts since they were written,nearly 2000 years ago.

The New Testament known today is replete with mistranslations, later insertions, censorship, errors and forgeries. (especially the Epistles)
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Reference:

'Misquoting Jesus' Bart Ehrman.

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why is a book by Bart D. Ehrman, a New Testament scholar at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.[1] The book introduces lay readers to the field of textual criticism of the Bible. Ehrman discusses a number of textual variants that resulted from intentional or accidental manuscript changes during the scriptorium era. The book, which made it to the New York Times Best Seller list, is available in hardcover and paperback.[2]

Summary

Ehrman recounts his personal experience with the study of the Bible and textual criticism. He summarizes the history of textual criticism, from the works of Desiderius Erasmus to the present. The book describes an early Christian environment in which the books that would later compose the New Testament were copied by hand, mostly by Christian amateurs. Ehrman concludes that various early scribes altered the New Testament texts in order to deemphasize the role of women in the early church, to unify and harmonize the different portrayals of Jesus in the four gospels, and to oppose certain heresies (such as Adoptionism). Ehrman contends that certain widely-held Christian beliefs, such about the divinity of Jesus, are associated not with the original words of scripture but with these later alterations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misquoting_Jesus

I should clarify then, I mean the bible as accepted by the christian faith, not the original documents as written 2000 years ago. I've been to many christian churches and I've never seen any of them use the original Greek or Hebrew. It's usually KJV or NAS or NRSV, so that's what I'm going on. If you want to get into the nitty gritty of historical details, yes some things are lost in translation, but the original bible (and I have gone through many versions more closely based on original texts) is still riddled with inaccuracies and contradictions.

[Faith No More]

One way to keep it from pissing you off could be to just think of it as this, AD means after death. Seeing as Xtians are supposed to believe in a Zombie Jesus isn't it a bit moronic to still call it After Death when the fucker supposedly rose from the dead?

Actually, this is a misconception. A.D. stands for "Anno Domini," which is Latin for "the year of our lord."

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Anno_Domini

[Drich]

[quote='RaphielDrake' pid='314287' dateline='1343021929']
[quote='Drich' pid='314278' dateline='1343020648']
Then please tell me what proper consideration implies.

How is it you still do not know what I am doing? I am not switching between translations. I am taking the orginal greek or Hebrew text and then translating the words indivisually, by using a lexicon and concordance.





here this is an on line version I use.http://www.blueletterbible.org/ This isn't a bible persay. it is the KJV tied to a lexicon and concordance with a full greek and hebrew libary tied to every single word in the bible (that is what the numbers are next to each word.)

Ralphie seriously i talked about this for like the first month and a half I was here. Do you not remember any of this?
[/quote]

I've seen multiple arguments where you were *perfectly* willing to use fundamentalist passages so don't you *dare* try that bullshit with me.
If thats what you're committing to then thats what you're committing to and fair enough. We have a ball game but you have not been committing to it in the past and you should not quote from any other version from now on if thats what you choose to do.

Is this understood or do I have to voice it in even more simplistic terms so I don't get another snarky remark in response?
[/quote]

I quote from what ever version I think is more easily understood initially, or which ever one provides the best vantage point for whatever it is i am talking about. And if the context comes into question I reference the the lexicon. That is how excegesis works. Establish the base line passage or principle and the research and support or correct.

Am I supposed to give up established protocal simply because you do not know how to argue it? Ahh, no.

How about you ask questions about what you do not fully understand, and I'll do my best to answer you. rather than assert what it is you think you know, get angery and insist that I dumb down my efforts to meet your own.

In the words of the all awesome yoda,
"That is why you fail."

You like Luke (Skywalker not dirtwalker and bible writer) instead of meeting the challenge and allowing the bar to be raised, want to lower the bar to what you feel comfortable with.

---

[quote='KnockEmOuttt' pid='314292' dateline='1343023253']
[quote]I don't know, have you? I don't know what places it is you were talking about to begin with.[/quote]Readwhat you wrote that was your assertion and not mine

[quote]If you mean anywhere in Europe, chances are they're either extremely traditional or secular. If you mean Latin American, chances are they're devoutly Catholic. Anywhere else, chances are they're something other than Christian. I'm not off base here.[/quote] So steriotypes? I guess it's good we are not talking about race, because it seems it is only not good to steriotype people culture/color and not what they believe.


[quote]Do you read the bible in ancient Greek and Hebrew often?[/quote]Only when I need to correct what most believe to be an indefencable error in the english.

[quote]The translation argument might account for slights, but not the bigger inaccuracies. There are a lot of massive contradictions and inconsistencies in the bible which can't just be explained away by "oh, it's a translation error."[/quote]
Then maybe you could start a new thread provide a few. NBote if you cut and paste a link to the 'skeptics bible' i will cut an paste a link to the 'skeptics bible answered.' Show me a place where 'translation' or a better understanding of a translation will not break a supposed contradiction. (put some effort into it)

[Cinjin]

You like Luke (Skywalker not dirtwalker and bible writer) instead of meeting the challenge and allowing the bar to be raised, want to lower the bar to what you feel comfortable with.

I think the point is there shouldn't be a challenge just to get the love promised you by a sky pappa. What in inept, pathetic, flaccid god you have. He can't even get his "word" to stand the test of what is really a tiny amount of time in the scheme of eternity.

[Drich]

Dirch, exactly how are you translating this? Like which lexicon are you using?

EDIT: Furthermore, are you trained in the languages you're translating from?

asked and answered

Edit: yes I was trained to use every scrap of reference material I use to translate.

[Cinjin]

Dirch, exactly how are you translating this? Like which lexicon are you using?

EDIT: Furthermore, are you trained in the languages you're translating from?

asked and answered

Edit: yes I was trained to use every scrap of reference material I use to translate.

He had to be .... there's no other way to justify and excuse all the glaring contradictions in the bible.

[Drich]

I think the point is there shouldn't be a challenge just to get the love promised you by a sky pappa. What in inept, pathetic, flaccid god you have. He can't even get his "word" to stand the test of what is really a tiny amount of time in the scheme of eternity.

Wow, What a selfrighteous statement. Just because you are lost and do not understand, just because the whole of your current knoweldge and wisdom count for nothing, just because you can not or will not put forth the effort God is weak?

Good luck selling Him on that one.

[Cinjin]

I think the point is there shouldn't be a challenge just to get the love promised you by a sky pappa. What in inept, pathetic, flaccid god you have. He can't even get his "word" to stand the test of what is really a tiny amount of time in the scheme of eternity.

Wow, What a selfrighteous statement. Just because you are lost and do not understand, just because the whole of your current knoweldge and wisdom count for nothing, just because you can not or will not put forth the effort God is weak?

I'm not lost - I know exactly where I am. I do understand the Bible very well. I've studied it for 30+ years. I have put forth tons of effort to try to "know god." I was once a devout and terrified sheep just like yourself. I know exactly what you THINK you feel. I know what it is you THINK you know. My knowledge of your religion is extensive and that is part of the reason your people hate me so much.

Good luck selling Him on that one.

Thankfully, I don't ever have to worry about selling your angry desert god anything. Beings that do not exist tend not be too interested in buying anything.

[Gooders1002]

Your going to love Nepal as there it is the year 2035, there as they don't follow are calender.

[Norfolk And Chance]

I think the point is there shouldn't be a challenge just to get the love promised you by a sky pappa. What in inept, pathetic, flaccid god you have. He can't even get his "word" to stand the test of what is really a tiny amount of time in the scheme of eternity.

Wow, What a selfrighteous statement. Just because you are lost and do not understand, just because the whole of your current knoweldge and wisdom count for nothing, just because you can not or will not put forth the effort God is weak?

Good luck selling Him on that one.

We need to have a negative kudos button.