Fuel against the fundies

[chatpilot]

Very interesting tackattack but that just illustrates the many difficulties in translating ancient text. Languages and words evolve and change with the times which makes it even harder to interpret the true meaning of some of these text.

[tackattack]

I agree tha\t gathering a modern interpretation of something written so long ago with a completely different wod definition and translated so many ways is very very difficult. That's why I have such a prolem with fundementals who don't use the actual source in context. Context is so imperative for relative definition.

It illustrates where a major Christian misconception lay, and I hope you would all use it against prejudice and hatefull disertations from Christians.

[fr0d0]

I've been to some heated discussions about homosexuality. There are always the very vocal and very tiny minority who will shout their unconsidered opinion and walk off. In these discussions the consensus of those that remained was always the opposite.

[Dotard]

Question for you Tack,

You say you believe the bible to be an inerrant words of a God. Are they meant for ALL mankind or only for those who can read an ancient hebrew language?

Really. If this God o' yourn wrote a book to mankind so that we may know him then why the need to be fluent in ancient hebrew or the need to seek out those who are so that they can basicly read it to us?

Does this make sense to you? And how could the translations be wrong in any way? It's the freaking word of God. Did God not take the trouble to ensure what was translated was what he meant? Are you saying he just let people fuck it all up so when it got down to our day and age we would be forced to seek out and learn an ancient language to know what it really said?

And why are you trusting the Jewish interpreters again? If God allowed the original translators to fuck it all up then what makes you think he ain't allowing your modern day Jewish translators to fuck it all up?

Were the original translators not Jewish? Or were there a couple Jews in there that fucked the translation also?

[tackattack]

I've been to some heated discussions about homosexuality. There are always the very vocal and very tiny minority who will shout their unconsidered opinion and walk off. In these discussions the consensus of those that remained was always the opposite.

I agree, and that's the trick, not to walk away.

@Dotard- I believe the Bible is the inspired living word of God, not inerrant. I feel it was originally meant for everyone and still could be. At it's time I don't feel it was misinterpreted. It is just a book, and it's written by men, many years ago. God didn't write it or translate it, he inspired it. 1000 years from now there will be a different common language and they'll have different deffinitions for words than we use today and probably more of them. It takes every generation trying their best to selflessly pass on those beliefs as acurately as possible for it to remain pure. History since then and now is littered with far too much hate, bigotry and self-serving for me to even consider the Bible as inerrant. That doesn't mean with God's help I don't see any value in those words. Definitions change and as society changes and adds new facets to itself new definitions are necessary. I'm sure they didn't have a name for electricity back then either. If you saw electricity in an old book before electricity in a different language then you'd raise a question as to the translation as well. Someone at that point is assuming some word meant the modern interpretaion of it. I try and read the Bible from an anacronistic, selfless perspective as much as possible. If you don't believe the bible could be real.. then don't read it no one's asking you to. You're making it seem like God puts words in our head or we all hear voices from God. I can't speak for ancient translators, but God doesn't speak to me like that.

[Dotard]

Why shouldn't I read it just because I maintain there is no God? I have read it.

Whether this God actually wrote it, inspired it or actually spoke audibly to the writers my inquiries still stand.

If this God inspired these words for all of mankind then he fucked up in his endevour. You say it is not inerrant, just a book written by man, definitions or meanings of words have changed. How are you deciding what is an errant load and what is commanded by God? Oh that's right, Jewish people have the authority to tell you what God really meant. (edited to add: If you really believe that, then why are you not denouncing Jesus as the messiah? The Jews have a better grasp on the true meaning of "God's Word" and they say he AIN'T the messiah)

The Do's and Don'ts concerning the treatment of slaves is found in the bible. Would a Jew not agree? If you were supreme president of the world and were against slavery and labeled it wrong, would you allow your words to be "mis-translated" to show no condemnation of slavery, just how to treat the ones you owned, and spread around the globe without ever raising an eyebrow? Or would you take steps to ensure your true meaning was disseminated? How about if your subjects very lives were dependant upon them understanding what you want of them?

Or would you just sit back on your laurels and say "Boy those writers and translators really fucked that all up. Ehhh screw it, if people want to know if I really meant that they better seek out someone from a small sect of people who have copies of the originals ('cause I let the originals get destroyed even though I had the power to preserve them). If they cannot or will not do that then fuk 'em, let 'em burn for an eternity."?

If I were to give you your assumption that this God o' yourn is real and he inspired that book we call the Bible in order to let mankind know what it is he expects from us, and the existance of our very souls was dependant upon our understanding of it, then what you are advocating is not unlike a Wookie living on a planet with a bunch of Ewoks. It does not make sense.

But then again, maybe you just ain't explaining it right. What to take another shot at it? Maybe you can make your position on the matter a bit more coherent and cohesive.

[Eilonnwy]

I had this discussion with a friend on livejournal who is very Jewish. And when I mean very Jewish, she talks about it a lot on her LJ and you can tell it's a really important part of her identity. She went to an assembly thing where Jewish homosexuals discussed what it was like to be gay in the Jewish religion and how they struggle with prejudiced.

My friend had a hard time reconciling what she knew to be right with the texts she believed in. I still don't know her stance.

So Jewish people have the same struggles with accepting homosexuality as the Christians do.

[tackattack]

---

Why shouldn't I read it just because I maintain there is no God? I have read it.

Whether this God actually wrote it, inspired it or actually spoke audibly to the writers my inquiries still stand.

If this God inspired these words for all of mankind then he fucked up in his endevour. You say it is not inerrant, just a book written by man, definitions or meanings of words have changed. How are you deciding what is an errant load and what is commanded by God? Oh that's right, Jewish people have the authority to tell you what God really meant. (edited to add: If you really believe that, then why are you not denouncing Jesus as the messiah? The Jews have a better grasp on the true meaning of "God's Word" and they say he AIN'T the messiah)

The Do's and Don'ts concerning the treatment of slaves is found in the bible. Would a Jew not agree? If you were supreme president of the world and were against slavery and labeled it wrong, would you allow your words to be "mis-translated" to show no condemnation of slavery, just how to treat the ones you owned, and spread around the globe without ever raising an eyebrow? Or would you take steps to ensure your true meaning was disseminated? How about if your subjects very lives were dependant upon them understanding what you want of them?

Or would you just sit back on your laurels and say "Boy those writers and translators really fucked that all up. Ehhh screw it, if people want to know if I really meant that they better seek out someone from a small sect of people who have copies of the originals ('cause I let the originals get destroyed even though I had the power to preserve them). If they cannot or will not do that then fuk 'em, let 'em burn for an eternity."?

If I were to give you your assumption that this God o' yourn is real and he inspired that book we call the Bible in order to let mankind know what it is he expects from us, and the existance of our very souls was dependant upon our understanding of it, then what you are advocating is not unlike a Wookie living on a planet with a bunch of Ewoks. It does not make sense.

But then again, maybe you just ain't explaining it right. What to take another shot at it? Maybe you can make your position on the matter a bit more coherent and cohesive.

---

I think it was pretty clear. You see God as resting on his laurels about a translation he inspired. I see him trying to correct our actions though divine punishment, and then by sending us his son to explain it, then giveing us a fresh start, then giving us our own direct phone line for answers. Just because you refuse to accept any evidence due to it's subjectivity, doesn't make it unevidenced. Your perspective of timeliness doesn't happen in your lifetime, doesn't equal lazy God. I don't see anything in nature where one-sidedness gets us anywhere productive. If you don't understand I'm not going to hold your hand. I simply tried to help in the struggle for open communication with the brainwashed. This then turned into a personal attack on my views. Are you that hateful of any religious person that you can't even accept when they're trying to help? Do you always default to attack mode? Can't you see that's why some of you can't seem to communicate very effectively with the fundies? All I've seen is pity or hate for the religious from some of you. After I smoked and took a step back I did have to retract some of what I typed. I'll just say that nature show an even keel is better than a one sided war. I could raise an army or faith believers and you can have your army of objective science. I'll just go back to goofing off and answering questions, no more soap boxes for me :S

---

I had this discussion with a friend on livejournal who is very Jewish. And when I mean very Jewish, she talks about it a lot on her LJ and you can tell it's a really important part of her identity. She went to an assembly thing where Jewish homosexuals discussed what it was like to be gay in the Jewish religion and how they struggle with prejudiced.

My friend had a hard time reconciling what she knew to be right with the texts she believed in. I still don't know her stance.

So Jewish people have the same struggles with accepting homosexuality as the Christians do.

---

And I'm not saying they don't. I'm pointing out that Christians are far more misinformed about what the actual context is generally than those of the Jewish faith. I've met far more Torah scholars than Bible scholars that aren't Jewish in my short days. I think it's a stuggle society deals with as a whole, some of those society views bleed over into our religions, then to the moral base of those who use religion as their moral center. Aside from religion, me personally, I don't have a single problem with homosexuality as it appears in real life, not the movies. I didn't feel this way before I left Christianity, because I had far too much faith and far too little knowledge. When I stepped away from religion, it didn't make sense that a loving couple who tried to put God first in their lives, would condemn them to hell. My Dad contends that God loves the people but hates their actions. I think that's crap, it's either a sin or not. From my subjective contextual perspective of the Bible and my intuition and spiritual insights, I teach my kids that there's nothing wrong with being who you are.

[Dotard]

Where is this explaination from Jesus you speak of? Where is this direct phone line you say God gave us? Are you saying the Jews are the phone line?

Why haven't you answered my questions? Why are you dodging them in favor of merely accusing me of being in attack mode? Where is this evidence you speak of?

You claim you are here to help understanding, but when asked a question you just claim the questioneer is being 'hateful'.

Can you not see you are not being very helpful.

Please scroll up, see the questions (those are sentences with one of these --> ? at the end of it) and answer them. For you to make posts as you just did completely ignoring all inquiries borders on preaching.

"God did this and that" "If you don't understand it, I ain't gonna hold your hand" (while claiming you are here to 'help') "You refuse to accept any evidence" (never once offering me any)

If you wish to explain your views to help others understand them, that's fine and dandy. Be prepared to answer questions that arise from this explaination. Refusal to answer questions and all the questions that will arise from your answers is nothing more than preaching.

Follow thru or don't play at all.

[fr0d0]

Wake up and smell the mustard Dotard ...you're "questions" were more loaded than Jordan. Don't cry like a baby because someone points that out to you. Grow some balls and own your own car crash.

Nothing wrong with asking stupid questions. Plenty wrong with asking questions you don't want to know the answers to.