Unless your source is a convincing decepticon : ), posing as the real Deal, Cliffy.
Why King James version, why not the Sinai bible?
- Thread starter Twila
- Start date
Unless your source is a convincing decepticon : ), posing as the real Deal, Cliffy.
“What are the facts? Again and again and again – what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history” – what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!”
--Robert A. Heinlein
--Robert A. Heinlein
Ha ha. Clearly the first female governor of Texas had a sense of humour!
No she wasn't. Left wingers can be dumb, but they aren't that dumb. Clearly she was joking (if she even said it at all). It was more likely a Republican attributing a silly saying to a Democrat to smear her good name.
Back to the Sinai Bible for a second, you can read about it here. The Bible is in Greek, so unless you speak Greek it's not as good as English translations such as the Queen James version. You may as well be reading the Latin version.
Why the King James version? Because it's in English!
Last edited:
The most reliable modern version of the Bible.. drawn from original texts in the Revised Standard Edition.. written in the late 19th Century and correcting some errors and omissions in the King James Version.. and in more accessible form than the Douay Rheims Bible which it supplanted.
The Sinai Bible sounds like it fits in with the Gnostic Gospels.. which were found to be forgeries in support of heresies.. Gnosticism, Arianism, Nestorianism.. and supressed by the Church. There is a rampant attempt to 'reform' the Christ story as that of a gifted rabbi, with no divine presumption.
Of course it is intended to sap Christianity of its transcendence, and it claim as the unique source of Truth. It would simply become another speculative philosophy is such a case. You can imagine who would be behind such a thing.
The Sinai Bible sounds like it fits in with the Gnostic Gospels.. which were found to be forgeries in support of heresies.. Gnosticism, Arianism, Nestorianism.. and supressed by the Church. There is a rampant attempt to 'reform' the Christ story as that of a gifted rabbi, with no divine presumption.
Of course it is intended to sap Christianity of its transcendence, and it claim as the unique source of Truth. It would simply become another speculative philosophy is such a case. You can imagine who would be behind such a thing.
Last edited:
It's all kind of irrelevant. If people haven't figured out how to coexist together by now, we likely will kill each other off and Earth and its surviving life can continue evolving. Doesn't look like that's happening any time soon.
Do we really need to have faith that some bunch of invisible and likely, imaginary spooks caused everything to exist, including the evil that everyone's gotten all a nal about? No. Some of us silly humans can actually get along without some vague, polysemantic at times, anathematic at other times, "holy" library occupant. These same silly humans can also actually be happy letting others live their own lives.
Do we really need to have faith that some bunch of invisible and likely, imaginary spooks caused everything to exist, including the evil that everyone's gotten all a nal about? No. Some of us silly humans can actually get along without some vague, polysemantic at times, anathematic at other times, "holy" library occupant. These same silly humans can also actually be happy letting others live their own lives.
So because you have no faith, nobody should have it? Need some help getting off your high horse?
I have no problems with people of faith except when they interfere with my life as Islam and Christianity have. If you have faith, why not keep it to yourself? By trying to convince, coerce, or force others, like me, into having faith in the first place, the faithful have opened a can of worms that no-one is happy eating.
Have faith if you like, but keep it to yourself. I have different faiths.
And, BTW, I never suggested that anyone else can't have faith in whatever they choose; I am simply offering my opinions. Don't like em, don't read em.
Where have I EVER done that?
Touche. You should take your own advice regarding your first paragraph.
Done which?
My opinion is interfering with your life? Oh, I feel so powerful!
I don't know your political ideology, but if you hold a totalitarian ideology (which you likely don't), then your opinion can interfere with someone's life.
Ideas are more powerful than guns. ~ Joseph Stalin
He meant "Have faith if you like, but keep it to yourself. " but you knew that huh?
By the way...take the s out of your youtube link.....it's screwing up the page....
Actually....don't.....this thread deserves it.....lol
By the way...take the s out of your youtube link.....it's screwing up the page....
Actually....don't.....this thread deserves it.....lol
...if they let it. I am largely swayed by evidence, not so much by opinion.
An idea differs from an opinion. And I agree with Stalin.
I had the idea that's what he meant. As I said, though, I have no faith in gods. I simply offer my opinions on what I think faith is and does.
What? I tried posting a couple youtubes and neither showed up from what I can see. The page looks normal to me.
Jesus Christ - salam to him - spoke the Syro-Aramic which was the language spoken by the Children of Israel following their return from the captivity of Nabuchodosnosor; so it is the same language of this Sinai gospel.
While King James version is a translation to English from intermediary source: not the original one; because the origianl one is lost; the Latin translation is the intermediary source; this Latin had been the translation from Syro- Chaldaic or Aramaic language.
But where is this Siani gospel? And why is it not translated to English and other languages?
Of course there are many false gospels, like that which is called Barnaba's Gospel; it is a fabricated one.
While King James version is a translation to English from intermediary source: not the original one; because the origianl one is lost; the Latin translation is the intermediary source; this Latin had been the translation from Syro- Chaldaic or Aramaic language.
But where is this Siani gospel? And why is it not translated to English and other languages?
Of course there are many false gospels, like that which is called Barnaba's Gospel; it is a fabricated one.
The truth is only relative to the beholder. Once it is spoken or written, it becomes an opinion and everybody has an opinion.
BL, if you need to ask that then you're either one of 'them', or you're exceptionally not with it today. Not sure which at this point.
But WTH...
IMO, the extreme side of Evangelicals is equal to and just as batshyte crazy as the extreme side of Islam, Judaism and a lot of other religions.
There's a third option. It's the "f*cking imbecile" option.
Worth serious consideration.