temporalillusion

You must have missed this post then. I'd like to see your reply to it.

IBelieveInHymn

Yes we do. I've already stated a major problem in "the perfect word of Allah". Allah said the Virgin Mary is a part of the Christian Holy Trinity. Allah isn't so perfect. He couldn't even distinguish a story that was around for nearly 700 years prior to Islam.

GenesisNemesis

No, you don't. Allah is perfect. Allah is god.

Kapyong

Gday,

Really?
How do you know?
Where is the evidence?


K.

Keith&Co.

Oh, Steve will happily provide links to any site that lets him know they're 'answering' his site.
So far he has:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/christian.html

Sai

"Hell-bent". yes. too cute by nearly a half.

Am I determined ( an better word than hell bent) not to believe the word of god? No. To think god is a liar? no. You theists cant get past the end of your own noses! You think that god is real and that everyone knows it.

i dont believe the word of god is a lie any more than i believe the word of the loch ness monster is a lie. there is no word of god. no Word of Nessie either.

Those of us who look at the bible without a filter ( the filter being the belief that its all 'gods" word, all true, so you must find a way to make it teue) see some things that are obvious nonsense. Like the noahs ark story. or the 6 days creation. it does call the validity of the whole, if its all supposed to be true, into serous question.

so, we take the bible as a mix of history (sort of history) geneology, poetry, nonsense, dull prose, fables etc. many authors, many centuries of writing, many sources. some of it makes sense and is reasonably true, some is just crap.

Noah's ark? childrens story. wouldnt bother calling it a "lie'.

as for your question why cant atheists see it the way you do? Take off the tinted glasses and maybe you can see what it really is.

Sai

surveillance camera. i have heard about those.

Sea

NIV "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother"

NASB "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother"

Apparently Christians who study the Bible, know ancient Hebrew and Greek, and wrote the translations disagree with you. These highly educated Christians decided "hate" is the best English representation of what Jesus said.

Take it up with the Christians who say you're wrong.

PapaverDeum

So, you state that Jesus used a form of the HEBREW root word "sin'ah"(Strong's H8135
see http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/...KJV...Normally I don't like Strongs but since it is available online at BlueLetterBible....Note that the definition there lists its english definition as a feminine noun meaning "hating, hatred, hate", "hatred..of man, god)"). It claims to derive from H8130, a verb meaning the action of hatred.

Earlier in this thread, you seemed ot think that this word equates to "loving less" ? (I see nothing about "loving less"). Where did you get the "loving less " from ? Reference please ?

You see, I also studied some of the languages and history of this period. What I learned was that the Hebrew language was no longer in common use by the time of Jesus and had not been in common use for 500 years ! I learned that these people spoke Aramaic (attested by Josephus also) about the time of Jesus (and had been for the past 500 years). Hebrew was a mostly ceremonial language used to read Torah at the synagogue and in the temple, on jewish holidays, etc.

If this position is true (and that is what I learned of this period) then it is very unlikely that Jesus would have used the word you have claimed he used.

Further, How do you know that Jesus used this word ? Is ther a Hebrew NT that I am not aware of that states this.

Please provide some evidence that Jesus used this word. Or, how about any biblical author who states that ?

you see, my experience has been quite the opposite. I have studied the history of the period, and dlearned some of the languages. Usually, most Christians that I've spoken with do not seem to be aware of it.

For example, you seem ignorant of the fact that hebrew was not in common use (was not the everyday language of people in Judea) in first century Judea)

Further, it seems to me that you are suggesting that Jesus worded a particular phrase wIth a Hebrew word when all of the NT documents list it in greek (save for the peshitta[syriac-ARAMAIC] copies and latin copies).

But I cannot fathom how you can even begin to support this. It looks to me like you are saying this only to criticize atheists. When in fact, it is YOU making unsupported assumptions. Why would you do this ?

But is there a legitimate translation problem here ?

I disagree with your translation. I think Jesus is telling them that in order to follow him they must be willing to believe Jesus's teachings about god to the point that they must be willing to at least disagree with their parents, and at most be able to severe ties with them to the point of being willing to favor Jesus's teachings over those of the religion of their parents. And "hate" might well be appropriate in this case. But how does one square this with the Torah directove to honor one's parents ? A Sticky wicket that one.


Au contraire, You haven't shown me the truth of anything. <edit>

I already assumed that what was intended by what Jesus said (see above). But you have unashamedly and boldly tried to put words in Jesus's mouth, telling us that he said X rather than what the text we have says. Further, history says that the language you use was not the everyday language at the time !!!

You have intentionally sought to deceive in order to make your hero seem more acceptable. This is what is known as bad apologetics, and is why some apologists get a reputation as being less than honest (as you are).

Just as making things up to make your hero more acceptable is unworthy of it.

John Kesler

A poster on another list that I participate on summed up the issue well: