FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page Proof Jesus was a False Prophet
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 4 of 13 « First 23 4 56 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-19-2005, 07:27 AM   #31
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfather
Mar 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment.

It seems like they were able to translate it just fine in Mark. Although you would expect to have differing quotes from a man made Jesus. :huh:

-Godfather
Why? That's part of the Shema, which pious Jews must recite everyday. If someone was going to invent a Jesus, why would they alter this quote?

Vorkosigan
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 07:40 AM   #32
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUGFly
When the law was given in the Torah and further modified in the books to come, it made sense. It was right. Pigs are dirty animals, shellfish are dirty animals, scavengers are extremely dirty. Eating these animals will make one sick (very high probability). Likewise, sleeping with your neighbour's wife may lead to death or severe beatings. These were appropriate rules.
Well, this is all right and well. But if the problem is dirt, why not simply tell them to clean them? Why not simply tell them about soap (this is, I think, originally an argument by Vinnie)?
Sven is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 08:55 AM   #33
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default
The transformation from dirty to clean must happen in our mind to which Jesus said that nothing that enters the body can defile the body and identified bread and wine as the body of Christ after it has been consecrated by the work of human hands and subsequently sanctified in the human mind.
Chili is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 09:47 AM   #34
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metacrock







well duh. You think maybe the bit above that says "do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin..." just might be a benifit of a doubt? Maybe?
The passage you cited clearly states that she is not to be killed if the rape happened in the countryside, but she is to be killed if the rape happened in a city.

Where is 'the benefit of the doubt' there?
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 09:52 AM   #35
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
Metacrock, where are you getting that translation of Leviticus 19:20?
From the NIV
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 08:32 PM   #36
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Hurricane Central.
Posts: 158
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorkosigan
Why? That's part of the Shema, which pious Jews must recite everyday. If someone was going to invent a Jesus, why would they alter this quote?

Vorkosigan
Good point Vorkosigan. There is no reason why they would alter that quote. My mistake.
Godfather is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 08:56 PM   #37
Talk Freethought Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Heart of the Bible Belt
Posts: 5,807
Default False Prophet Test
Quote:
Deuteronomy 18:22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Quote:
Matthew 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Either there are some mighty old folks still walking around or Jesus filled the qualifications of "false prophet".

-Atheos
Atheos is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 02:18 AM   #38
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5,815
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr
From the NIV
I suppose I should have checked BlueLetterBible.

The relevant section of Leviticus 19:20:

KJV: "she shall be scourged"

NKJV: "for this there shall be scourging"

NLT: "" (omitted)

NASB: "there shall be punishment"

Webster's: "she shall be scourged"

Young's: "an investigation there is"

Darby's: "there shall be a chastisement"

ASV: "they shall be punished"

HNV: "they shall be punished"

RSV: "an inquiry shall be held"

Vulgate: ...erm, my Latin isn't really up to this, here's the whole thing:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lev 19:20
homo si dormierit cum muliere coitu seminis quae sit ancilla etiam nubilis et tamen pretio non redempta nec libertate donata vapulabunt ambo et non morientur quia non fuit libera
Hebrew: ...ack! Link

So many versions! I'd be grateful if someone could translate the original Hebrew.

Ah, how amazingly inerrant the Bible is!
Jack the Bodiless is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 09:09 AM   #39
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atheos
Either there are some mighty old folks still walking around or Jesus filled the qualifications of "false prophet".

-Atheos


So are you a Jewish fundie? It occurs to me that this is a typical case of atheists trying to paly both sides of the street. On the one hand, as athiesst you reject the Jews too. But on the other, if you can make allience with a Jew to fustigate the Christians you will do so.

Now that statment about false prophets has not been violated by matt. not at all. First, it doen't even apply to misquoting, it applys to fortelilng events that dont' come to pass. You can't say Matt ever did that.

In terms of getting quotes wrong, it really is a matter of LXX vs the MT and also testamonia. The testimonia prove to have been used at Qumran, they were like sunday school work books. So the quotation might come out of the workbook, thus the wrong attribution because the quote from one prohet might be givne on a page titled as another prophet's work. So if the redactor knew the scripture by the testimonia then he would be apt to quote it according to that schemea.

Moreover, Matt doesnt' lead away to other Gods nor does he fortell anything that didn't come to pass, that's the real test.
Metacrock is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 09:12 AM   #40
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless
I suppose I should have checked BlueLetterBible.

The relevant section of Leviticus 19:20:

KJV: "she shall be scourged"

NKJV: "for this there shall be scourging"

NLT: "" (omitted)

NASB: "there shall be punishment"

Webster's: "she shall be scourged"

Young's: "an investigation there is"

Darby's: "there shall be a chastisement"

ASV: "they shall be punished"

HNV: "they shall be punished"

RSV: "an inquiry shall be held"

Vulgate: ...erm, my Latin isn't really up to this, here's the whole thing:


Hebrew: ...ack! Link

So many versions! I'd be grateful if someone could translate the original Hebrew.

Ah, how amazingly inerrant the Bible is!

That is not a matter of errency. Translations are not error, they are differences in translation.

moreover, when you consider that the Bible never tells us it is the Bible or to have a Bible, inerrency is really pushing it. the chruch as an instituition never made an doctrine of inerrency. that's totally a preotestant fundie thing. One need to hold to it to be a christian
Metacrock is offline  
 
Page 4 of 13 « First 23 4 56 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:04 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.