Presbyterian Church U.S.A recognizes gay marriage

[Victorian Gray]

I said that because I though you were getting too emotional.

btw, congratulations on derailing the thread. I'd give it about 7 out of 10.

 

[Retro Rob]

That makes absolutely no difference to my point, unless you honestly believe a large enough multitude of scholars (to ensure that each had a small enough portion to copy to ensure perfect reproduction) were always on hand to make a new copy.

Interesting point. I am not sure how many copyists were on hand at any given time, but I am fairly confident that the portions available during copying were checked.

Of course, copying errors are bound to creep up into anything, but normally, whole words aren't left out or exchanged...just misspellings most of the time. When I copy things, its always spelling errors that I make, not entire ideas missing/exchanged.

At any rate, it still doesn't support the overall point (not saying that you're making this point) that those errors were so significant that we cannot trust what we currently have.

 

[Meghan54]

Scholars in this out-of-the-way corner of the Hebrew University campus have been quietly at work for 53 years on one of the most ambitious projects attempted in biblical studies — publishing the authoritative edition of the Old Testament, also known as the Hebrew Bible, and tracking every single evolution of the text over centuries and millennia.

And it has evolved, despite deeply held beliefs to the contrary.


For many Jews and Christians, religion dictates that the words of the Bible in the original Hebrew are divine, unaltered and unalterable.



For Orthodox Jews, the accuracy is considered so inviolable that if a synagogue's Torah scroll is found to have a minute error in a single letter, the entire scroll is unusable.


But the ongoing work of the academic detectives of the Bible Project, as their undertaking is known, shows that this text at the root of Judaism, Christianity and Islam was somewhat fluid for long periods of its history, and that its transmission through the ages was messier and more human than most of us imagine.




Inevitable hiccups, scribal errors

The scholars note where the text we have now differs from older versions — differences that are evidence of the inevitable textual hiccups, scribal errors and other human fingerprints that became part of the Bible as it was passed on, orally and in writing.


A Microsoft Excel chart projected on one wall on a recent Sunday showed variations in a single phrase from the Book of Malachi, a prophet.


The verse in question, from the text we know today, makes reference to "those who swear falsely." The scholars have found that in quotes from rabbinic writings around the 5th century A.D., the phrase was longer: "those who swear falsely in my name."


In another example, this one from the Book of Deuteronomy, a passage referring to commandments given by God "to you" once read "to us," a significant change in meaning.


Other differences are more striking.


The Book of Jeremiah is now one-seventh longer than the one that appears in some of the 2,000-year-old manuscripts known as the Dead Sea Scrolls.



Some verses, including ones containing a prophecy about the seizure and return of Temple implements by Babylonian soldiers, appear to have been added after the events happened.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44117239/...ars-seek-correct-mistakes-bible/#.U6ZUHLGpEyg




Maybe you need to educate yourself, Rob, about the problems the multiple translations the Bible has been subjected to over the centuries have created. The King James version is one of the worst attempts at translations, in part due to words and concepts being changed, ignored or replaced to suit the translators and the time period and their belief system at the time, or the word had meaning when originally written that changed by the time the KV translation was made.

 

[Retro Rob]

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44117239/...ars-seek-correct-mistakes-bible/#.U6ZUHLGpEyg




Maybe you need to educate yourself, Rob, about the problems the multiple translations the Bible has been subjected to over the centuries have created. The King James version is one of the worst attempts at translations, in part due to words and concepts being changed, ignored or replaced to suit the translators and the time period and their belief system at the time, or the word had meaning when originally written that changed by the time the KV translation was made.

I've been well-aware of the KJV for quite some time. As far as this line here goes:

Some verses, including ones containing a prophecy about the seizure and return of Temple implements by Babylonian soldiers, appear to have been added after the events happened.

...scholars generally don't believe God inspired prophecy because we know humans cannot make dead-on, long term predictions. Nothing was added "after the events"...they just rather assume it was added later, due to the fact it was prophetic.

Had that NOT been a prophetic utterance, they wouldn't say anything about it. But here we go again, axing the book...thinking we know more about it than the person(s) who wrote it.

Move it along...nothing to see here.

 

[sportage]

No one group nor religion nor class nor race nor sex owns marriage.
So none of the above can say what marriage is, isn't, should be, shouldn't be.
If marriage was "owned" thru bible quotes then Atheist would not be allowed to marry.
Unless the Atheist owned marriage.
And I love how groups like the National Organization for Marriage think in their little pea like brains that they somehow possess sole ownership of marriage. Which they do not.
Marriage is like a supernova ever changing ever expanding.
The religious bible thumpers should just shut up and be thankful they are allowed to participate in marriage.
No one owns this bus. Anyone can ride.

And yes, one day even polygamy could be part of legal marriage.
That too could happen. And that should be just fine if and when.

As we explore the universe, and our technology may reveal us to other intelligence lifeforms throughout the universe, we could one day face marriage between two intelligence lifeforms not of the human species.
You know... like Jim and Tammy baker.
So that day too might come our way when marriage is once again expanded to include a human being and an intelligent caring loving hot piece of slimy green goo from the corners of our universe. Probably named Bob.

The National Organization for Marriage and the religious fundies will one day look back on simple same sex marriage victory as those good ole days.

 

[mikeymikec]

Interesting point. I am not sure how many copyists were on hand at any given time, but I am fairly confident that the portions available during copying were checked.

Of course, copying errors are bound to creep up into anything, but normally, whole words aren't left out or exchanged...just misspellings most of the time. When I copy things, its always spelling errors that I make, not entire ideas missing/exchanged.

Was one multitude of people employed in the monumental and tedious task to write the copy, then another multitude used to error-check it with the previous copy, or was it just one multitude copying and checking their own collective work?

(re: text in bold) Rob, if you have faith that whichever modern translation of the Bible you use is a faithful / accurate enough reproduction of God's intention/word, I wouldn't try to convince you not to have faith, but your faith/confidence has no place in a logical discussion regarding the potential accuracy of the Bible when put up against the very high expectations that many people have for it (ie. they believe it to be the infallible word of God).

You didn't want to get involved in a logical argument regarding the difficulties of translation, citing your ignorance on that topic, yet I'm pretty sure you haven't been involved in the monumental task of making a copy of a Bible, yet you claim to have knowledge enough to participate in this facet of the discussion.

At any rate, it still doesn't support the overall point (not saying that you're making this point)that those errors were so significant that we cannot trust what we currently have.

Whose overall point are you replying to then (since you acknowledge it isn't mine)? If you want to have a logical discussion regarding the points I made, please address the actual points I was making, and don't ignore half of what I have said.

 

[justoh]

I found Jesus (with someone else).

 

[schmuckley]

Mark 12:28-31

So Jesus said the most important commandments were to love. Therefore Jesus would feel that the love felt between two men or between two women is of far greater importance than anything stated in the Old Testament.

wrong.
Jesus was God;God said such things are an abomination.
That's how it is.
He never said anything to contradict what was previous.

 

[justoh]

Don't ever leave me Jesus
I couldn't stand to see you go
My heart would simply snap my wound if you walk on out that door
I promise I'll be good to you, keep you warm at night.
Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, why don't we just shut off the lights.

 

[mikeymikec]

justoh, please stop thread crapping.

 

[shira]

wrong.
Jesus was God;God said such things are an abomination.
That's how it is.
He never said anything to contradict what was previous.

How's that Jesus stuff working out for you? Sounds like you're a pretty unhappy dude.

 

[schmuckley]

How's that Jesus stuff working out for you? Sounds like you're a pretty unhappy dude.

I think your Spidey-sense is off;I'm a very happy man

Am i happy that a so-called Church of God is going against his will? No.

They don't make my world go 'round though...
It's sad..truly.

God's word is God's word.
Leviticus 18:22King James Version (KJV)

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.




Romans 1:26-28King James Version (KJV)

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;


Jesus was God..Like he's gonna go against hisself or something. umm.. NO