rah

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] rah@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

everyone else got it just fine on the first pass

I'm not sure how you determined that but it doesn't make any difference to our communication. You're not making sense to me. If you want to communicate with me, I need to understand you.

I don't think you want to communicate.

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

It doesn't need to be simpler, it needs to make sense.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (8 children)

You're not making any sense.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

a thousand years ago

Again, we're talking about different things.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (10 children)

Did you not understand what you were asked?

No. You haven't explained who is doing the vetting you're asking about, which is critical to answering.

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

newer versions

So not the same scriptures then.

The texts change in response to our interpretation over time

New texts being created is not the same thing as changing texts. People don't go around with a pen and update pages.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (12 children)

No you didn't.

[–] rah@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago
[–] rah@feddit.uk 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

me and my wife

As her legal wife

we got married

You got married? In a religious ceremony in a Christian church? Or you had a civil ceremony and are now in a civil partnership?

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

You're wrong. As shown by the source you yourself gave.

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 2 years ago (14 children)

Vetted by whom?

[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 2 years ago (6 children)

there is no such thing as an "original" Bible text

I never said there was. And the existence of more than one accepted scripture doesn't contradict what I said. Each of those scriptures will not adapt to its environment.

there'd be no way to perfectly preserve their meaning over the many of thousands of years they developed.

Again, we're talking about different things. You're talking about long periods of time where human civilisation develops, where scriptures are translated, reinterpreted, etc. into new scriptures. I'm saying that the King James Bible of the 1950s was the same King James Bible of the 1970s and didn't adapt in response to the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

view more: ‹ prev next ›