A "gotcha" argument for Satan
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-04-2015, 05:23 PM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
(13-04-2015 04:56 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  What Q will say (and he will actually have a valid point) is that those are not the same verses in parallel -- they are different verses. What he meant was to take one verse, say Matthew 5:44, and compare different English translations of that same verse. I think if you did that, you would still find significant differences, but what you are doing above is cheating. He didn't claim that different verses would say the same thing.

I thought the same thing at first but look closer; there are 2 translations of each verse given and that's what is being compared.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2015, 05:30 PM (This post was last modified: 13-04-2015 05:52 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
(13-04-2015 05:23 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 04:56 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  What Q will say (and he will actually have a valid point) is that those are not the same verses in parallel -- they are different verses. What he meant was to take one verse, say Matthew 5:44, and compare different English translations of that same verse. I think if you did that, you would still find significant differences, but what you are doing above is cheating. He didn't claim that different verses would say the same thing.

I thought the same thing at first but look closer; there are 2 translations of each verse given and that's what is being compared.

Did I fuck up the presentation? Seemed pretty clear to me but I think I see the source of the confusion. For you lucky bastards who have never felt any reason to understand the notation used to indicate different translations of the Bibbie like (KJV) and (NIV) please read:

(13-04-2015 04:41 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Matthew 5:44
But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you (NIV)
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; (KJV)
as

Matthew 5:44 - New International Version (NIV): But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you
Matthew 5:44 - King James Version (KJV): But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

The fact that both Grasshopper and unfogged, neither of which is Q-stupid, both saw the different translations as entirely different verses speaks even more to the point than the litany of examples I supplied. Big Grin

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2015, 05:20 AM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
(13-04-2015 01:54 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 06:30 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  As the doctrines coming out the same way no matter the translation is evidence for God...
What would you call it if the doctrines come out differently?

[Image: ChristianityBranches.svg]
[Image: Protestant_branches.svg]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_denomination

I don't believe you are trying to obfuscate my point, but you may not be understanding it.

We can look at any 20 of the translations cited right now, put the same verses from those Bible in parallel, and they will come out the same.

Do all atheists have the same degree of agnosticism in their makeup? How about apatheism? Rather a moot point you've made--I'm saying categorically that we can look in any English Bible and find the same text.

I'm struggling to understand what you are getting at. You say "the same doctrine" but different branches of Christianity break apart based on doctrinal disagreements. You say "the same text" and yet we have web sites dedicated to parallel translations and bibles in earlier languages because nuances differ from version to version. I think you are saying that no matter which bible version you read you only find it strengthens your belief in your existing opinion. Is that more or less what you are trying to say?

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2015, 10:24 AM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
(13-04-2015 05:23 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 04:56 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  What Q will say (and he will actually have a valid point) is that those are not the same verses in parallel -- they are different verses. What he meant was to take one verse, say Matthew 5:44, and compare different English translations of that same verse. I think if you did that, you would still find significant differences, but what you are doing above is cheating. He didn't claim that different verses would say the same thing.

I thought the same thing at first but look closer; there are 2 translations of each verse given and that's what is being compared.

You are absolutely right. I was guilty of "superficial reading". My bad, and my apologies to GirlyMan. As Emily Litella used to say -- "Never mind".

Blush
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2015, 10:31 AM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
RE Luke 1:28 -- it is a major problem for some Catholics (like our friends over at Suscipe Domine) that both of these (Protestant) translations say "highly favoured" rather than "full of grace" (as in the Douay-Rheims). They actually use that passage (and a few others) as a sort of shibboleth to determine whether or not a given translation is acceptable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2015, 01:28 PM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
Put simply, there are formal and dynamic translations. Dynamic translations are paraphrases where someone takes the general swipe of a sentence or sentences and tries to place it in context for the readership they are targeting. If the Bible says "heart" or "mind" and the tribe you are translating for says your foot is the seat of your emotions, dynamic paraphrase translators render the verse as "Love the Lord with all of your foot" and etc. to those peoples.

The NIV is indeed the most popular English version of the Bible today. With respect to my many listeners who use the NIV as their daily study Bible, I've probably told people in 25 of my last 30 sermons to read a formal version where the people are really serious about going word-for-word and not "this sentence kind of says X". The NASB and NKJV are two great modern formal versions. I believe you will find the KJV lines up with those two in the manner in which you are inquiring. For this reason, I have not read the NIV for many years.

However, in the Matthew 5:44 argument, I can get that one tells me the exactly right thing to do with people groups but that the two versions agree we are to love (pray on behalf of our enemies). I can't imagine any English Bible, even the worst offender of a paraphrase Bible, saying we are to hate our enemies (in Matthew chapter 5).

I'm not trying to play NTS here. I'm saying formal English Bibles are like someone testifying in court under oath when answering "What exactly did the plaintiff say to you when you spoke to them" as opposed to "Let me tell you what I think he might of said..."

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2015, 01:30 PM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
(14-04-2015 05:20 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 01:54 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I don't believe you are trying to obfuscate my point, but you may not be understanding it.

We can look at any 20 of the translations cited right now, put the same verses from those Bible in parallel, and they will come out the same.

Do all atheists have the same degree of agnosticism in their makeup? How about apatheism? Rather a moot point you've made--I'm saying categorically that we can look in any English Bible and find the same text.

I'm struggling to understand what you are getting at. You say "the same doctrine" but different branches of Christianity break apart based on doctrinal disagreements. You say "the same text" and yet we have web sites dedicated to parallel translations and bibles in earlier languages because nuances differ from version to version. I think you are saying that no matter which bible version you read you only find it strengthens your belief in your existing opinion. Is that more or less what you are trying to say?

Yes, if that is true both for people whose doctrine is correct and incorrect. For example, someone who says they love the Lord but that Jesus rose from the dead as a metaphor only I would consider incorrect no matter what version they read, because they will keep plying the same mistakes from the same verses in different versions.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-04-2015, 01:46 PM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
(14-04-2015 01:30 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(14-04-2015 05:20 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  I'm struggling to understand what you are getting at. You say "the same doctrine" but different branches of Christianity break apart based on doctrinal disagreements. You say "the same text" and yet we have web sites dedicated to parallel translations and bibles in earlier languages because nuances differ from version to version. I think you are saying that no matter which bible version you read you only find it strengthens your belief in your existing opinion. Is that more or less what you are trying to say?

Yes, if that is true both for people whose doctrine is correct and incorrect. For example, someone who says they love the Lord but that Jesus rose from the dead as a metaphor only I would consider incorrect no matter what version they read, because they will keep plying the same mistakes from the same verses in different versions.

That's not a rational means of judgement on a person. You're making assumptions based on poor evidence and stipulations. Because I see you say that you read the bible and believe Jesus was real and he rose from the dead doesn't mean I assume you read Don Quixote and assume Don Quixote is real.(which the book proclaims, it states he is a real person in the opening of the book which is why I specifically use that as a reference and not any random text)

You don't demonstrate often having an open nonjudgmental approach to what people think and how things work. It's a flaw that isn't helpful to best understanding what is more fittingly true.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2015, 02:14 PM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
(14-04-2015 01:46 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(14-04-2015 01:30 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Yes, if that is true both for people whose doctrine is correct and incorrect. For example, someone who says they love the Lord but that Jesus rose from the dead as a metaphor only I would consider incorrect no matter what version they read, because they will keep plying the same mistakes from the same verses in different versions.

That's not a rational means of judgement on a person. You're making assumptions based on poor evidence and stipulations. Because I see you say that you read the bible and believe Jesus was real and he rose from the dead doesn't mean I assume you read Don Quixote and assume Don Quixote is real.(which the book proclaims, it states he is a real person in the opening of the book which is why I specifically use that as a reference and not any random text)

You don't demonstrate often having an open nonjudgmental approach to what people think and how things work. It's a flaw that isn't helpful to best understanding what is more fittingly true.

Actually, and I apologize in advance for sounding so black-and-white, my assumptions are based from anecdotal evidence--talking to several hundred or 1,000 or more individuals regarding multiple doctrines. I've had likely many, many, many, many more conversations with JW's and Mormons, etc. than you have--simply because I'm an active witness for Jesus--where we together look at the same verses and they something like, "I can't address what you said at this time but I know I'm right."

May I give you a specific example? When someone says they must have both trust in Jesus and good deeds to be saved, and I show them Romans 4:

Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness… (verses 4-5)

and say, "Gosh, it looks like one can do ZERO works and be saved here..."

What is your interpretation of these verses?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes The Q Continuum's post
15-04-2015, 02:26 PM
RE: A "gotcha" argument for Satan
Hey Q - what is your interpretation of these verses?

James 2 New International Version (NIV)
14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Have to love to selective verse picking to make yourself look smart (or even somewhat sane). Quoting the bible with atheists will get you nowhere.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: