Atlantis: What is it all about?

[FriendlyFire]

I think I can help a little. Here are some alternative English translations:
I think he's saying the "proto-Earth" is described in Gen. 1:2, not a collision

Its going to get really really weird if we start cherry picking from the hundreds of versions of genesis.
Probably best for Bezerker to choose hes "preferred" version of the bible

or dont it would be more hilarious that way, when it comes down to reconciling why there are so many different versions

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Its going to get really really weird if we start cherry picking from the hundreds of versions of genesis.
Probably best for Bezerker to choose hes "preferred" version of the bible

or dont it would be more hilarious that way, when it comes down to reconciling why there are so many different versions

This thread has been weird from the get-go (no offense to Birdjaguar intended). It's just the latest of I forget how many threads that were either initially about this, or got derailed into it. I remember years ago when Timtofly was very earnestly lobbing multiple versions of the flood myth at me to convince me it was absolutely objective fact, and wasn't letting little things like physics, chemistry, and biology get in the way.

I've been looking up various versions of the Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram, and will post the best one I can find. It does relate to some portion of recent posts.

 

[João III]

Its going to get really really weird if we start cherry picking from the hundreds of versions of genesis.
Probably best for Bezerker to choose hes "preferred" version of the bible

Different translations =/= different versions. This is why I said it's strange to have a sort of literalist debate without referring to the original Hebrew. Different translations aren't "wrong", they're exactly what they are: different translations of Hebrew into English

or dont it would be more hilarious that way, when it comes down to reconciling why there are so many different versions

It's rather easy to reconcile as there aren't different versions, but different translations. The same issues with translating the Bible into English exist when translating any language into another. A key piece of the plot in the fantastic film ARRIVAL (2016) is the problem of translating one language into another. It's not so much the words being translated, but abstract concepts and ideas

Part of why the Catholic Church didn't allow widespread translation of the Bible prior to the Reformation was the idea that different translations would result in different interpretations (and they were right. See: Protestant Reformation)

 

[FriendlyFire]

Different translations =/= different versions. This is why I said it's strange to have a sort of literalist debate without referring to the original Hebrew. Different translations aren't "wrong", they're exactly what they are: different translations of Hebrew into English

It's rather easy to reconcile as there aren't different versions, but different translations. The same issues with translating the Bible into English exist when translating any language into another. A key piece of the plot in the fantastic film ARRIVAL (2016) is the problem of translating one language into another. It's not so much the words being translated, but abstract concepts and ideas

Part of why the Catholic Church didn't allow widespread translation of the Bible prior to the Reformation was the idea that different translations would result in different interpretations (and they were right. See: Protestant Reformation)

The Bible has been reconciled multiple times due to the insane diviation of the text
The Jews did it for the story of moses when there was 4 Major different versions and numerous minor versions
The entire Niacin council was formed to Cannonise the Bible because there was so many versions of the Bible just a three centuaries after Jesus death
Then we can talk about forgeries, anomalies in writing style which everyone whom agrees were inserted into the text.

If your interested in this I suggest doing some homework first.

 

[João III]

The Bible has been reconciled multiple times due to the insane diviation of the text

Ah, so we're shifting the goalposts away from differences arising from translation?

The Jews did it for the story of moses when there was 4 Major different versions and numerous minor versions.

Are you referring to the "documentary hypothesis", which posits four sources, not versions?

The entire Niacin council was formed to Cannonise the Bible because there was so many versions of the Bible just a three centuaries after Jesus death
Then we can talk about forgeries, anomalies in writing style which everyone whom agrees were inserted into the text.

The purpose of the Council of Nicaea was to establish Christian doctrine, not canon; hence the Nicene Creed. In fact, there is no record of any discussion of the Biblical canon at the Council. Not to mention that the Book of Genesis is Old Testament and Christianity is primarily centered around the New Testament, which was written in (Koine) Greek.

If your interested in this I suggest doing some homework first.

You'll have to forgive me if I question the credentials of someone who not only doesn't understand the Council of Nicaea, but confuses Nicene with Niacin. If you're interested in this, I suggest doing some homework first

 

[Birdjaguar]

The process of selecting the sacred books for the NT was a slow and dynamic process that took place over several centuries. In any case by the middle of the 3rd C, the NT was mostly in place.

On point, though, the translation of those books has always been varied and a bit loose with each author knowing best. Of course, translating the words does not always translate the meaning behind them. "God's wind" being an excellent example.

 

[FriendlyFire]

The process of selecting the sacred books for the NT was a slow and dynamic process that took place over several centuries. In any case by the middle of the 3rd C, the NT was mostly in place.
On point, though, the translation of those books has always been varied and a bit loose with each author knowing best. Of course, translating the words does not always translate the meaning behind them. "God's wind" being an excellent example.

I thought that the first standaised Bible was created at Nicene with the rejection of certain books and the attempt to resolve issues with the divided early Christian belief system.
I do remember that one major Christian belief was that there were two Gods and this was declared as herecy and eventually completely stamped out. Along with the Gnositics and many of there wild christian beliefs

 

[El_Machinae]

The translation only matters with regards to elucidating what the people who compiled it believed. Much of the compiling was done after they'd forgotten their own history.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Ah, so we're shifting the goalposts away from differences arising from translation?
Are you referring to the "documentary hypothesis", which posits four sources, not versions?

Its been a long time since I read up on this.
Yes your right 4 sources of the story, which had to be redacted to make them all fit together

Essentially Bible had to be redacted mutiple times due to the divergence of its contents.
The divergance of the Bible is more then just simple translation problems.

 

[João III]

I thought that the first standaised Bible was created at Nicene with the rejection of certain books

No

and the attempt to resolve issues with the divided early Christian belief system.

Yes

I do remember that one major Christian belief was that there were two Gods and this was declared as herecy and eventually completely stamped out.

You are thinking of Arianism, which held that Jesus (Son of God) was not co-eternal with God the Father. This is what's known as a nontrinitarian position. And while Arianism was gradually stamped out, you can still see nontrinitarianism today, such as in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Along with the Gnositics and many of there wild christian beliefs

Gnosticism is also still practiced today, among the Mandaeans in Iraq

Its been a long time since I read up on this.

I can tell

Yes your right 4 sources of the story, which had to be redacted to make them all fit together

Essentially Bible had to be redacted mutiple times due to the divergence of its contents.

You speak with such certainty of something that is only a hypothesis

Simply insisting that the divergence is just due to translation is ignorance

That is not what I am saying. I am saying there are divergences in the English translations due to the nature of translating one language into another. Aside from King James supremacists, almost no one disputes this.

It's rather bold of you to speak on ignorance when you have shown yourself to be so ignorant. Please, take your own advice and do some homework

 

[Edmund Ironside]

The Bible has been reconciled multiple times due to the insane diviation of the text

Can you clarify what you mean by this? From what I have heard the variation between the bible texts is incredibly small compared to texts from the same period.

In this video Dr. Dan Block talks about how they deal with variations and how minor and rare they are generally:

For 'insane deviations' from texts look at the Anglo-Saxon chronicle (which was much more contemporary relatively). In the Mercian copy of the chronicle Aethelflaed is a major figure, in the Wessex copy of the chronicle she isn't mentioned!

 

[FriendlyFire]

No
That is not what I am saying. I am saying there are divergences in the English translations due to the nature of translating one language into another. Aside from King James supremacists, almost no one disputes this.

Oh right, I misread that and shoot wayyy off into the how the bible was created.
Rather then what you meant which referred to our current modern versions of the bible

 

[FriendlyFire]

Can you clarify what you mean by this? From what I have heard the variation between the bible texts is incredibly small compared to texts from the same period.
In this video Dr. Dan Block talks about how they deal with variations and how minor and rare they are generally:
For 'insane deviations' from texts look at the Anglo-Saxon chronicle (which was much more contemporary relatively). In the Mercian copy of the chronicle Aethelflaed is a major figure, in the Wessex copy of the chronicle she isn't mentioned!

Sure, but Iam talking about early Christian
The example I gave was the belief in two Gods, and the Gnostic bibles

Then due to the divergence of bibles what happens is that its get redacted.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The text of the Bible (OT and NT) has been very consistent over time with few changes or redactions. The interpretation of the texts has been all over the place with many heresies and divergent ideas. The Catholic Bible and Protestant Bible each have different books but the books that cross over are essentially the same. Our own @Plotinus wrote a wonderful book on the subject of how Christian thought developed over time. Seek: The History of Christian Thought by Hill. It covers 2000 years of how Christians have thought about their beliefs. Christianity has been dynamic over time.

 

[FriendlyFire]

The text of the Bible (OT and NT) has been very consistent over time with few changes or redactions. The interpretation of the texts has been all over the place with many heresies and divergent ideas. The Catholic Bible and Protestant Bible each have different books but the books that cross over are essentially the same. Our own @Plotinus wrote a wonderful book on the subject of how Christian thought developed over time. Seek: The History of Christian Thought by Hill. It covers 2000 years of how Christians have thought about their beliefs. Christianity has been dynamic over time.

Once the Bible gets redacted it becomes fixed and its replication from then on is very stable. I totally agree with this.
The exmaple I would give since we talked about it is the two Genesis creation stories which have contridictions, this would have been the result of divergence and then later being redacted together. It makes sense to me why there is duplication, contridiction and errors in the Bible since it was created using this process. A similar proccess would happen again with the New testerment, anything that didnt make the cut into the Bible would by default be considered heresy and stamped out

I would consider this a kind of development, divergence, then refinement, and finally redaction process. If that make sense.

 

[Birdjaguar]

IIRC Genesis has multiple authors and the accepted version just "stacks them" one after the other. The Church long ago explained away the differences. to my knowledge there is no previous version of Genesis to the one we have now.

 

[r16]

turkish school system has always said the Bibles were brought down to 4 .

 

[Birdjaguar]

turkish school system has always said the Bibles were brought down to 4 .

??? I do not understand.

 

[r16]

many versions of Bibles . A council and only 4 will be accepted as true and all the others are false . ı presume they then formed parts of sections of the Bible , that single volume ı see in the movies .

 

[EnglishEdward]

Are you talking about the Gospels of: Mark, Luke, Mathew and John?

The Gospel of Thomas was not included.