Well, then the King James is flawed with that translation. How can it be trusted to be accurate in other cases if it gets a commandment wrong?
How powerful is Satan?
- Thread starter El_Machinae
- Start date
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
You just made my argument for me. The New King James says 'murder'. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus 20;&version=31;
Thanks for verifying for me why it is a much better research version than most other versions.
Hopefully now you understand that there is a difference between the "King James Version' and the "New King James Version'.
If I can be of further assistance in educating you just ask.
You just made my argument for me. The New King James says 'murder'. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus 20;&version=31;
Thanks for verifying for me why it is a much better research version than most other versions.
Hopefully now you understand that there is a difference between the "King James Version' and the "New King James Version'.
If I can be of further assistance in educating you just ask.
Well, yes, the point of course is that there are fundamental differences between all versions of the bible. So a "Christian" using the King James would have a serious point of contention with a "Christian" using the New King James. Which one of these "Christians" is the true Christian?
For those who use "Shalt Not Kill", any kind of soldiering profession would be un-Christian, whereas this might be permissible if you use interpretation "Shalt Not Murder".
Not to mention the differences I can imagine there are with more esoteric versions of the bible!
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
They are both probably true christians, however, it is incumbent upon them to do some research if they want to know the truth. Since ancient hebrew and greek had words that can actually be translated several different ways, the two versions are not that fundamentally different. Murder, or killing someone in cold blood are essentially the same thing. However, if one digs deeper with a study guide concordance to trace the root word used in the original document, one will find that it is indeed 'murder' that is a slightly closer description.
What you are pointing out is a very slight discrepancy in translation.....not a fundamental difference.
Then in such cases it is also to have a good knowledge of other biblical scriptures in order to put such situations into context.
Did the Hebrews wage war? Yes. Did God condone this? Yes. What did Jesus say to the Roman Soldier? Answer: He praised him for his faith...not gave him a hard time because he was a soldier.
Get the idea? However, without more biblical knowledge one can easily fall into the trap of taking such scripture out of context like you would do here.
So if separate people independently do Bible "research", you can guarantee me that they will reach the same conclusions about the "true word" of the Bible?
odintheking
Lighting the way...
But I am real. And no one can defeat me in hand to hand combat.
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
If you had a lisp I bet you'd feel a bit "Thor" the next day though (bad pun I know).
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
How do you take away family? If you take away family, the humans in question would just form new families. It's in our nature. We travel in packs; we form tightly knit social groups.
An isolated human is bound to sin, as that is not the natural state to be in for a human being. We need other people.
Eran of Arcadia said:
How/when did this happen? What else did he say?
Why? If people can do bad acts and good acts, why is it beyond the pale to suggest that people might be bad, or evil, because of their evil acts?
So is the idea that the universe exists. So is the idea that we are having a conversation right now - it's ultimately an unprovable belief. That doesn't automatically make it false, however.
Perhaps you could explain why the concept of good or evil people is lacking in substance?
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
If you do not assume that the Universe exists, then you must also concede that it is impossible to know any sort of truth at all.
This would prevent you from making any sort of claim about the Universe at all. You could make them, but they would have no substance.
If you want to be able to say anything meaningful about the Universe at all, you must concede and assume that it exists.
Well, so we don't get stuck in semantics, define your own personal conception of "good person" and "evil person".
What a complete intellectual copout.
Pretty much.
I define an evil person as a person who has committed an evil act, and faces the consequences of that act. I define a good person as someone who does not face the consequences of any evil acts, either because he has not committed any, or because he has been forgiven for the evil acts he has committed.
Why? Obviously I believe that you exist, otherwise I wouldn't waste my time talking to you. But I don't believe it is possible for me to "know" that you do. Ultimately, everything you think you "know", you really just believe - everything you think is based upon assumptions, upon basic beliefs that are inherently unprovable in an objective sense.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
We all assume that the Universe exists before engaging in a discussion - if your position is that it does not exist, then, by extension, all the arguments you make are meaningless.
You have to assume something
"The Universe exists" is a good start that we can all agree on. If somebody doesn't, they have nothing to say, so it doesn't matter anyway.
You have to assume something
"The Universe exists" is a good start that we can all agree on. If somebody doesn't, they have nothing to say, so it doesn't matter anyway.Believing my senses are roughly accurate is one thing. Accepting things that can't be senses are true is an additional assumption. I prefer to make as few assumptions as possible, and I think that philosophy is a lot more sensible than your "accept one thing, then accept any stupid thing you like" philosophy (or at least what you are suggesting).
-Drachasor
SickCycle
Prince
Satan is what I like to call a role model..
More realisticly it's the church itself that keeps the idea of "Satan" alive and well, it isn't devil worshipers or some cult groups that have some twisted version of the bible, it's the church for the sole purpose of keeping you in line and making you fearful of not believing in there system.
That's prob to much for you peeps tho.
Satan, the Devil, Evil is inside every human being, it isn't some wicked omni-potent being that makes people do bad things, all people have the capacity for good and evil, what you choose to do with your life and where it goes is a mixture of who you were when you got here and your environment.
I'm not posting this as a debate I'm posting it as a fact you can accept or deny, I dun much care
More realisticly it's the church itself that keeps the idea of "Satan" alive and well, it isn't devil worshipers or some cult groups that have some twisted version of the bible, it's the church for the sole purpose of keeping you in line and making you fearful of not believing in there system.
That's prob to much for you peeps tho.
Satan, the Devil, Evil is inside every human being, it isn't some wicked omni-potent being that makes people do bad things, all people have the capacity for good and evil, what you choose to do with your life and where it goes is a mixture of who you were when you got here and your environment.
I'm not posting this as a debate I'm posting it as a fact you can accept or deny, I dun much care
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Satan is what I like to call a role model..
More realisticly it's the church itself that keeps the idea of "Satan" alive and well, it isn't devil worshipers or some cult groups that have some twisted version of the bible, it's the church for the sole purpose of keeping you in line and making you fearful of not believing in there system.
That's prob to much for you peeps tho.
Satan, the Devil, Evil is inside every human being, it isn't some wicked omni-potent being that makes people do bad things, all people have the capacity for good and evil, what you choose to do with your life and where it goes is a mixture of who you were when you got here and your environment.
I'm not posting this as a debate I'm posting it as a fact you can accept or deny, I dun much care
Your niaveity is rather funny to be honest. I most certainly gurantee you that 'devil worshipers' and cult types do indeed exist and are quite interested in promoting the existance of Satan as much as they can.
And for what its worth, you can either accept that fact or not. But all you need to do is google 'satanic murders' or 'satanic cults' to realize that it is indeed true.
Pokurcz
Emperor
Well I find your naivety hilarious.
I'd say that most people who "worship" "Satan" are teenagers doing it as a form of protest against society and to make them selfs feel special and "unconformist" without actually believing in Satan or God, whilst the rest believe Satan to be good, in that they believe that he either has been pardoned by God or they believe that it is "God" who is evil.
So no "cult types" are "evil", there are no large groups of people wandering about delighting in being evil, except for the odd deranged sociopath probably locked up in an asylum.
It is only people of often only slightly different faiths who label their competition as evil because they fear loosing their faithful to them, and there is no better way to do that than to discredit and smear the opposition, just take a look at politics.
It is the smearing that is evil, and the "righteous" who commits a sin by not being tolerant, whilst of coarse thinking they are doing the right thing.
SO what I believe frob is saying is that it is more often religious people who sin in the name of their faith rather than nonreligious people minding their own business. Because in this example, religious people have a motive to discredit their competition by in fact lying.
As has been shown in a different thread, atheists are just as prone to act in a good way (HELPING THE POOR), as religious people.
How can an atheist helping the poor and ill fortunate be on Satans side?
Ecofarm
Deity
That said, the Church does more to keep the idea of Satan alive than those cults -- the Church is just that much bigger for one.
I'm surprised you took that guy seriously enough to respond to him. He has the annoying air about him of someone that thinks his far from unheard of beliefs are some great revelation to everyone in this thread. Frankly I agree with what he said (excepting the few single sentence paragraphs), but he has a quite conceited way of saying it.
-Drachasor
