bentson (03/11/83)
I claim that if I wish to find contradictions in the Bible I should be able to pick the version of my choice for such examination. Those that wish to reply MUST respond using the version of my choice. If they fail to do so, then they are either failing to respond directly to the challange or, more importantly, admitting that SOME versions are invalid. For that matter I should also have the option of pointing out contradicitons between versions of the Bible. All this is in response to those who have defended the absolute accuracy of the Bible by naming the version that they use and naming the Bible study books that explain what was really meant. The problem, as I see it, is that Bible lacks precision with accuracy (accuracy with precision?). In any event, the multitude of versions (even when we restrict ourselves to one language and one short historical period) should indicate that the contents of the Bible aren't very precisely bounded. I don't see how anyone can claim that the Bible is literally true since THAT CLAIM ITSELF implies that the meaning of all words are clear and unambiguous. That there are books explaining what the Bible really means in some phrase or other shows that the words are unclear. Once we admit that some words and phrases don't convey the same meaning to all, we're back on the slippery slope trying to determine what the Bible DOES say. Fundamentalists know how to avoid a slippery slope: THEY DON'T TAKE THE FIRST STEP. Randy Bentson Colo State U - Comp Sci ucbvax!hplabs!csu-cs!bentson
cjh (03/23/83)
#R:csu-cs:-208100:harpo:24800001:000:2988
harpo!cjh Mar 23 10:10:00 1983
***** harpo:net.religion / csu-cs!bentson / 7:52 am Mar 11, 1983
*** I claim that if I wish to find contradictions in the Bible I should be
able to pick the version of my choice for such examination. Those that
wish to reply MUST respond using the version of my choice. If they fail
to do so, then they are either failing to respond directly to the
challange or, more importantly, admitting that SOME versions are
invalid. For that matter I should also have the option of pointing out
contradicitons between versions of the Bible. ***
I am sure that there are some people would be up to your challange.
Unfortunately, I am not one of them. Unfortunately for you is that you
think that the restrictions that you impose are neccessary. To restrict
yourself to using only one version of the Bible is to limit yourself.
Different translations allow a Bible student to grasp sutler meanings of
some words/phrases. In many translations from the Hebrew and Greek to
English, a single word in English is used that comes closest to the
meaning of a Hebrew/Greek word. English is not perfect. So in order
to sometimes find the true meaning of a word/phrase, it is neccessary to
consult other translations, sometimes even to consult the original text
if you know how to read it. Admitting this, I am admitting that I
belive that there are some versions that are, as far as I'm conserned,
invalid. For example, there was a translation written by Thomas Jefferson
that omitted many portions that did not agree with his own personal
philosophy. As far as determing what is a contradiction between translations,
I think that the two books should be compared to the original text rather
than to each other.
*** All this is in response to those who have defended the absolute
accuracy of the Bible by naming the version that they use and naming
the Bible study books that explain what was really meant. The problem,
as I see it, is that Bible lacks precision with accuracy (accuracy with
precision?). In any event, the multitude of versions (even when we
restrict ourselves to one language and one short historical period)
should indicate that the contents of the Bible aren't very precisely
bounded. I don't see how anyone can claim that the Bible is literally
true since THAT CLAIM ITSELF implies that the meaning of all words are
clear and unambiguous. That there are books explaining what the Bible
really means in some phrase or other shows that the words are unclear. ***
The 'problem' is not with the Bible but with the English language.
The multitude of versions indicate the difficulty in translating the
different languages of the Bible to English. As for the claim that
because that you don't understand the Bible, it discredits the Bible
I have already seen some execelent responces to that in this news group.
Carl Hoffmann
Bell Labs
harpo!cjh
P.S. Sometimes we have to admitt to ourselves that there are some things
we are just not ready to understand.
----------