Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 3, 2009 13:16:18 GMT -4
An interesting opinion piece on the subject of torture appeared in the Wall Street Journal today. Basically, he's asking why Congress, if it really believes waterboarding should be banned, doesn't step up and offer a bill doing just that, as they did to President Bush. This time the President says he agrees with them, so why not make it final?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 3, 2009 12:35:11 GMT -4
This book is inspired; it was part of the Scriptures when Jesus Christ was here on the earth. He put His imprimatur on the entire volume when He said, "The Scripture cannot be broken." (John 10:35). Some say that it is not quoted in the New Testament, yet there are fragments everywhere. I disagree that John 10:35 indicates that the entire Old Testament as it was constituted in Jesus' time is inspired. The context of the passage is that the Jews were about to stone Jesus for the blasphemy of calling himself the Son of God. Jesus defends himself by saying basically "in the Scriptures you are called gods", probably refrencing Psalms 82:6. He then says "if that scripture called everyone gods and the children of god, and it's right (cannot be broken), then why are you upset that I am calling myself the Son of God?" Jesus seems to be refrencing a particular scripture when he asks if it can be broken, not the Old Testament as a whole. Also I would like to see some specific refrences as to where fragments of the Song of Solomon can be found in other scriptrues.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 3, 2009 12:26:22 GMT -4
How can I tell? You'd get a better answer if you asked how I can tell something is not inspired. The best answer I can give you is Jesus Himself validated the entire OT and promised His disciples that He would bring all things to their remembrance, in anticipation of their writing the books of the NT. So how do we know: A) that we have the same Old Testament that Jesus was talking about? B) that the New Testament books we have were all really written by his disciples under his inspiration? In fact, several of the writers of the New Testament were not named as apostles in the text - Matthew, Mark, Luke, James and Jude. C) that there aren't additional works out there that are also inspired but not collected in the Bible? Why trust a Rabbi, who wasn't a Christian, to determine what is and isn't inspired writings? Wouldn't he have said that the New Testament as a whole is not inspired? An obvious answer, but is it the correct one? Here's the list again, along with where they are mentioned in the Bible: Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21:14) Book of Jasher (Josh. 10:13, 2 Sam. 1:18) Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Kgs. 11:41) Book of Samuel the Seer (1 Chr. 29:29) Book of Gad the Seer (1 Chr. 29:29) Book of Nathan the Prophet (1 Chr. 29:29; 2 Chr. 9:29) Prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chr. 9:29) Visions of Iddo the Seer (2 Chr. 9:29; 2 Chr. 12:15; 2 Chr. 13:22) Book of Shemaiah (2 Chr. 12:15) Book of Jehu (2 Chr. 20:34) Sayings of the Seers (2 Chr. 33:19) An earlier epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 5:9) Possibly an earlier epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 3:3) An epistle to the Church at Laodicea (Col. 4:16) Prophecies of Enoch known to Jude (Jude 1:14) Perhaps you should look up a few of these refrences and see if it sounds like they were considered uninspired by those who took the time to refrence them in their own works.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 3, 2009 12:07:22 GMT -4
Does anyone have any answers to my queries at the end of post 24? -- "Soyely" is probably descended from the Anglo-Saxon "soþlice" meaning "truly". The Anglo-Saxon thorn "þ" which produces a "th" sound was often written as a "y" in Middle English. IHN - Googling tells me that it can stand for "In His Name", but that seems to be a Muslim convnetion, not a Christian one. "INRI" is a Latin abbreviation for "Iesvs Nazarenvs Rex Jvdærvm" - "Jesus Nazarene, King of the Jews" that was the sign that Pilate ordered hung on the cross. It was also written in Greek and Hebrew on the sign, but the Roman Catholic church obviously used the latin version, and it can be seen on many crucifixes. It was common to hang a sign above a crucified victim describing his crime. In this case, saying Jesus was being crucified for being "King of the Jews" was rightly seen as an insult by the Jewish leadership - a reminder that they were under Roman rule and had no real king. They wanted Pilate to change it to "he said I am king of the Jews" but Pilate refused "what I have written I have written."
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 2, 2009 18:36:33 GMT -4
You're quite right. Anglo-Saxon is another beast altogether. I have "The Anglo-Saxon Reader" (or something like that, I can't find it right now) and it is basically incomprehensible to me. Fortunately there is a dictionary section at the end of the book, but going back and forth for each word made me put it back on the shelf where I can't find it anymore. I have mentioned before that my degree is in English Literature, haven't I? In the course of getting my degree I took some classes in Anglo-Saxon literature. It helped quite a bit that I was already fluent in Dutch and had some High School German under my belt, since Anglo-Saxon grammar is closer to them than to modern English. I saved my textbooks, including Sweet's Anglo-Saxon Primer and Sweet's Anglo-Saxon Reader. The dictionary part in the back is the gloss. I also have a copy of Tolkien's translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, which unfortunately doesn't have the original untranslated text included with it.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 2, 2009 17:17:07 GMT -4
A story from the NYT today: "Iraqis voted on Saturday for local representatives, on an almost violence-free election day aimed at creating provincial councils that more closely represent Iraq's ethnic, sectarian and tribal balance. By nightfall, there were no confirmed deaths, and children played soccer on closed-off streets in a generally joyous atmosphere."
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 2, 2009 17:01:25 GMT -4
"Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter" -Sen. Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, May 7, 1998.
"Senator Daschle is embarrassed and disappointed by these errors. He apologized for his part in these errors and expressed his deep regret that the committee had to devote time to them.” - Jenny Backus, Daschle spokeswoman, Jan 31, 2009
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 2, 2009 12:03:22 GMT -4
Looks like perfectly understandable Dutch to me, albiet with some very odd spelling.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 2, 2009 0:36:31 GMT -4
You should try reading Anglo-Saxon, the real old English. Middle English is quite easy by comparison.
The most well-known text of the same era is The Canterbury Tales by Chaucer. They are quite legible, though you may need a gloss to catch some of the words. If you buy a copy of the Tales in Middle English it will likely include one.
EDIT: (Shakespeare and the King James Bible, by the way, are considered Modern English, despite their archaic patterns and vocabulary)
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 2, 2009 0:21:34 GMT -4
It isn't just one thing. THE condition is that the writing be inspired by God. One of the proofs that an author is speaking for God is fulfilled prophecy. Good. I think I can agree with that general definition. Now, how can you tell when a writing was inspired by God, apart from prophecy? The Song of Solomon. That is the only book in the Bible that Joseph Smith declared was not inspired. The case for its inclusion has been that its an allegorical account of God's love for Israel and/or the church. It was almost certainly not written by Solomon, and possibly not even written anywhere near the time Solomon lived. There are no prophecies in it, no real religious themes, and it is not quoted from in the New Testament. It has passages like this: "How beautiful are thy feet with shoes, O prince’s daughter! the joints of thy thighs are like jewels, the work of the hands of a cunning workman. Thy navel is like a round goblet, which wanteth not liquor: thy belly is like an heap of wheat set about with lilies. Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins. Thy neck is as a tower of ivory; thine eyes like the fishpools in Heshbon, by the gate of Bath-rabbim: thy nose is as the tower of Lebanon which looketh toward Damascus. Thine head upon thee is like Carmel, and the hair of thine head like purple; the king is held in the galleries. How fair and how pleasant art thou, O love, for delights! This thy stature is like to a palm tree, and thy breasts to clusters of grapes. I said, I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of the boughs thereof: now also thy breasts shall be as clusters of the vine, and the smell of thy nose like apples; And the roof of thy mouth like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak." If it is an allegory for God's love for Isreal it's not exactly a very spiritual allegory, is it? Why is it in the Bible? We'll come back to that. I did earlier in the thread. But I don't see how you could declare them "inspired" or "not inspired", since they aren't available for examination. The Biblical writers clearly thought they had value, since they refer to them, but they were not preserved and added to the Bible. Should we trust the judgement of the Biblical writers who thought they were inspired, or should we decide they're not inspired because they weren't preserved?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 1, 2009 18:17:00 GMT -4
Which is it, DH, is the condition only that it be inspired by God, or that it be inspired byGod and also contain prophecy? Or is it only that it contain prophecy?
There are several books in the Bible that don't contain any prophecies. Are they scripture?
Also, the LDS scriptures contain several prophecies that have been fulfilled. Are they therefore scripture?
What about the books mentioned in the Bible but missing from it, as I mentioned earlier?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 1, 2009 1:02:59 GMT -4
I know nothing of what it means, but I think the Hebrew script is one of the most beautiful ways of putting thought to page invented. Your right though, that is a beautiful manuscript, and thanks for sharing the translation. Though I admit, I do have a copy of a translation. Um, are you talking about the Greek text that Ginnie posted a picture of, or some other text?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 31, 2009 21:27:15 GMT -4
DH, you have yet to answer my questions about what is scripture.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 31, 2009 20:01:54 GMT -4
Since the original manuscripts are no longer in existence, I find that difficult to believe. What Gillian is referring to is that the body of writings that Biblical critics have decided is the most authentic given the available manuscripts doesn't match up very well with the King James Version in many areas. How closesly this "authentic" version matches up with what was originally given and written is open for debate, and is probably something we will never know without God's assistance or a time machine. Of course, the flip side of that is how Dead Hoosiers can know that the original texts were infallible, since they are no longer available for perusal.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 31, 2009 19:56:53 GMT -4
According to what I've seen, the Turkish minister was not really being censored. He went on at some length about how Israel was killing innocents and then left the stage after the moderator tried to direct things away from personally abusing other leaders.
|
|