Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to More stuff for Christians to choke on
Make2short -- I don't have anybody anywhere other than these passages are
not isolated by any means in the use of third person references. A good portion of both the old and new testament seems to utilize methods that fiction writers would use. Especially segments where Jesus is having his thoughts described or words he said when he was alone. The point is that an open minded perspective would have made this obvious to anyone reading this work but unfortunately there is an infrastructure and a legend of minions dedicated to ensuring that no one ever does look at these things objectively.
posted by
gomedome
on August 14, 2005 at 2:57 PM
| link to this | reply
thelongroad -- I'm going to make this the last response to one of your
comments unless you somehow miraculously come up with something intelligent to say. The term "Jesus Juice" was never directed at you specifically, for you to use it as a justification to begin insulting someone is something you have no right to do. A term that you find offensive, written in a public forum, is not the same as a personal insult directed specifically at an individual. You have the option of simply not clicking on my postings if you find some of the language and subject matter offensive.
posted by
gomedome
on August 14, 2005 at 2:50 PM
| link to this | reply
CFarmer --- what I am getting at is that: the book of John was most likely
written by someone else other than John, at least that is the most likely explanation. If this is so, then the one witness to the life of Jesus Christ is no longer credible as this portion becomes hearsay or the opinion of someone else.
posted by
gomedome
on August 14, 2005 at 2:30 PM
| link to this | reply
I don't see what you're getting at with this whole "See!? See!? He totally refers to himself in the third person!" thing.
posted by
CFarmer
on August 14, 2005 at 11:11 AM
| link to this | reply
well yeah pat_b
if you study the subject even a little you will find that the King James is very much the translators beliefs rather than a literal translation of the original languages, the KJV's source was the Latin Septuagant rather than strict word for word from the Hebrew and the Greek, meaning that much of what is believed as taken from the KJV is more from medieval Christianity than it is original Christianity.
posted by
Xeno-x
on August 13, 2005 at 7:46 PM
| link to this | reply
vibrance
Doesn't one always?LOL
posted by
ariel70
on August 13, 2005 at 9:22 AM
| link to this | reply
hey I had a boyfriend once
who referred to himself in the third person!!! He was a fool though. hehehhe. Love, Vib
posted by
Vibrance
on August 13, 2005 at 9:13 AM
| link to this | reply
read thelongroad's first comment again...
he/she says the Bible is disturbed in more languages.... couldn't agree more. probably meant dis-tributed and not dis-turbed...
Which begs another question: What if those original writers or any one of the later translators and editors, made similar mistakes? And if so, would those mistakes have any effect on the meaning of the story? What dangerous spongy swampy territory are we treading now?
posted by
Pat_B
on August 13, 2005 at 5:50 AM
| link to this | reply
read thelongroad's blurb again...
he/she says the Bible is disturbed in more languages.... couldn't agree more. probably meant dis-tributed and not dis-turbed...
Which begs another question: What if those original writers or any one of the later translators and editors, made similar mistakes? And if so, would those mistakes have any effect on the meaning of the story? What dangerous spongy swampy territory are we treading now?
posted by
Pat_B
on August 13, 2005 at 5:46 AM
| link to this | reply
You've really got us here.
Could John have been modest and that is why he used the third person? No. of course not. This is the Bible and we know that everyone in the Bible is mean and arrogant. That is the writers are because nothing in the Bible ever happened, it is totally a myth. Oh and by the way, you have to be careful of Christians because they are mean and insult you, just because you don't believe as they do. Unlike blog it rationalists who have only kind things to say to those mean irrational Christians. They spend all of their time blogging against other religions. Gee whiz, Gnomedome, how did you get so smart, so sweet and so loveable?
posted by
Make2short
on August 12, 2005 at 2:00 PM
| link to this | reply
Insults
As if I threw the first insult. I've mentioned that I am not an athiest yet you insist on referring to me as such. You have suggested that I have no morals more than once plus a host of other petty insults and insinuations. Re-read any one of your comments and tell me if there is not an insult in there somewhere. The truth of the matter is that you have run into someone that is not about to take your deluded bible thumping bullshit and you can't handle it.
I believe you are the one who started with derogatory comments such as Jesus Juice. At least I back up my comments, explaining clearly why I believe you are without morals. I'm sorry if you took this as an insult, it is merely my perception of people who trash the Bible.
You claim that you are not an atheist so state your beliefs for the record. You dear friend, are the one who is deluded. Why don't you get to the core of the truth here and explain why you hate Christians so much? Obviously, you must have had some bad experiences in the past to foster this dark attitude.
posted by
thelongroad
on August 12, 2005 at 11:59 AM
| link to this | reply
I couldn't resist responding to this nonsense
Part of a recent comment: "Since you such the Bible scholar, you should know that the Bible clearly states that most of the world's population will end up going to hell." And of course that means that your God is willing to condem entire faith systems and even entire nations. Pretty well all of the Arab world is euchred, the Oriental races don't stand much of a chance, the Hindus and Buddhists amongst others are all out of luck as well. Somehow I don't think that is the meaning implied or if it is then it is rendered meaningless by virtue of it's exclusivity. Either that or you are forced to drop the notion of your God being all caring. Seems he only cares about the white races or those who have adopted or been forced to adopt the Christian faith system. Keep slugging away bucko, someday you might say something that makes sense.
posted by
gomedome
on August 12, 2005 at 10:22 AM
| link to this | reply
Hemlocker -- admittedly that kind of statement is a little harsh but
when people are insistant on using the bible to justify just about anything they please, it no longer is an unfair assessment. To quote it as if it is a factual document and to ignore the fact that it is loaded with countless inconsistancies, forgeries and artistic license on the part of it's editors, is even more of an insult than my seemingly unkind words.
posted by
gomedome
on August 12, 2005 at 10:14 AM
| link to this | reply
gomedome
"this bastardized work of accumulated gibberish" ! What a gentle soul you are. Hemlocker
posted by
Hemlocker
on August 12, 2005 at 9:33 AM
| link to this | reply
thelongroad -- you are the best comedian on this blogging site
As if I threw the first insult. I've mentioned that I am not an athiest yet you insist on referring to me as such. You have suggested that I have no morals more than once plus a host of other petty insults and insinuations. Re-read any one of your comments and tell me if there is not an insult in there somewhere. The truth of the matter is that you have run into someone that is not about to take your deluded bible thumping bullshit and you can't handle it.
posted by
gomedome
on August 12, 2005 at 9:20 AM
| link to this | reply
God's divine plan? But only 35% of the world's populace are adherants to Christianity and after 2,000 years. So who screwed up? God or the Christians? Or is it God's divine plan to be very selective amongst the children he supposedly loves? To not let the remaining 65% anywhere near heaven but to let them think that they will get there by worshipping their false Gods? You would have to be retarded to think this makes any sense. Geez maybe you are retarded, in that case I apologize. Can't have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
I've debated with your kind, and it's always the same. If you can not offer a good counter argument, you resort to petty insults regarding my intelligence. It's immature, and shows how weak your arguments really are.
Since you such the Bible scholar, you should know that the Bible clearly states that most of the world's population will end up going to hell. God's divine plan is for the gospel to spread to all corners of the world which it has, and for the Holy Bible to survive and exist throughout the centuries which it has. Another part of God's divine plan was for the Jews to be restored as the nation of Israel. Guess what? It happened. So much for your supposed book of myths.
posted by
thelongroad
on August 12, 2005 at 9:10 AM
| link to this | reply
katray - you are absolutely correct, it is exactly the same thing
but the difference being that I recognize it as such and can turn it off at any instant. It really is just a case of being tired of taking it without returning the favour. I've spent my entire life having idiots with a bible under their arm suggest, insinuate or outright proclaim that they are better than me simply because they have a bible under their arm. Excuse me if turn the tables occassionaly.
posted by
gomedome
on August 12, 2005 at 8:34 AM
| link to this | reply
Curious Gomedome
Did you ever consider that intolerance and prejudice against Christian beliefs is really no different than what their extreme elements practice? Adding fuel to the righteous hellfires...
posted by
Katray2
on August 12, 2005 at 8:22 AM
| link to this | reply
thelongroad ---- spoken like a true brainwashed bible thumper
God's divine plan? But only 35% of the world's populace are adherants to Christianity and after 2,000 years. So who screwed up? God or the Christians? Or is it God's divine plan to be very selective amongst the children he supposedly loves? To not let the remaining 65% anywhere near heaven but to let them think that they will get there by worshipping their false Gods? You would have to be retarded to think this makes any sense. Geez maybe you are retarded, in that case I apologize. Can't have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
posted by
gomedome
on August 12, 2005 at 8:10 AM
| link to this | reply
Spoken like a true immoral atheist. What sick twisted morals you must have if you get your jolleys off by trying your darnest to insult Christians. You are not alone though. People have tried all throughout history to destory the Bible and keep it from being published. But by God's divine plan, the Bible remains alive and well, disturbed in more languages than any other writing.
posted by
thelongroad
on August 12, 2005 at 5:42 AM
| link to this | reply