Election Results

[Gambit]

The point I most want to continue with is the validity of the Bible section, but I'll refrain. An interested party can open one of those, or perhaps I will later. I will close this one with a simple answer to a question you asked.

The Amplified Bible is a version where words from the original language (Greek, in the quote above) are translated in multiple ways to make the meaning of the original word clearer. Usually at least one of them is modernized substantially over the original English King James Version, for example, since some of those words have lost their meaning from the days of Olde English. The printed version is hardly a small volume, though, and while easy to understand it is awkward to read from.

As I have been careful to not raise any controversial points in this post and thus extend the discussion, I'm fine with closing it.

[Kaleban]

That makes me curious. I spent a lot of time in Asia when I was younger, and learned some Japanese and Chinese.

As pictographical languages, the meanings of "words" are both complex, multifaceted and very poetic, making direct translation near impossible.

Is Greek the same way? And was the "original" Bible written in Aramaic? I'm curious about stuff like this, and its neat to find people who know about it.

[Ravok99]

All I gotta say about Kerry is a simple fact: At one point he says he would not have done ANYTHING different than Bush did. On other point, he said he would remove all American troops from Iraq, and push it off to the U.N. - a major factor for why the U.N. did NOT want to get involved. They can't afford to work against terrorist cells; it would most likely rip Europe to shreds as these guys are seen as supporting the Jewish/American Infidels - and Europeans become prime targets for extremists that would use that as an excuse for entering Heaven.

So... I didnt see any potential resolution to the situation that Kerry could really talk about. He would most likely confuse the situation.

On the religious front. That is a tricky and personal issue; religion is like that. However, I am tired of the "Everyone else is cool, but those Christians are real trash." kind of sentiments I have received over my lifespan. I have a very open mind, I don't step on other people for what they feel is right, but dang, there are really two choices when it comes to government support of abortion. Either we allow people to have as much sex as they want and kill off the 'unwanteds' - or we deal some respect to the outcome of sex, and support the idea that those little cells are someone important.

I know my own vote on that issue, but I can't justify other folks or their beliefs. That is not what a vote is about. Its about saying what our society stands behind in a collective effort, and what a single opinion can mean to a group. That is a vote.

I think Bush is an OK guy to do the job for the next 4 years. I am uncertain what Kerry truly sought to accomplish, as his agenda was very spread out, and, as Gambit said, seemed to say, "Don't worry, Uncle Sam will do it all."

That statement worries me. I doubt I could ever hope to rely on a massive government to completely handle all of my needs. I have to earn my keep, and work to secure my own needs. That is capitalism. So, what was Kerry supporting?

[Cerberus]

The Texts of the Bible, are written in several languages, Hebrew, Aramaic etc.. The Bible has been translated in to Greek, the Septanguiant, and into Latin, the Vulgate.. so there are a ton of languages in Biblical history, i have a NT that is written in Arabic Script. I think the various books of the Bible were assembled in to their current order and copmplilation (Canon?) in around 300AD

[XMEN Ashaman DTM]

There were actually several compilations that floated around. There was much argument over which things should go into the "bible", each of those early books differed in what aspects of what we call the Old Testament should carry over from the Jewish texts. And there was talk over how much of ancient Hebrew mythology should be included in this text (cherubim, seraphim, nephalim for example... they are three types of "angels", yet they aren't mentioned more than in passing in much of the Bible). Realize also that those names are derivatives of their ancient hebrew names. And there was talk in how much of each book should be included in the Old Testament.

The New Testament was a bit different because most of the books refer to Jesus in some way. Most of these were also written in Greek, while simultaneously written in Aramaic. But the content of the NT only differed in which aspects of Jesus' life the priesthood wanted to pass on. The church at this time was still quite small, so there wasn't as much argument.

[Cerberus]

Which part of the NT was written in Greek? All of Paul's letters were written in Hebrew, the Gospels were written in Hebrew, I think the General Letters were written in Hebrew, The only one I am not sure about is Revelation. But if you hold to the tradition that John the Revelator is the Apostle John then that one should have been in original Hebrew.

[yak]

DOWN WITH BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gambit]

Yak, you are welcome to participate, but being inflammatory is not.


Asha, the early church didn't have a priesthood. Leaders, yes, but not ANYTHING like the Catholics later had or the Jews traditionally had. Yes, though, there has been much discussion about which writings went in and which writings didn't. We can get into that elsewhere if you like or leave as-is.


Jester, nearly all the NT was written in Greek originally - remember who wrote most of it (Paul) and that he wrote mostly to Gentiles, not Jews, so especially Paul's letters. He was well-educated and a Roman citizen. John was apparently writing to a Greek audience. Luke was a physician and wrote using Greek for its precision. Matthew wrote in Greek but his audience seems to have been Jewish. The common language Jesus spoke was indeed Aramaic, and Mark translates some of these words into Greek for his Roman readership.

I think all the OT was Hebrew. Certainly mostly. (Ah, according to some info I just found, there are some Aramaic passages here and there.)

"Greek was the language of Alexander's empire and so the language of the East under the Romans. It was the common language of the New Testament writers." http://www.bible.gen.nz/amos/language/languages.htm

[Cerberus]

hrm didn't know that, i'll look more into it.

[XMEN Ashaman DTM]

Eh... what I meant by preisthood was that the followers of Christ (they weren't called Christians until later), were led by those that studied what the 12 Disciples did and taught. It wasn't a formal preisthood as you would think in terms of the Catholic church and such, but it was a preisthood that closely (as far as we can tell) tried to follow what Peter and Paul had written. There wasn't exactly a formal book to give to churches or those that wished to form a church to describe how a church should function, what it should do, what ceremonies to perform, and so on. Many of the churches inferred what to do after the deaths of Peter and Paul (they were the most vocal), and also John, from what they had written and what they had instructed churches to do. Take communion for example. It was originally supposed to be a symbolic ceremony celebrating Christ's last supper. He didn't take the bread and wine he gave his followers and transform it into his own flesh and blood. Yet that's how the Catholic Church, and offshoots of the Catholic Church, performed the Communion ceremony. It wasn't like that in the early days of the what we call christianity. (This is in large part to the influence of Roman religion on Christianity to create the Roman Catholic Church.) The ceremony was performed in remembrance of Christ... as a way to recall to each and every Christian that Christ's last night on earth was not spent worrying, retaliating, or doing anything except celebrating what life there was left to Him. Christ led by example, and taught throught metaphorical stories, which are both the reasons that Christianity became so popular.

Regardless of whether you believe the Christ knew he was going to die the next day, you have to realize that he thoroughly enjoyed his life and time with his friends.

[XMEN Ashaman DTM]

Oh and here is an interesting page. I'm not going to comment on it now...

http://www.biblestudysite.com/history.htm#5

[Ravok99]

There's a lot of stuff in here; and I won't go into every detail discussed. However, the idea that Bush basis his decisions on a 'Christian vote' if you want to call it that; which is fair, because he does to a healthy extent. He is open about it, and let's the population decide if his policies are worthy of his office.

How a president bases their decisions is key to understanding what a president will do under a set of circumstances, and whether or not we agree with those decisions on a personal level. I saw no thread of continuity in Kerry's decisions, whether the Bible was written in two or three different languages or not.

You can refute all kinds of Biblical issues, I frankly wouldn't care if the Bible was written in Egyptian. The book is worthy reading, because it has influenced history, and has helped people further define things like, History, Science, and Rational Thinking.

Whether or not you believe in God is insignificant to the power of the words in the book. Now, I happen to think that those guys take the Bible seriously, because if they didn't - they would break the book's own Commandment not to "give false testimony". So, either the book stands to reason, or it fails because its full of liars.

OK - I can deal with that. It is still a book worthy of reading without worrying whether religion is going to get shoved down your throat.

Frankly, that Bush uses the book as a guideline for his behavior can mean a lot of different things; all sorts of people have laid such claims. To know what the man really believes and decides you need to dig into his record, and not into his claims. I feel that Bush handled a national threat of multiple airline attacks upon civilian and government employees and citizens with an action based on the intelligence known at the time. War on terror? Can it be won? Ask if people can change in Belfast, or if people can change in Germany, or if people can change in Russia, and if history will constantly repeat or if we get any better over time.

I say that question cannot be answered in the brief amount of time terrorism has upscaled to its present state. Tomorrow is not a set of variables easily defined by cause and effect, because at this point in history, old grudges and new grudges are mingling at a startling rate. We have cause to worry about every issue being discussed. Each issue is someone's life.

As Christians we are taught to care about someone's life. Its an eternal gift of soul that is imparted to every human being on the planet. If that is a bad set of teachings and just a buncha bad philosophy, so be it - I prefer to accept the possibility, and to use it as a springboard to understanding that when I fall short (sin) against one of my brothers in this life, someone gets hurt. I messed it up. My bad. I cannot be perfect in my actions, but I can work to atone with my brother, and in hope we can move beyond the hurt I re-created into the world. This is taking responsibility for my actions, and whether it is a temporary benefit, or an eternal partaking; I don't see much difference in idealogies.

[Gambit]

The ceremony was performed in remembrance of Christ... as a way to recall to each and every Christian that Christ's last night on earth was not spent worrying, retaliating, or doing anything except celebrating what life there was left to Him. Christ led by example, and taught throught metaphorical stories, which are both the reasons that Christianity became so popular.

I don't think the Last Supper was as much of a celebration of the past as a memorial. He said, when He gave the bread and wine, "This do in rememberance of Me." I will grant that He loved the disciples and enjoyed His time with them, and there very well may have been some of that in there. And while you're right, he didn't worry, the death that He knew was coming was far from pleasant and weighed upon Him that last night. Did you know that the bit about how He sweated blood while praying in the garden was taken as just a figure of speech until relatively recently, when doctors dicovered that during times of extreme stress the capillaries can actually burst and blood can leak into the sweat glands?

But as to the reason that Christianity became so popular, I would say that it was, and is, the fact that He is alive and empowers his followers, unlike religions that worship an abstract ideal, the pattern of planets & stars, or someone long dead. The fact that our God is one that is powerful enough to have created the universe and yet still cares deeply about us as individuals. These are the things that set Christianity apart from everything else.

[XMEN Ashaman DTM]

But as to the reason that Christianity became so popular, I would say that it was, and is, the fact that He is alive and empowers his followers, unlike religions that worship an abstract ideal, the pattern of planets & stars, or someone long dead. The fact that our God is one that is powerful enough to have created the universe and yet still cares deeply about us as individuals. These are the things that set Christianity apart from everything else.

Sort of...

Let me explain. You believe, and those that follow your religion also believe, that Christ is still alive only He rose to heaven and no longer walks the earth. Now, take Mohammed, the prophet and founder of Islam... he has been long dead, yet is considered just as holy as Christ is. The only difference is that Christ was considered the son of God, while Mohammed is considered the last true prophet of God. Muslims would say that Mohammed is THE holiest, besides the one God Allah. Christians would say that Christ is THE holiest besides God the Father. As a Christian, I very much doubt that you would place Mohammed on equal or greater footing than Christ. And a Muslim would not put as much honor on Christ as they would Mohammed. God is still God in both religions eyes.

But both men are dead, and anyone outside of Christianity would probably have a hard time believing that Christ rose from the dead. Muslims acknowledge Christ as a person that spoke God's word, from what I know of Islam, but they still place a greater emphasis on Mohammed. So you saying that "as to the reason that Christianity became so popular, I would say that it was, and is, the fact that He is alive and empowers his followers, unlike religions that worship an abstract ideal, the pattern of planets & stars, or someone long dead.", has little truth to someone outside of Christianity. You can't say that you're right because you are Christian.


I personally still contend that Christianity became so popular because it appealled to more people (and still does) than most other religions. Islam may be the exception to that, as may Buddhism. Many people from the middle east could identify with Islam (especially since it began where Arabs began), just as many people in southwest Asia could identify with Buddhism (which incorporates traditions and ideas particular to that region). Buddhism and Islam have just as high moral qualities as Christianity, which is probably the reason that both are still around. That is, on top of the fact that all three have "warrior-monk" types (please note the quotation marks ).

Maybe this discussion belongs in another thread, but I'm too lazy to transfer it over to another, and it seems that the majority of the conversation has drifted this way. Plus, it still semi-relates to the thread topic through Bush's statements that his decisions come from his religious views. (Personally, I think that's AWESOME, what I find a bit disconcerting is that he expects others to believe as he does through his actions and policies. A big example of this would be Powell's resignation this last week.... you take a look at the cabinet, or cabinet-select folks and they are ALL people that are in line with Bush's ideas... there will be VERY little dissent if any... there may not be anyone there to say, "Mr. President, your idea is not going to work... or there is a tremendous downside to that policy.")

[XMEN Ashaman DTM]

Oh and I think you misunderstood me when I was talking about Communion.