Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
Message:
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.
Attachment:
    

Topic Review
Theravad

[*] posted on 30-3-2016 at 16:37
This one will roll on and on but as Leigh says it was the "church" that decided what was to be "officially" in the bible. The problem with many ancient writings (apart from the allegory) issue is that they were set in a social context and society has changed so much that literal translations can be confusing in the modern age.

Revelations 22:18-19 also promise a plaque unto you if you go about changing the "word". :-)

The Buddhist tradition have a concept of Sasana which is the lifetime of the teachings of a teaching buddha and warn the further you go forward from the death of the teacher the father you can go form the truth.

So with no Jesus around to correct the corruption of Christianity wrought by both time and the "church" bending it to suit their own purposes it becomes increasingly impure ;-)

Happy Easter/Ishtar/Oester lips_sealed
LSemmens

[*] posted on 30-3-2016 at 10:47
How, then would you describe it, Scholar. Until the second council of Trullan (692) There was no real canon of the New Testament. Until then there were collections in circulation of the various letters that eventually made up the New Testament Canon. Wiki:
scholar

[*] posted on 30-3-2016 at 00:03
Quote:
Originally posted by LSemmens
the Bible which did not really become cohesive as a text until about the 3rd century

I certainly would not put it that way.

The Christian Scriptures were cohesive from the time each document was written.

Some of the documents were accepted by the whole Christian community from the first, while others took more time for general acceptance for varied reasons, including such a simple reason as the fact that some were more widely and popularly circulated than others.
LSemmens

[*] posted on 29-3-2016 at 04:08
I'll only comment on Christianity as that is my area of purvey. There are many, and varied translations of the Bible which did not really become cohesive as a text until about the 3rd century. To ensure that the original meaning of the text is conveyed, of course it must be re-translated into modern parlance. Where there is doubt over the meaning of a particular passage, a study of the original text is necessary. In my arsenal of works I favour the King Jimmy, but also use the Amplified, Yankee Standard Perversion, NIV, And a Strong's Concordance, along with many and varied reference works, the best (IMO) is a Dakes Reference Bible.
Katzy

[*] posted on 28-3-2016 at 20:52
If the words don't change, people won't understand, any more then they did when the Cafflix insisted everything had to be in Latin.

I guess certain religious authorities would prefer everyone to believe that they had special knowledge, which is getting towards the ol' gnostic thing, innit?
marymary100

[*] posted on 28-3-2016 at 19:50
Some religions forbid changing the way a text is written down using the rationale that change of text changes meaning over time.


Here is a small example of how the words change over time even in our own language.


http://i.imgur.com/aE4v3Uz.jpg