Religion Matters: Take 3

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:01 am

Here's the deal.

It seems to work much better to have a catch-all topic when you don't want every few posts to be a separate one (clutter), so we've been just going with a generic Religion topic for a good while. The problem is contention, and it's probably a better idea for this class of topics (umbrella topic/megatopic) to break it up into smaller categories. We've started doing that with Christian Matters and ideally any other sub-categories that warrant their own topic will be added as we go, but there also needs to be a topic that's wide open for criticism and discussion about religious matters that doesn't favor any particular form or region or whatever. So this more broad/general/inclusive topic is gonna be that--don't go there (or No be there. -- Mr. Miyagi) if you're not interested in this sort of thing. By all means create a topic that suits your own tastes or goals or whatever--that's kinda what this place is all about and how it's supposed to work ... eh? Seems to me that PP is the best place for this topic, but we'll see. The last iteration that survived for very long was moved there, so if TPTB here decide they agree it can easily be moved there.

So ... let's give this another shot.

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:18 am

I like Tim's suggestion of going through the Christian Bible one chapter at a time - one person of arbitrary religious position reads and summarises the chapter, maybe there are some comments, then the next person steps in. Like a relay book club with religious overtones.

Do we have enough interested people to keep it going for a worthwhile length of time?

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:25 am

Quote from: MoominDave on Aug 11, 2015, 06:18AMI like Tim's suggestion of going through the Christian Bible one chapter at a time - one person of arbitrary religious position reads and summarises the chapter, maybe there are some comments, then the next person steps in. Like a relay book club with religious overtones.

Do we have enough interested people to keep it going for a worthwhile length of time?
I kinda doubt it, but that does sound interesting--seems a project like that would warrant its own topic though. I think it would get lost if it were just going on amidst a bunch of other kinda random discussions. I don't see it being a heavy traffic kinda thing, but that's all highly speculative because if it works it will develop whatever character the participants decide to bring into it.

ttf_ddickerson · Post by **ttf_ddickerson** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:44 am

Quote from: MoominDave on Aug 11, 2015, 06:18AMI like Tim's suggestion of going through the Christian Bible one chapter at a time - one person of arbitrary religious position reads and summarises the chapter, maybe there are some comments, then the next person steps in. Like a relay book club with religious overtones.

Do we have enough interested people to keep it going for a worthwhile length of time?

I think that this wouldn't work because it would require too much discipline. People jumping in and making comments etc,

Unless, you're suggesting that one person takes chapter one, and does a complete discourse of it in one posting, then wait a week or so for everyone to discuss it, then the next person does chapter two and posts it in one post. Is that what you're talking about?

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:51 am

That was what Tim said had been done before (quote from "Christian Matters" thread):
Quote from: timothy42b on Aug 10, 2015, 09:04AMThere was a long running thread called Read Da Book. It was started by one of the resident outspoken atheists whose premise was that most of the Christians on the forum had never read the Bible themselves. So we started at Genesis and each of us took one chapter, paraphrased it as reverently or irreverently as he pleased, asked a set of study questions, and then the group discussed. We made it much of the way through the OT (lots of surprises - you would be amazed at the number of times somebody gets killed in one chapter, then again in the next, and is alive later to father some children.) Some of the theologic points were interesting and in hindsight I wish I'd copied it. We had a mix of fundagelic Christians, liberal Christians, atheists, and pagans.

Would you enjoy being a part of that? I think I would. But you'd need a critical mass of people to keep it going.

ttf_Trav1s · Post by **ttf_Trav1s** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:11 am

From my perspective, that type of thread would require huge amounts of time and effort that I simply cannot commit. I find the OT to be especially demanding in light of the complexity of Hebrew. Doing something like this half-____ed does not do it justice. It has the potential for interesting discussion but get concerned person beliefs overtake historical facts and truths.

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:14 am

On the contrary, although I can understand why it wouldn't appeal to a professional religious person such as yourself, I think doing it half-arsed would result in the non-Christian and non-professionally religious crowd gaining a lot of valuable insights. The low-hanging fruit is still yet to be plucked for many - and I'd certainly include myself in that - although I read about half of this book many years ago, a refresher would definitely not go amiss. I didn't read deep study as being the intention of what Tim talked about - rather the bringing to attention of the narrative.

Perhaps the fact that we are talking about doing it rather than doing it says something significant though...

Perhaps when we finish the Bible, we can start on the Koran... Or maybe we should cover that first?

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:28 am

Quote from: Trav1s on Aug 11, 2015, 07:11AMFrom my perspective, that type of thread would require huge amounts of time and effort that I simply cannot commit. I find the OT to be especially demanding in light of the complexity of Hebrew. Doing something like this half-____ed does not do it justice. It has the potential for interesting discussion but get concerned person beliefs overtake historical facts and truths.
That's kinda my inclination as well, but there's also nothing at all wrong with doing it more casually. We have a small cadre of pro/degreed theologians (i.e. you and JtTheo) who would be invaluable in making whatever commentary you have time to make. Even that model's gonna take a lot of time for those who do a chapter write-up.

But I'd think a treatment that suits whoever's doing it that's then critiqued is a good potential learning experience for all involved--especially regarding the fact we can all get ourselves into erroneous thinking patterns and we all need to be quite prepared and ready to modify our thinking and understanding accordingly when we discover them (which should happen pretty frequently) rather than digging in and doubling down. Personally I think learning that is far more valuable than the actual material ... almost irrespective of what that material is.

ttf_B0B · Post by **ttf_B0B** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:29 am

Quote from: MoominDave on Aug 11, 2015, 07:14AMOn the contrary, although I can understand why it wouldn't appeal to a professional religious person such as yourself, I think doing it half-arsed would result in the non-Christian and non-professionally religious crowd gaining a lot of valuable insights.I'd have to agree with Travis here. While the low hanging fruit might do some good, a half-***ed approach can also lead to a very different interpretation that is counter productive. The passage to turn the other cheek for instance is often taken at first glance as a call to be passive, when in depth it is readily shows to be non-violent resistance.

Half-***ed is often worse then not starting at all.

QuotePerhaps the fact that we are talking about doing it rather than doing it says something significant though...
And the fact that this is the third spin off in about religion in which it is still being talked about is even more telling.

ttf_Trav1s · Post by **ttf_Trav1s** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:51 am

Quote from: MoominDave on Aug 11, 2015, 07:14AMOn the contrary, although I can understand why it wouldn't appeal to a professional religious person such as yourself, I think doing it half-arsed would result in the non-Christian and non-professionally religious crowd gaining a lot of valuable insights. The low-hanging fruit is still yet to be plucked for many - and I'd certainly include myself in that - although I read about half of this book many years ago, a refresher would definitely not go amiss. I didn't read deep study as being the intention of what Tim talked about - rather the bringing to attention of the narrative.

Perhaps the fact that we are talking about doing it rather than doing it says something significant though...

Perhaps when we finish the Bible, we can start on the Koran... Or maybe we should cover that first?

My education has taught me that when it comes to the world of faith, there is always another perspective. if we faithfully engage the conversation and truly listen to the other, then nothing is as black/white or right/wrong as we desire. The problem with most Americans is that we do not listen to learn and grow. We listen so that we can figure out the right answer/response. See my post below from another thread that speaks to the socio-political context of America which was highly shaped by the understanding of faith thru the lens of the Reformation.

Quote from: Trav1s on Aug 10, 2015, 12:05PMI am going to approach this and all Christian faith related discussion from an entirely different direction to see if it might offer some insights into the discussion.

I spent the past weekend in a 3 day retreat of large group and small group spiritual direction. We talked extensively about several spiritual practices that Christians can use to grow deeper in their relationship with God. Things like The Examen, Silent Meditation, and a few other things (still used in the Roman Catholic tradition) - all practices to empty self and be open to the movement of God. These practices are definitely things that the participants engaged as part of the time on retreat.

The presenters were quick to point out that Churches of the Reformation (as lead by Luther in response to his understanding of Works righteousness as he understood or experienced or perceived in the Roman Catholic church) were quick to move towards the faith as belief in Christ as understood thru Scripture to avoid the potential of making faith about individual "works."

Taking that point further - When the move turned to belief, the push came to define the "right" beliefs and the "right" nature of scripture. Today we stand formed by 500 years of identifying self against the other. Luther said that he believed this and the RC church believed that. Soon others followed suit and new denomination or even splinters within denominations took place. (IMO - Luther over-corrected and went too far the other way but that is often debated)

The historian in me says that this desire for the "right" belief (as lead by Luther with the best of intentions) is the very root of the mess in the US political environment. When personal beliefs and ideology become more important than community and relationship with others any group takes a dangerous wrong turn. The sad truth is that both sides are guilty of this approach and both sides of the debate will be responsible for the results. But instead of taking responsibility for self (individual or group), we blame someone else. Scapegoating is so much easier than taking responsibility for self.

Those same patterns at work in the "hot topic" discussions on the board.

The other sad truth is that the dynamics and attitudes at work in the religion discussions on this forum are exactly why we have people my age and younger are fed up with the institutional Church. Addition to this thread - The rhetoric in this thread is the same as in the Church. People are still people...

Mark Twain said it quite well, "Actions speak louder than words... but not nearly as often."

The frustration for me is that to engage this discussion faithfully one must be open ideas that are different than one might currently believe. When an individual's faith gets challenged, the response can be quite interesting - in my experience the response is most likely defensive and aggressive towards the one who offers the idea that challenges the individuals "beliefs." This is not something to be taken lightly or to be done without respect for the other. Some are comfortable with having their reality messed with and others are not. I watched several classmates in seminary that I greatly respected and appreciated do some CRAZY stuff when their understandings were challenged. The other truth is most people lack the self-awareness to understand what is going on inside when this happens.

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:58 am

I think we are in danger of missing the point of the idea here... It's a book of a thousand-odd pages, each with a lot of detail. We wouldn't be turning over the meanings of individual phrases on a regular basis - or even doing much in the way of challenging ways of thinking. We'd be noting the big picture stuff - the overall shape of the history and mythology of the ancient Jews, if I might be permitted to use my own perspective to frame it.

ttf_Trav1s · Post by **ttf_Trav1s** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:09 am

Quote from: MoominDave on Aug 11, 2015, 07:58AMI think we are in danger of missing the point of the idea here... It's a book of a thousand-odd pages, each with a lot of detail. We wouldn't be turning over the meanings of individual phrases on a regular basis - or even doing much in the way of challenging ways of thinking. We'd be noting the big picture stuff - the overall shape of the history and mythology of the ancient Jews, if I might be permitted to use my own perspective to frame it.

I hear you Dave! I appreciate and respect the point. I think that is a great idea. Give it a try if you so desire.

(Putting on the cynic's hat here) My training says that even between the idiomatic nature of Hebrew and the variances in English translations, we will end up in some of those conversations where we argue of details instead of working to understanding the overarching nature of the story and major themes. Even within Christian circles those are up for debate. In the 10 years between undergrad and seminary I saw fair amount of things that shifted when it came to Biblical understanding. Archeology and the growth of the social sciences have changed our insights into scripture. (cynic's hat is off)

Perhaps a "Major Themes of the Hebrew Bible" and a "Major Themes of the New Testament" might be a better way to frame the discussion????

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:18 am

Oh, I'm sure it would run aground from time to time. Interesting to learn how so though...

I'll wait to see if any more expressions of interest turn up for a day or two before launching anything. I'm happy to start it off if enough want to give it a go - I think we'd need 5 or 6 people at least contributing to make it worth attempting - but it might generate some of its own momentum as it went.

Perhaps you could do us the favour of suggesting a suitable version to use... I note that there is an online KJV, which would be my natural inclination (ancestor of modern English versions, and a pleasing prose style), but there are more options than that out there...

ttf_Trav1s · Post by **ttf_Trav1s** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:38 am

In the American context Biblical translations are also hot button issues.

In my experience, I find my translations of both Greek and Hebrew ending up somewhere between the following translations:
- New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
- New American Bible (NAB)
- New American Bible Updated (NAU)

As part of my sermon prep I look a multiple translations as well as the original text. I note the differences between the translations then go to the original text and look at the original word in question.

Another truth is that each translation has a bias. Some work to do a "word for word" translation and others work to make the text more readable. Others contain a theological bias based on who was involved in the translation.

As for a good resource that offers a several translations is http://bible.oremus.org

ttf_Trav1s · Post by **ttf_Trav1s** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 8:56 am

Another option to consider and one that would be easier for me to participate is following the texts of the Revised Common Lectionary - just putting it out there.

ttf_timothy42b · Post by **ttf_timothy42b** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:05 am

I've done it once, it was a couple years of effort, and while I think we enjoyed it it was fatiguing after a while. I'm not sure I'm up for it again. Let me think on it.

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:11 am

Quote from: Trav1s on Aug 11, 2015, 07:51AMI watched several classmates in seminary that I greatly respected and appreciated do some CRAZY stuff when their understandings were challenged.Alright man ... you can't just post something like that and drive on. Let's hear a bit about that, eh?

Quote from: Trav1s on Aug 11, 2015, 07:51AMThe other truth is most people lack the self-awareness to understand what is going on inside when this happens.I don't know if self-awareness has diminished over the last few decades or if I just expect people to get a bit better about that over time, but it sure does seem to be much too rare. All the more for the sense that others are their own persons and come from their own worlds and such.

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:18 am

Quote from: Trav1s on Aug 11, 2015, 08:09AM Quote from: MoominDave on Aug 11, 2015, 07:58AMI think we are in danger of missing the point of the idea here... It's a book of a thousand-odd pages, each with a lot of detail. We wouldn't be turning over the meanings of individual phrases on a regular basis - or even doing much in the way of challenging ways of thinking. We'd be noting the big picture stuff - the overall shape of the history and mythology of the ancient Jews, if I might be permitted to use my own perspective to frame it.I hear you Dave! I appreciate and respect the point. I think that is a great idea. Give it a try if you so desire.

(Putting on the cynic's hat here) My training says that even between the idiomatic nature of Hebrew and the variances in English translations, we will end up in some of those conversations where we argue of details instead of working to understanding the overarching nature of the story and major themes. Even within Christian circles those are up for debate. In the 10 years between undergrad and seminary I saw fair amount of things that shifted when it came to Biblical understanding. Archeology and the growth of the social sciences have changed our insights into scripture. (cynic's hat is off)

Perhaps a "Major Themes of the Hebrew Bible" and a "Major Themes of the New Testament" might be a better way to frame the discussion????
I'd kinda like to kick things off with Steven Pinker's summary of the Old Testament from The Better Angels of Our Nature--kind of as an intro to the process. It may be better put to use as a discussion topic in Religion Matters 3.0 though. Anyone familiar with it? If so, please feel free to share your thoughts on these idears.

ttf_bhcordova · Post by **ttf_bhcordova** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 11:50 am

Quote from: Trav1s on Aug 11, 2015, 08:38AMIn the American context Biblical translations are also hot button issues.

In my experience, I find my translations of both Greek and Hebrew ending up somewhere between the following translations:
- New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
- New American Bible (NAB)
- New American Bible Updated (NAU)

As part of my sermon prep I look a multiple translations as well as the original text. I note the differences between the translations then go to the original text and look at the original word in question.

Another truth is that each translation has a bias. Some work to do a "word for word" translation and others work to make the text more readable. Others contain a theological bias based on who was involved in the translation.

As for a good resource that offers a several translations is http://bible.oremus.org

Travis, are you refering to the NAB(a Catholic translation with the entire bible) or the NASB (a Protestant version with the deuterocanonical books missing?) I ask because there is no NABU(pdatated)

ttf_Trav1s · Post by **ttf_Trav1s** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 1:28 pm

I use a program called bibleworks and in the version I have the quick reference info I have labels one as NAB and the other NAB. I will get more for you in the morning. Also, I would include the Apocrypha in the discussion as I believe it has worth but others would not agree.

ttf_drizabone · Post by **ttf_drizabone** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 2:22 pm

I'm in.

A couple of suggestions:
- use a standard translation as a reference
- otherwise it could be confusing for people that aren't familiar with there being different transalations
- you can always refer to another translation in specific cases if you want to
- use a modern translation
- we don't want to have to explain "old english" at the same time as the bible text
- from a protestant point of view The NIV 2011 is pretty good in terms of accuracy and is very understandable
- you can read it online at https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-International-Version-NIV-Bible/
- bible gateway has a whole stack of versions if you want to use another - or compare

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 2:47 pm

Quote from: timothy42b on Aug 11, 2015, 09:05AMI've done it once, it was a couple years of effort, and while I think we enjoyed it it was fatiguing after a while. I'm not sure I'm up for it again. Let me think on it.

How did it work out in practice? How long a summary was expected, and how much detail? How many study questions, and of what level of profundity? How much debate did each chapter spark?

ttf_drizabone · Post by **ttf_drizabone** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:08 pm

Quote from: MoominDave on Aug 11, 2015, 07:14AM
Perhaps when we finish the Bible, we can start on the Koran... Or maybe we should cover that first?

I vote for something more relevant to our audience such as "The God Delusion" as the second book. And I'm being serious, as it will give us a chance to understand the "other side". I'd like to discuss a book that sets out what you do believe in, but then atheists are characterised by what they don't believe in rather than by what they do belive in, so that might not be possible.

But I think we're getting a bit ahead of us when we can't even get around to talking about the first book on our list.

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 1:17 am

Like when we started a weight-loss regime in our house, and one of the first comments was "We must take care not to get too thin"...

Fair point though. If we ever get there, we'll have a good and careful think about what to approach afterwards. I suggested the Koran/Quran as it's a book I've occasionally dipped into, but never taken the time to inspect in any detail - and I'd be intrigued to see how it does and doesn't line up with the Christian Bible, and with which parts. It is however, so far as I can tell from what I've seen, a less easy read than the Christian Bible...

There is also enough sacred material here to keep us going for decades, should we choose to, even in the proposed skimming-the-surface vein...

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:11 am

Quote from: Baron von Bone on Aug 11, 2015, 09:18AMI'd kinda like to kick things off with Steven Pinker's summary of the Old Testament from The Better Angels of Our Nature--kind of as an intro to the process. It may be better put to use as a discussion topic in Religion Matters 3.0 though. Anyone familiar with it? If so, please feel free to share your thoughts on these idears.

I don't know this book, and don't know how long this is. How about you post it here, and I link to it in the kick-off post for the new thread?

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:44 am

Quote from: Trav1s on Aug 11, 2015, 08:38AMIn the American context Biblical translations are also hot button issues.

In my experience, I find my translations of both Greek and Hebrew ending up somewhere between the following translations:
- New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
- New American Bible (NAB)
- New American Bible Updated (NAU)

As part of my sermon prep I look a multiple translations as well as the original text. I note the differences between the translations then go to the original text and look at the original word in question.

Another truth is that each translation has a bias. Some work to do a "word for word" translation and others work to make the text more readable. Others contain a theological bias based on who was involved in the translation.

As for a good resource that offers a several translations is http://bible.oremus.org

Quote from: drizabone on Aug 11, 2015, 02:22PMI'm in.

A couple of suggestions:
- use a standard translation as a reference
- otherwise it could be confusing for people that aren't familiar with there being different transalations
- you can always refer to another translation in specific cases if you want to
- use a modern translation
- we don't want to have to explain "old english" at the same time as the bible text
- from a protestant point of view The NIV 2011 is pretty good in terms of accuracy and is very understandable
- you can read it online at https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-International-Version-NIV-Bible/
- bible gateway has a whole stack of versions if you want to use another - or compare

So the question of which version to pick is one we'd better not get too far wrong. To my mind, the version picked needs to fulfil three broad criteria:

i) To have an easily navigable online version;
ii) To be a relatively modern and readable version of the text, with respected scholarship;
iii) To have widespread basic approval within the various pieces of the Western Christian world.

That Bible Gateway website is very nice - just click on it, and there you are without fuss, all sorts of different versions of every chapter. The kind of organised information-sharing thing that the internet was invented for.

The NIV is what I recall was used when my Mother attended a church - I have a copy at home, bearing the label "Presented to David Taylor for good attendance, 1991"(!). It lives on a shelf next to the Koran, the Edda, and a book about Celtic origin ideas.

However, my inclination is to go with Travis's recommendation, and plump for the NRSV, which is described on the same site as having "received the widest acclaim and broadest support from academics and church leaders of any modern English translation." Browsing random chapters, the prose style seems pleasant, and the description matches the criteria well. Any objections to going with the NRSV?

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 4:48 am

This Jesus & Mo is actually pretty generic--no need for skin of any real thickness--not a side-splitter, but amusing:

Jesus: I'm getting sick of whataboutery.
Mo:     Whataboutery?
Jesus: It's the fallacy of relative privation. Whenever somebody points out a problem, someone will try to dismiss it
      by saying that much bigger problems exist, so the initial problem isn't worth discussing.
      "What about extremism?" "What about Israel?" "What about the West?" It's an impediment to discussion, and it
      gets on my nerves.
      What do you think, Mo?
Mo:    I think there are more important things to worry about than whataboutery.

ttf_B0B · Post by **ttf_B0B** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 8:27 am

Quote from: Baron von Bone on Aug 12, 2015, 04:48AMThis Jesus & Mo is actually pretty generic--no need for skin of any real thickness--not a side-splitter, but amusing:Well, for things to change for the better, things would first need to change. Looks like that's already failing as the meaningless habits come back already.

ttf_blast · Post by **ttf_blast** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:03 pm

FOR THE INFORMATION OF ALL

The destruction of the original thread.....

Bruce has been searching through the moderator action log and found that the culprit was...

ME

I was trying to send a warning to a member about TOU and needed to check that thread.

I was working from my phone in an area were phone and internet kept dropping. In my efforts, it seems I zapped the thread by mistake.

I am very sorry and apologise to all for the loss of the history of debate.

Pure accident... no hidden agenda.

Chris Stearn

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:11 pm

Quote from: blast on Aug 12, 2015, 02:03PMFOR THE INFORMATION OF ALL

The destruction of the original thread.....

Bruce has been searching through the moderator action log and found that the culprit was...

ME

I was trying to send a warning to a member about TOU and needed to check that thread.

I was working from my phone in an area were phone and internet kept dropping. In my efforts, it seems I zapped the thread by mistake.

I am very sorry and apologise to all for the loss of the history of debate.

Pure accident... no hidden agenda.

Chris Stearn
Good to hear, man!

Still a bummer of course, but good to hear.

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:21 pm

Quote from: blast on Aug 12, 2015, 02:03PMFOR THE INFORMATION OF ALL

The destruction of the original thread.....

Bruce has been searching through the moderator action log and found that the culprit was...

ME

I was trying to send a warning to a member about TOU and needed to check that thread.

I was working from my phone in an area were phone and internet kept dropping. In my efforts, it seems I zapped the thread by mistake.

I am very sorry and apologise to all for the loss of the history of debate.

Pure accident... no hidden agenda.

Chris Stearn

Ah Chris, that solves the mystery. Glad to hear it was more innocent than it felt. Thanks all for the detective work.

Your punishment is that your post here means that you are now subscribed to this thread forevermore...

ttf_badger · Post by **ttf_badger** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 2:49 pm

Nothing is ever lost...Check Hillary's server.

ttf_Trav1s · Post by **ttf_Trav1s** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 4:05 pm

Quote from: bhcordova on Aug 11, 2015, 11:50AMTravis, are you refering to the NAB(a Catholic translation with the entire bible) or the NASB (a Protestant version with the deuterocanonical books missing?) I ask because there is no NABU(pdatated)

My bad as I got things confused.

QuoteVersion ID: NAU
Description: New American Standard Bible with Codes (1995)
Language: English
Number of Books: 66
Number of Chapters: 1189
Number of Verses: 31103
Number of Blank Verses: 0
Total Number of Words: 775306
Number of Unique Words: 14348
Current Verse: 18440
Database Type: Bible Text Version
Books: Gen Exo Lev Num Deu Jos Jdg Rut 1Sa 2Sa 1Ki 2Ki 1Ch 2Ch Ezr Neh Est Job Psa Pro Ecc Sol Isa Jer Lam Eze Dan Hos Joe Amo Oba Jon Mic Nah Hab Zep Hag Zec Mal Mat Mar Luk Joh Act Rom 1Co 2Co Gal Eph Phi Col 1Th 2Th 1Ti 2Ti Tit Phm Heb Jam 1Pe 2Pe 1Jo 2Jo 3Jo Jud Rev

Copyright and Source Information:

NAS/NAU - The New American Standard Bible NASB (NAS[1977] and NAU[1995]), Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1988, 1995, and La Biblia de Las Americas, Copyright © 1986, both by The Lockman Foundation. All rights reserved. This excellent translation is an updated edition of the ASV [see above], with the entire Bible completed in 1971. Both the 1977 NASB English Bible translation and the 1995 New American Standard Bible 1995 Update are included as separate literal Bible texts. PERMISSION TO QUOTE: The text of the New American Standard Bible may be quoted and/or reprinted up to and inclusive of two hundred (200) verses without express written permission of The Lockman Foundation, providing the verses do not amount to a complete book of the Bible nor do the verses quoted account for more than 10% of the total work in which they are quoted. Notice of copyright must appear on the title or copyright page of the work as follows: Scripture taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, © Copyright The Lockman Foundation 1960,1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1988, 1995. Used by permission. When quotations from the NASB text are used in not-for-resale media, such as church bulletins, orders of service, posters, transparencies or similar media, the abbreviation (NASB) may be used at the end of the quotation (instead of the above copyright notice). Quotations and/or reprints in excess of the above limitations, or other permission requests, must be directed to and approved in writing by The Lockman Foundation. This permission to quote is limited to material which is wholly manufactured in compliance with the provisions of the copyright laws of the United States of America and all applicable international conventions and treaties.

ttf_John the Theologian · Wed Aug 12, 2015 7:08 pm

I would be willing to take part in this as long as we remember that the chapter divisions don't always fit with the clear subject breaks in some cases. They were added much later than when the texts were written-- the first chapter divisions were in the 13th century while the verse divisions came in the 16th. The joke that is sometimes told is that the chapter and verse divisions were done by someone on horseback and sometimes happened when the horse stumbled.

As far as translations, while I could live with the NRSV, it is not my preference because it is not held in high regard in more conservative circles because at a number of significant places in an attempt to be gender neutral, it translates texts inaccurately. In other words there is an element of political correctness that plays into the translation philosophy that is unnecessary.

The NIV is not my first choice, but it would probably be quite workable and until very recently was the best selling modern English translation of the Bible. It follows what is known as dynamic equivalent translation philosophy.

My first choice would be the English Standard Version (ESV), which is an updating of the original Revised Standard Version. After the NIV and the King James Vesion it is the best seller. It follows what is known as an essentially literal translation philosophy.

I can explain the difference between these 2 translation philosophies if anyone wants to know.

Here's a link to the ESV:

https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/English-Standard-Version-ESV-Bible/

ttf_drizabone · Post by **ttf_drizabone** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 7:28 pm

I too would prefer the NIV 2011 or the ESV.

But I would work with the RSV if that was the groups preference

ttf_ddickerson · Post by **ttf_ddickerson** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:44 am

How about the NEV? that one would work for everyone on here. ((NEV==New Editable Version))

ttf_MoominDave · Post by **ttf_MoominDave** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:50 am

Shame we don't have anyone called Neville here. Do you fancy taking a turn when we've got this going? Looks like we'll launch it the week after next, when I get back from holiday.

ttf_HeRoze · Post by **ttf_HeRoze** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:22 pm

in theory - I'm on board with a structured bible discussion. Wondering if it follows the "bible in a year" path or can it be more a scheduled choice reading? By choice reading I mean where there are multiple books that speak to the same subject, or books where one leads or foreshadows the next, or .... I don't have access to those types of resources, unfortunately.

ttf_drizabone · Post by **ttf_drizabone** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:32 pm

Quote from: ddickerson on Aug 13, 2015, 08:44AMHow about the NEV? that one would work for everyone on here. ((NEV==New Editable Version))

You being cheeky? Naughty! Or are you referring the the New European Version, which seems to be christadelphian - I wasn't aware that we had any of that persuasion here, so would probably not be interested.

ttf_HeRoze · Post by **ttf_HeRoze** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:40 pm

I'm going to use whatever bible I have lying around (usually the new Jerusalem bible) or an online reading format.

This link may also prove helpful if there is a significant difference in versions...

http://www.biblestudytools.com/compare-translations/

ttf_drizabone · Post by **ttf_drizabone** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:50 pm

Quote from: HeRoze on Aug 13, 2015, 02:22PMin theory - I'm on board with a structured bible discussion. Wondering if it follows the "bible in a year" path or can it be more a scheduled choice reading? By choice reading I mean where there are multiple books that speak to the same subject, or books where one leads or foreshadows the next, or .... I don't have access to those types of resources, unfortunately.

The idea as I understand it, is to go through the bible, chapter by chapter.

As we haven't got any more concrete plans than that, here's a proposal for your consideration and revision.

1. You volunteer to do a chapter.
2. This would be organised more than a week before you're scheduled to publish
3. You prepare a summary of the text based on the approved translation, but with additional references as you see fit. (At the moment we're leaning towards using the ESV which is easily accessible on Bible Gateway. If anyone has any stong objections to that or preferences for another translation please let us know)
4. Then interested people will have the opportunity to ask questions about your summary or the text, or offer an analysis or make observations. Of the Text - not the person. The reasons for you thoughts are important.
5. Then when we've finished on that chapter we publish another one and repeat.

I think the idea is so that people can actually find out what's in the bible or whatever books we do, rather than to argue for the right understanding, so it would be great to get peoples understanding of what the texts mean, I don't expect long arguments on the thread about particular topics. Just tell us what you think and why and then move on.

And deal with the text not the people. I want people with different understanding to participate so don't annoy them. Even if they don't believe the RIGHT THING!

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:51 pm

Quote from: drizabone on Aug 13, 2015, 02:32PMYou being cheeky? Naughty! Or are you referring the the New European Version, which seems to be christadelphian - I wasn't aware that we had any of that persuasion here, so would probably not be interested.
I think it's just part of the whole "the measure of True Christians is that they agree with me" schtick.

But I think you realize that too ...

ttf_drizabone · Post by **ttf_drizabone** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:52 pm

Quote from: HeRoze on Aug 13, 2015, 02:40PMI'm going to use whatever bible I have lying around (usually the new Jerusalem bible) or an online reading format.

This link may also prove helpful if there is a significant difference in versions...

http://www.biblestudytools.com/compare-translations/

Thanks and it will be great to have you on board

ttf_drizabone · Post by **ttf_drizabone** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 2:57 pm

So do we have any volunteers for the first couple of chapters?

First in gets to pick if you want a particular chapter, but it will work easier if we have a roster. That will give you more time to work on your summary.

Unless someone says that they want Genesis 1 by tomorrow night, I'll start on it.

ttf_ddickerson · Post by **ttf_ddickerson** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:05 pm

Quote from: drizabone on Aug 13, 2015, 02:32PMYou being cheeky? Naughty! Or are you referring the the New European Version, which seems to be christadelphian - I wasn't aware that we had any of that persuasion here, so would probably not be interested.

Yes I was, but maybe, if we all collaborate on a single edition, editable version with cut and paste, we would all end up with a Bible that we all agreed on. .....Just kidding......

I was not referring to the New European version, wasn't even aware of that one.

You guys are going to do an awesome work, and I can't wait to start the reading.

ttf_HeRoze · Post by **ttf_HeRoze** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 3:37 pm

Ok - I downloaded eSword, so I should have most versions of the bible covered.

I would ask that we choose one of the free online versions if nothing else.

BTW eSword has a few dozen versions (free, in English; and gaboodles more not free or not English) as well as commentaries.

http://www.e-sword.net/index.html

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:49 am

Yet again, some really good stuff in today's Pan Patheos Newsletter (lots of good reading/discussion material), including ...

Newsletter Home:
The Quest for Renewal and the Religious Life
A Counterfeit Christian, or Heretic: Yes or No
Republican Conundrum: The Only Benchmark of Belief is Fanaticism
Future of Faith in America: Islam

ttf_Baron von Bone · Post by **ttf_Baron von Bone** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 5:20 am

Missed this one from the 14th ... some good stuff again (as usual).

What Do People Think God Is Actually Like?
Does more education mean more, or less, religion? It depends whether you take intelligence into account (this is as much about stats in general than the chosen stat).
That was weird are you a mind reader? Thinking style affects how we interpret weird experiences (and maintain beliefs).
Distrust of atheists is widespread and pervasive: more evidence (it's because we're too into persecuting Christians, of course)
Churchgoing has been on the decline for decades in Western nations: heres why
Americans: not as religious as they think they are
The statistics are clear: a cultural shift away from religion is underway in the USA
You can make people less religious by flicking their brain with magnetic pulses (or vice versa)

ttf_ronkny · Post by **ttf_ronkny** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 8:35 am

This thread is really taking off now!

ttf_ddickerson · Post by **ttf_ddickerson** » Mon Aug 17, 2015 8:37 am

I thought that we were waiting on someone to perform an analysis on the First chapter of Genesis. I guess, BVB is trying to fill the time, while we wait.