03 Jul 11
1 edit
Originally posted by Dowardummm i noticed that you never mentioned the King of Kings of biblical translation, the New world translation of the Holy Scriptures. Any translation which is prepared to use inane and insipid terms as a substitution for the divine name as encapsulated by the tetragrammaton is in serious want. What is more, one can readily see in many of these translations gross errors of judgement (i wont call it deception at this stage), for example, in the rendering of 1st Timothy 3:16, but they exist.
most serious scholars avoid the KJV. It is useful if you use a concordance, otherwise there are superior translations: NRV, NSRV, NLT etc...
03 Jul 11
Originally posted by RJHindsCopy-pasting from here and there regarding this matter will drive you nowhere; you are confused, and you have to study this tricky topic seriously. So I will give you pieces of information and sources, and you may proceed acccording to your convenience.
I guess I'll have to repeat this again for you.
The following is from britannica.com online encyclopedis:
trikaya, (Sanskrit: “three bodies&rdquo😉, in Mahayana Buddhism, the concept of the three bodies, or modes of being, of the Buddha: the dharmakaya (body of essence), the unmanifested mode, and the supreme state of absolute knowledge; the sambhogakaya (b ...[text shortened]... trine.
So the Christian Trinity is not at all like a copy-paste, a meta-concept of
Trikaya.
Graeco-Buddhism was developed in the period between the 4th century BC and the 5th century in the area known today as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Jammu and Kashmir. It was developed out of the interactions by Greek forays into India since the time of Alexander the Great; and later took place the establishment of Indo-Greek rule in the area for some centuries. Greco-Buddhism influenced the spiritual framework of Mahayana Buddhism.
And King Ashoka, the one who convened the third Buddhist council around 250 BCE at Pataliputra that was held by the monk Moggaliputtatissa, sent Buddhist missionaries dispatched throughout the known world to spread their doctrine. In the Edicts of Ashoka we see that the king tried to propagate the Buddhist faith throughout the Hellenistic world, and it is clear thanks to the Edicts that Ashoka had a perfect understanding of the political organization in Hellenistic territories, for the names and the location of the main Greek monarchs of the time are identified as Antiochus II Theos of the Seleucid Kingdom (261-246 BCE), Ptolemy II Philadelphos of Egypt (285-247 BCE), Antigonus Gonatas of Macedonia (276-239 BCE), Magas of Cyrene (288-258 BCE) in Cyrenaica (modern Libya), and Alexander II of Epirus (272-255 BCE) in Epirus (modern Northwestern Greece).
According to Pali sources some of Ashoka's emissaries were Greek Buddhist monks, indicating close religious exchanges between the two cultures: "When Moggaliputta, the illuminator of the religion of the Conqueror Ashoka, had brought the council to an end he sent forth elders… and to the Western countries he sent the Greek named Dhammarakkhita" (FYI check Mahavamsa XII).
Now: the antecedents of the Mahayana Trikaya doctrine appear in the Pali Canon when Gautama Buddha tells Vasettha that the Tathagata (the Buddha) was "Dharmakaya", the “Truth-body” or the “Embodiment of Truth”, as well as "Dharmabhuta", “Truth-become”, that is, “One who has become Truth” (Digha Nikaya). Thus even before the Buddha's Parinirvana the term “Dharmakaya” was current, and Dharmakaya without the concept of Trikaya is unconceivable.
Finally, I don't claim that Trikaya is identical to the Christian Trinity. I said that the Christian Trinity is an irrational doctrine regarding the so called triune nature and the activities of the Christian God, whilst Trikaya is an older and quite understandable concept regarding the triune hypostasis of the manifested Buddha.
However the trikayan concept was known to Plato, who re-offered it at his Platonism. Well, I argue that the Platonist Trinity is problematic in comparison to the doctrine of Trikaya; and I argue that the Christian Trinity (that is based on the functionality of the Platonist Trinity) is irrational, whilst Trikaya is a crystal clear concept. I do not argue that Platonism and the Christian theology are identical, however it is quite clear that the Christian Trinity is just a meta-concept rooted on pagan beliefs
😵
03 Jul 11
3 edits
Originally posted by black beetleits fascinating, I've been up there beetle, in Peshawar, Sawat valley, although i never made it to Gilgit i have met persons from there. They are a ruddy faced people who look to all intents and purposes to be European, exceptionally so. Not Mongoloid, purely Caucasian, and when one traverses even further, to say Tajikistan and Turkmenistan there are people there, to all intents and purposes who bear the mark of Hellenist culture. The games they play that they have handed down, the marriage rites etc. The Macedonian Zekunderi Azim has left his legacy to this very day.
Copy-pasting from here and there regarding this matter will drive you nowhere; you are confused, and you have to study this tricky topic seriously. So I will give you pieces of information and sources, and you may proceed acccording to your convenience.
Graeco-Buddhism was developed in the period between the 4th century BC and the 5th century in t e clear that the Christian Trinity is just a meta-concept rooted on pagan beliefs
😵
03 Jul 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSure thing😵
its fascinating, I've been up there beetle, in Peshawar, Sawat valley, although i never made it to Gilgit i have met persons from there. They are a ruddy faced people who look to all intents and purposes to be European, exceptionally so. Not Mongoloid, purely Caucasian, and when one traverses even further, to say Tajikistan and Turkmenistan there ar ...[text shortened]... n, the marriage rites etc. The Macedonian Zekunderi Azim has left his legacy to this very day.
03 Jul 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAnyone deluded enough to insist that God's name is Jehovah, and use that to replace the tetragrammaton when clearly we don't know for certain what YHWH actually says (everyone knows what it means) is likely to read an inferior translation like the NWT.
ummm i noticed that you never mentioned the King of Kings of biblical translation, the New world translation of the Holy Scriptures. Any translation which is prepared to use inane and insipid terms as a substitution for the divine name as encapsulated by the tetragrammaton is in serious want. What is more, one can readily see in many of these tran ...[text shortened]... it deception at this stage), for example, in the rendering of 1st Timothy 3:16, but they exist.
The prepoderance of evidense is against you yet you tiredly regurgitate the same old arguments...that's delusion...
03 Jul 11
2 edits
Originally posted by Dowardwhat a puny feeble excuse for having systematically removed the name of God from your translations and replaced it, upwards of 7,000 times with inane terms. You have NO authority for doing so, NO basis for doing so and the result has been a botched job that has resulted in confusion and error. The name Jehovah, from the tertragrammaton, JHVH has been in use for hundreds of years, my goodness, even that government sanctified version the King James Bible mentions it on several occasions.
Anyone deluded enough to insist that God's name is Jehovah, and use that to replace the tetragrammaton when clearly we don't know for certain what YHWH actually says (everyone knows what it means) is likely to read an inferior translation like the NWT.
The prepoderance of evidense is against you yet you tiredly regurgitate the same old arguments...that's delusion...
What is more, its found in abbreviated forms and derivatives of names like EliJAH, AdoniJAH, and even further to that, your absurdities with regard to pronunciation notwithstanding, why do you not pronounce Jesus as Yeshua or Yehohshua if you are sooo concerned about it? Which one of those is correct? Does it prevent you from using Christ's name, no? well then you are hardly being honest or consistent.
The fact of the matter is, Christians were to make Gods name known, not systematically remove it from the sacred text as you scurrilous robbers have done! You should be handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh for your iniquity!
(John 17:6) . . .“I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world. . .
03 Jul 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDo you seriously think a god would make such a big deal over what we called it?
what a puny feeble excuse for having systematically removed the name of God from your translations and replaced it, upwards of 7,000 times with inane terms. You have NO authority for doing so, NO basis for doing so and the result has been a botched job that has resulted in confusion and error. The name Jehovah, from the tertragrammaton, JHVH has be ...[text shortened]...
(John 17:6) . . .“I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world. . .
Suppose for a very brief instant of time, your god is real:
With 7000 languages on Earth, wouldn't that alone give you pause when quibbling over your version of the name for that god?
03 Jul 11
Originally posted by sonhouseyes i do, because within a name there is meaning, in fact, one of the main themes, if not the main theme of the Bible is the sanctification of Gods name. No it wouldn't give any cause for concern, for the name of Jehovah is unique and translates well into any one of those 7,000 languages.
Do you seriously think a god would make such a big deal over what we called it?
Suppose for a very brief instant of time, your god is real:
With 7000 languages on Earth, wouldn't that alone give you pause when quibbling over your version of the name for that god?
03 Jul 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieA Christian dies gets to heaven and stands before God for his judgement. God looks him up and down and reads the mans CV handed to him by St Peter, it is one of the most exemplary God has ever seen. God addressed the man -
yes i do, because within a name there is meaning, in fact, one of the main themes, if not the main theme of the Bible is the sanctification of Gods name. No it wouldn't give any cause for concern, for the name of Jehovah is unique and translates well into any one of those 7,000 languages.
'What can i say? You have lived an exemplary Christian life. You have spent all most your entire life helping others and spreading the 'word' of Christ. Your life has been almost without sin with a few minor indiscretions here and there, but apart from those i have to say this this is the most impressive Christian life record i have seen for generations. You sir are a credit to our faith. But there is one major problem here'.
A look of bewilderment crosses the mans face as he addresses God.
'But Lord, i have lived my life to the fullest as the Bible instructed me, what can the problem be?'
A look of rage began to descend upon Gods face, His cheeks began to redden, His fists clenched in an ever tightening grip. He began fervently shaking as steam suddenly started pouring from His ears.
St Peter, who knew what was coming, began back pedaling away from God. Then He erupted,
'YOU SPELT MY BLOODY NAME WRONG YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!!!! FOR THAT YOU WILL BURN IN THE FIRES OF HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!'
At this point God reached out and pulled a lever next to Him, a trapdoor opened and the man plummeted into the fires of Hell below.
As God sat there still shaking on the verge of crying, St Peter walked up to Him putting a consoling arm around His shoulder.
'I don't know why you let it get to you so much? I'll put the kettle on for you, a nice cup of Camomile tea will sort you out'.