Shootings

@divegeester said
Would leave if I did rejoin?

Why would you leave if you did rejoin? 🙂

Providing no one vetoed you rejoining that is.

-VR

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Before we address biblical misunderstanding, is the New World Translation of the Bible the only valid one? - If so, who decided that?

I ask, as in John 1:1, for example, it mistranslates, “and the Word was God” for “and the Word was a god,” completely misconstruing the meaning of the text.

No it doesn't dear boy.

In the original text the word for God (Almighty) is "Ho Theos", a phrase not repeated in that line. The word "logos" is correctly translated in several translations as either "godlike", or "devine" or something close. it is INCORRECTLY translated as "GOD" in works such as King James; Douay; AV etc.

@medullah

New International Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New Living Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

English Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Berean Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Berean Literal Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

King James Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New King James Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New American Standard Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

etc etc etc

@ghost-of-a-duke said
@medullah

New International Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

New Living Translation
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

English Standard Version
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Berean Standard Bible
...[text shortened]... ible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

etc etc etc

atheist,

noun. athe·​ist ˈā-thē-ist. Synonyms of atheist. : a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism.

You sure seem to know much about religion for one who claims to be an atheist.

-VR

@very-rusty said
You sure seem to know much about religion for one who claims to be an atheist.

Why should being an atheist preclude someone from knowing a lot about religion?

@divegeester said
Why should being an atheist preclude someone from knowing a lot about religion?

The question was not directed at you gooster, but thanks for playing. 🙂

-VR

@very-rusty said
The question was not directed at you gooster

You don’t seem to be very good at navigating open discussion Rusty.

@very-rusty said

You sure seem to know much about religion for one who claims to be an atheist.

-VR

My degree was in theology.

Is that allowed? Should I return my certificate?

@medullah said
No it doesn't dear boy.

In the original text the word for God (Almighty) is "Ho Theos", a phrase not repeated in that line. The word "logos" is correctly translated in several translations as either "godlike", or "devine" or something close. it is INCORRECTLY translated as "GOD" in works such as King James; Douay; AV etc.

I like this reply I found:

'Let's be clear here. The New World Translation, the JW's official translation, alters the text of John 1:1 to change the language "the Word was God" to "the Word was a God". The alteration is usually justified with some very poor arguments on the original Greek, which just about every expert I've read on 1st century Koine rejects.

The odd part about this alteration, other than the dishonesty of it, is why the Watchtower and Bible Society even thought it was necessary, since no other Unitarian sect, including the Arians, ever thought it necessary to monkey around with the verse (which they wouldn't have, viewing that as a clear violation of the prohibition against altering any part of Scripture). This is likely because JW scholarship is absolutely appalling, they probably knew nothing of the Arian arguments when they made the alteration, and later didn't want to be seen as using even an ancient Church source like Arius.'

(Reddit)

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I like this reply I found:

'Let's be clear here. The New World Translation, the JW's official translation, alters the text of John 1:1 to change the language "the Word was God" to "the Word was a God". The alteration is usually justified with some very poor arguments on the original Greek, which just about every expert I've read on 1st century Koine rejects.

The ...[text shortened]... on, and later didn't want to be seen as using even an ancient Church source like Arius.'

(Reddit)

I see, so you just looked it up, thanks all the answer I was looking for. 🙂

-VR

@very-rusty said
I see, so you just looked it up, thanks all the answer I was looking for. 🙂

-VR

You think research is a bad thing?


Perhaps I have inspired you to give your own references, when copy and pasting someone else's words.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
You think research is a bad thing?


Perhaps I have inspired you to give your own references, when copy and pasting someone else's words.

I am very doubtful that will happen as it is obvious it has been copied and pasted even if you didn't give reference. 🙂 😛

-VR

@very-rusty said
I am very doubtful that will happen as it is obvious it has been copied and pasted even if you didn't give reference. 🙂 😛

-VR

“Plagiarism. - Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition...'

https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/plagiarism

@ghost-of-a-duke said
“Plagiarism. - Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition...'

https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/plagiarism

Well I been doing it for years as well as others on the site, when will the Police be coming to arrest us....I want to get a good head start on them. 😛 🙂

-VR

@very-rusty said
Well I been doing it for years as well as others on the site, when will the Police be coming to arrest us....I want to get a good head start on them. 😛 🙂

-VR

Tuesday, 3pm.