Worship and doubt

Originally posted by RJHinds
Is that really the way you people talk over there?

naw ah talk like this but if ah dinae put own a posh accent you widnae huv a bars irn bru whit ah wiz own aboot.

Its Scotland not Scatland

Originally posted by CalJust
This is the first time I have ever heard anybody find something strange or even interesting in this verse.

In colloquial language it makes perfect sense.

Consider a group of eleven persons entering a MacDonalds, and a report writer following them states:

"When they entered the restaurant they ordered meals, but some only Coke".

Question: How is ...[text shortened]... m had secret doubts in their minds as to whether this was REALLY him.

And your problem is???

they were not ordering cokes or big macs they were apparently worshipping Jesus although some were apparently faking it, which was it? and i don't hold that there is any contradiction, simply bad and inaccurate translation.

Originally posted by CalJust
This is the first time I have ever heard anybody find something strange or even interesting in this verse.

In colloquial language it makes perfect sense.

Consider a group of eleven persons entering a MacDonalds, and a report writer following them states:

"When they entered the restaurant they ordered meals, but some only Coke".

Question: How is ...[text shortened]... m had secret doubts in their minds as to whether this was REALLY him.

And your problem is???

I already pointed out that Thomas doubted that Jesus was God. He only believed after he saw and feit the wounds on the hands and side of Jesus. Then he believed and said, "My Lord and MY GOD." Thomas knew that only God could have raised Himself from the dead.

However, that too made no sense to his distorted mind.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I already pointed out that Thomas doubted that Jesus was God. He only believed after he saw and feit the wounds on the hands and side of Jesus. Then he believed and said, "My Lord and MY GOD." Thomas knew that only God could have raised Himself from the dead.

However, that too made no sense to his distorted mind.

Thomas was not engaged in an alleged act of worship at the time, your analogy therefore makes no sense and you are once again seemingly incapable of rational thought.

Why were the disciples faking worship Hinds?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
they were not ordering cokes or big macs they were apparently worshipping Jesus although some were apparently faking it, which was it? and i don't hold that there is any contradiction, simply bad and inaccurate translation.

Oh, so you just wanted to "prove" that there are some "bad and inaccurate" translations.

What a novel idea! I'm sure nobody has ever thought of that!

No, of course the fifty-five zillion translations that exist are all equally accurate! (although they all use different words in various places).

Translators achieve perfection asymptotically - there is almost always a trade-off between various words that could fit.

And one last thing - the difference between "obeisance" and "worship" is clearly only in your mind, I would use the two words as synonyms.

Weymouth New Testament
There they saw Him and prostrated themselves before Him. Yet some doubted.

World English Bible
When they saw him, they bowed down to him, but some doubted.

Young's Literal Translation
and having seen him, they bowed to him, but some did waver.

These translations make much more sense, they simply bowed at the sight of Jesus and yet some were doubtful that it really was Jesus. To state that they worshipped him and doubted that it was him at the same time is nonsense.

double post

Originally posted by CalJust
Oh, so you just wanted to "prove" that there are some "bad and inaccurate" translations.

What a novel idea! I'm sure nobody has ever thought of that!

No, of course the fifty-five zillion translations that exist are all equally accurate! (although they all use different words in various places).

Translators achieve perfection asymptotically - there i ...[text shortened]... n "obeisance" and "worship" is clearly only in your mind, I would use the two words as synonyms.

an appeal to an argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy, simply because many render the term worship does not mean that it actually means worship, secondly I have demonstrated that it makes absolutely no sense that the disciples worshipped Jesus and doubted that it was him at the same time, such an approach is absolute nonsense.

The only reason that it is rendered as worship is because Jesus has magical properties and can effect the translation of verses, in fact there is not a single indication in the original text that it was an act of worship and as i have shown its nonsense to assume that it was.

Why dont you simply admit that its rendered worship because of religious bias, i will at very least applaud your honesty, otherwise it will get more and more roasty toasty for you.

Weymouth New Testament
There they saw Him and prostrated themselves before Him. Yet some doubted.

World English Bible
When they saw him, they bowed down to him, but some doubted.

Young's Literal Translation
and having seen him, they bowed to him, but some did waver.

These translations make much more sense, they simply bowed at the sight of Jesus and yet some were doubtful that it really was Jesus. To state that they worshipped him and doubted that it was him at the same time is nonsense. You know it, I know it and the very stones are crying it out.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Weymouth New Testament
There they saw Him and prostrated themselves before Him. Yet some doubted.

World English Bible
When they saw him, they bowed down to him, but some doubted.

Young's Literal Translation
and having seen him, they bowed to him, but some did waver.

These translations make much more sense, they simply bowed at the sight o ...[text shortened]... us. To state that they worshipped him and doubted that it was him at the same time is nonsense.

And your point is......?

😴

Originally posted by CalJust
And your point is......?

😴

These translations make much more sense, they simply bowed at the sight of Jesus and yet some were doubtful that it really was Jesus. To state that they worshipped him and doubted that it was him at the same time is nonsense. You know it, I know it and the very stones are crying it out.

that is the point

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have demonstrated that it makes absolutely no sense that the disciples worshipped Jesus and doubted that it was him at the same time, such an approach is absolute nonsense.

No, you have demonstrated no such thing - and are too bigoted to acknowledge it!

I have showed you by my MacDonalds example (which you just shoved aside) that it is quite common to use a verb for the activities of a group, whilst another, conflicting verb could well be applied to a sub-set of the group.

The rest of your post, (accusing me and others of some bias or whatever) is complete BS, for, as I said in my original response to this drivel of yours, this verse has never presented a problem that needed explaining.

I could mention at least another 100 verses where the different translations are really tricky, and could present doctrinal problems.

😠

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Thomas was not engaged in an alleged act of worship at the time, your analogy therefore makes no sense and you are once again seemingly incapable of rational thought.

Why were the disciples faking worship Hinds?

It is possible for one to believe something and still have doubts. For example, you can believe someone commited a murder and still have a doubt concerning the evidence.

Originally posted by CalJust
No, you have demonstrated no such thing - and are too bigoted to acknowledge it!

I have showed you by my MacDonalds example (which you just shoved aside) that it is quite common to use a verb for the activities of a group, whilst another, conflicting verb could well be applied to a sub-set of the group.

The rest of your post, (accusing me and others of ...[text shortened]... where the different translations are really tricky, and could present doctrinal problems.

😠

too bigoted , hardly, just fess up and free your mind, the only reason that you accept the text as worshipped is because of your religious bias and that Jesus has magical properties which effect translation.

Your macdonalds example was ludicrous, what you are infact saying is the disciples worshipped Jesus and doubted that it was Jesus at the same time, heloooo, is there aybody in there? which as we have come to appreciate is nonsense.

The only reason that the verse is rendered worship given that the text prevents the rendering of worship on a logical and rational basis is because of religious bias, isn't it.

I did not expect you to fess up and i wash my hands in innocency itself, your house is abandoned to you.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is possible for one to believe something and still have doubts. For example, you can believe someone commited a murder and still have a doubt concerning the evidence.

but its not possible to worship Jesus and doubt that its Jesus at the same time, is it. Why do you think the disciples were faking their worship?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
an appeal to an argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy, simply because many render the term worship does not mean that it actually means worship, secondly I have demonstrated that it makes absolutely no sense that the disciples worshipped Jesus and doubted that it was him at the same time, such an approach is absolute nonsense.

The only reason ...[text shortened]... him at the same time is nonsense. You know it, I know it and the very stones are crying it out.

It must be our religious bias that when we see a Muslims bowing down toward Mecca and touching their heads to the ground that they are worshipping. Perhaps they are only doing some type of exercise. Give me a break.