Biblical Translations

[Busby]

Originally Posted by Baile

But why do people who have a broader spiritual understanding and who can look beyond the belief-specific doctrine, focus on that stuff or even care? There are cruel stories of evil in fairy tales as well. When I pick up the Bible and study a passage, I look for the inspired bits, the brilliant metaphysical wisdom. It's the same with spiritual discussion. I ignore talk about demons and entities and evil, because I'm too busy living and contemplating upon the joyful, stupendous, miraculous aspects of life.

Why does cherry picking come to mind?

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by Busby

The one thing we can be sure of is that if God him/her/its-self really wanted us to know of him/her/it (as we somehow imagine he/she/it should be) then the Bible would be telling us exactly the same today as it once presumably did. And it would be clear, concise and precise so that everyone would be able to understand it without question. Just like the Highway Code in fact.
I've said it my whole adult life and I'll continue to say it; the Bible is a confusing, sometimes utterly evil, uncaring, unloving collection of fabricated imaginings of misled people.
In many ways it is that which was never said in this book that would be the most important information the world needs/needed to get off its backside.
To think that theology, something quite unfounded is taught at our universities - we deserve what we get.

I don't necessarily agree with society's interpretation of the book, but from God's point of view I'm not sure at all things could be stated as clearly as you want them to be. I find that sometimes, clarity the way you seem to want it can be bad for me.

Anyway it always seemed silly to me to give lip service to the idea of miracles and then with the next breath say 'but men were inefiicient in translating and men had machieavellin intentions as to what was edited in and out, therefor the whole book is worthless'.

Do I really have so little faith as to believe that if god wanted something in his book he couldn't put it in his book regardless of other circumstances? Jesus can heal the sick or raise the dead or turn water into wine or walk on water or still the stormy seas, but god can't sprinkle the words he wants to write into the pages of a mere book just because men were involved in editing it too? Should I honestly believe that men really have this power over God? Or is it just a matter of having so little faith as to believe god wouldn't care enough to actually say what he wants to say?

Or is it simply that I want to believe what I want to believe and don't care for much else, and am totally willing to ignore any 'evidence' that doesn't seem to resonate with my own desire for how things should be. Even having had it drummed into me from an early age that one of the most basic tenets of something like science is to look at things as the are not as I want them to be?

[Baile]

Originally Posted by Busby

Why does cherry picking come to mind?

I guess it's a matter of how one views the world. I raise my awareness of beneficent Spirit, and look for and gravitate to the light-filled. Others wallow about in their lower thought worlds, seeing nothing but ugliness and darkness and evil in life. All about the chosen focus.

[Jyotir]

Nothing wrong with cherries.

What Baile is suggesting is simply called discrimination - a time honored tradition essential to any spiritual path.

It's not a controversy.

Clearly and undeniably, and in spite of any errant misinterpretation or misapplication, the text is and has been an authentic source of real inspiration and practical attainment... for millions of people.

The controversy seems to arise when those who have no practical use for any particular expedient - for whatever reason - attempt to insist that others must come to the same conclusion.


~ J

[Baile]

Originally Posted by Jyotir

Nothing wrong with cherries.

What Baile is suggesting is simply called discrimination - a time honored tradition essential to any spiritual path.

It's not a controversy.

Clearly and undeniably, and in spite of any errant misinterpretation or misapplication, the text is and has been an authentic source of real inspiration and practical attainment... for millions of people.

The controversy seems to arise when those who have no practical use for any particular expedient - for whatever reason - attempt to insist that others must come to the same conclusion.


~ J

Such a clear and inspired explanation.

[StarChild]

Christianity is the religion the reptilians created to enslave humanity. To be brutally honest here, it has harmed far more people than it has helped. It has been used to divide and kill our people. Steal peoples kids and lands. And they have raped the Earth and all her children.

Most religions are much more of a barrier to spiritual growth because people cannot grow within the confines of dogma. Except perhaps Buddhism and a few others that may have provided useful tools for us, like meditation.

Based on my own understanding of the nature of the Universe and the nature of Source, we are all a divine spark. We are equally so. We are sovereign. We do not have to obey or worship anything and if something tries to insert itself between you and your own Source, just say "No thank you."

For more info on this topic:

http://www.silverlegion.org/Updates-and-Changelog.html

Scroll down to "Religion, the Demiurge, and Gods."

[Macsen1961]

Originally Posted by StarChild

Christianity is the religion the reptilians created to enslave humanity. To be brutally honest here, it has harmed far more people than it has helped. It has been used to divide and kill our people. Steal peoples kids and lands. And they have raped the Earth and all her children.

Christianity is nothing more than an offshoot of Judaism. Judaism evolved from the polytheistic religions of the region. Of all the known religions on the planet there are three that are truly monotheistic.

As for Christianity being the religion that has been the driving force behind the most harm done to people, I really suggest you study your history with a look at religions and violence.

The only difference is that Christianity came around when there was a bit more record keeping than any previous era.

Prior to the arrival of the Spaniards into Mesoamerica, the major empires would war just to get people to sacrifice on alters. The Mayas had their ball game, and the losers ended up dead. Thousands of skeletons have been found in pelinques in the areas controlled by the Mayan.

Recently thousands of sets of human skulls have been found under a house that is located at what would have been the foot of the main pyramid in the capitol Aztec city, now Mexico City.

Hindu writings indicate religious based wars as well.

To blame one religion out of all is a bit myopic.

[Busby]

Most people who turn to the Bible in times of need or because it is part of their daily life are, as far as I am concerned welcome to do so. It's just that for me and my need for clarity, - as in normal everyday life too, this book is too full of conflicts - in more ways than one. I also expect that a God, who we are told, is perfect would manage to get a message across to his sheep in such a way that even after 2000 years of interference there would be no doubt of what the message is. Apparently He/She/It doesn't find this to be of too much importance as he welcomes the meaning that every Tom, **** and Harry lends to it. This is something I'll continue to underline until my last breath.
Another thing that is disturbing is the seeming need to up-date the Bible to accomodate the desires of modern living. In other words we all know that we are suffering from a bad concience and wish for a bit of relief by relaxing the rules somewhat. The various Popes, who have no intention of according the wishes of the Roman Catholic Church to such infidelities has at least held out while other religious groups for the sake of popularity change their music every five minutes.

This is probably known as acting discriminatingly.

The four stars represent the name Richard in its shortened form. This act of correction is called 'being virtous' - let's not face facts, that would be too terrible. Edit

[Khalli]

Originally Posted by Busby

... I also expect that a God, who we are told, is perfect would manage to get a message across to his sheep in such a way that even after 2000 years of interference there would be no doubt of what the message is. ....

She has, it is out here in the world you just need to recognize it and that it might not be in spiritually related stuff. Also deep in Our souls the message is there, look inward.

[Macsen1961]

Dumb question, why do people insist on using gender specific pronouns for god?

In the strictest since, the monotheistic god seems to be a mixture of both the masculine and feminine. Both nurturer and creator/destroyer.