The Faith & Religion mega Thread

It's worth pointing out that Jewish scriptures were never reproduced in the traditional Greek/Roman way, which involved someone reading out aloud and a room full of slaves transcribing what was being read. You could use that for secular literature but rabbinical scholars always insisted that sacred texts be copied directly from a written original by a single scribe. That is still how it is done today, and there is very little difference between the modern massorah (standard) text and the documents found at Qumran.

As far as the New Testament is concerned, we have one or two quite early texts to which all modern translators keep returning. There simply wasn't time for much corruption to take place.

+1 hazel. The Codex Sinaiaticus and Vatican 1209 are two complete manuscripts on vellum from early times.

There's also several fragments been found from early times, some with a date range including the 1st century which shed light on how the earliest versions looked. This is of particular interest to our translators, who restore the Divine Name into the NT where it was originally. After all, it's his book!

The fact that it remained in when the Jews stopped using it meant every Hebrew copyist obeyed the injunction against changing Scripture, which is amusing, because they reject it as Scripture. Are they sure?

Interesting also that the Hebrew Matthew of Shem Tob Ben Issac Ibn Shaprut which we mentioned earlier had the Divine name throughout Matthew's gospel. Our guys have used that. And that guy was a polemicist against Christianity . You can imagine him spinning in his grave at us .

For what it might be worth, @business_kid, there are a great many who objected to the inclusion of the Book of Revelation in "the canon" at all. They objected to the idea of a God/Jesus who had become positively sadistic. They didn't like watching people stewing forever in a lake of sulfurous fire while angels sat around the thing as though it was some kind of celestial campfire, praising God for his "justice." In fact, they had real problems with people being defined as bird-food for raptors and vultures and such. (e.g. Revelation 19,20)

Apocalyptic literature is actually fairly plentiful – if you were getting the sh*t beat of you, you liked to read books which showed God coming down from heaven to beat the sh*t out of whoever was then beating the sh*t out of you. (In the case of Revelation, that was likely to be Emperor Nero.)

But Revelation is very-explicitly and also very-exceptionally violent. This is no more a "forgiving, loving" God/Jesus: this is now someone who apparently loves to forever-torture the very things that He once created, and to do so in the most-hideous ways. There are those who rejected its inclusion on that basis alone.

It is well worth reading online articles such as this one which recognize that "the selection of 'the canon'" was(!) "a selection," and that this selection process was disputed both at the time and probably ever since. Someone at some point decided that the "Book of Enoch" should be excluded, but that "Revelation" made the cut. And, actually, it's not really "someone at some point." We do know "who and when and why."

Yes, as I mentioned in post #10225, people were slower to accept Revelation.

Like most people, you show signs of having missed two important pointers for how to interpet Revelation.

1. Rev:1,1: It was presented 'in signs,' i.e. not literally.
2. Rev 1:10 "…I came to be in the Lord's day." Most of the book goes from the Last Days to the end of the Millenium.

Both are times of judgement, so killing is done, all right.

The potential for teaching apostasy from Revelation was great, especially with Greek philosophers confusing people with their codswallop. That influence was less in later times. Early Bible canons had explanations justifying why books were accepted or rejected. I think Origen of Alexandria (and later Athanasius of Alexandria) listed the 27 books that gained acceptance and we use today. But God is influential enough to look after things like that. Men didn't get to mess that up.

Revelation is best understood in you understand the fulfillment of Hebrew prophecies, which you probably don't. As for God being a sadist, no. That's taking a shallow pass at scripture, instead of digging.

• Greek used the same word for 'tormentor' and 'jailer' as jailers were often called upon to apply torture. So "Tormenting day and night…" = confining day & night.
• Fire is a symbol of destruction in Scripture, Not torture. Daniel's 3 friends were sent for execution in a furnace, not torture.
• in Rev 20:14, Death and the grave ('Hades' in some translations, 'hell' in worse ones) were also hurled into the Lake of fire. The lake of fire cannot be literal. It is a sign of destruction.

Think about it logically for a minute. Imagine you end up in a furnace. Within seconds, your body (including all pain sensors) is ashes. Your life is over, so you are not conscious of anything. You are not likely to feel anything, are you?. You, the great skeptic, have taken on board some nonsense from false religion

To make sense of the lake of fire: With Death (from Adam & Eve's sin) --> the grave, people had the hope of a resurrection through Jesus' sacrifice. At that time, all of that will be over. The point is, there's no way back for anyone destroyed at that later time. Now I imagine I'll get get flak for saying all that because I imagine it will go over some heads. C'est la vie.

EDIT: The book of Enoch is an obvious fake, because Enoch lived far too early to see any of the stuff he wrote about.

Ignoring the bit of "ad hominem" here ("... which you probably don't"), I actually do also know the subject quite well. When I used the word "sadist," I meant that other people at the time objected to how this particular book was portraying the Trinity and Its motivations. "Symbolic" though it was undoubtedly intended to be, there were indeed many people who felt at the time that it ought not be included in the Canon.

If you want to interpret it as "prophecy," then you necessarily (I suggest ...) cannot view it as "symbolic" at all. Some day, once-dead people are going to be thrown into a sulfurous pit, there to experience never-ending torture in spite of the fact that their mortal lives are done. In exchange for, as my friend once put it, "at most, seventy-odd years of screw-ups." "Prophecy," as I understand and use the term, is supposed to come literally true.

Although violence in apocalyptic writing is somewhat "par for the course," Revelation in many (ancient ...) people's opinions "went a bridge too far," and should not have been accepted. It should have instead joined the "off-line list" of many apocalypses ("Old-T and New") that we have preserved.

-- The "Book of Enoch" was merely cited as a quick example. Like many such texts which were obviously written in the name of someone else, then as you say, the supposed-provenance often does not make any sense. But, "a very long time ago, somebody wrote it and got it published. And then, other people saved it." Maybe they valued it just for what it said [to them].

Or... we can take "God Fearing" more literally since in early times Respect = Fear, and that assumption still exists a bit today. Considering most scribes and authority figures were Male, and male authority figures were like substitute Father Figures, who combine some emotional distance, judgment and punishment (often severe) Gods were most often seen as capricious, vindictive and powerful/fearful and such "gems" as "Spare the rod, spoil the child" and "Women and horses should be beaten regularly" last even till this day though to lesser degree. Back then, it was de rigeur. It is still evident in many "Last Days" folks who actually gloat over those condemned to "bone detail" while they watch from on high.

Personally I have no problem with light punishing behaviour like a loud clap or crack of a whip to motivate a farm animal to move into a corral or barn. They needn't grasp that they will be better tended and protected there, their instincts just move to avoid loud sharp, noises. They get what they need and I get what I want so loud noise is OK. Granted, I have participated in shoeing horses and horn removal of cows etc that are far scarier and possibly painful "for their own good" but even that can feel rather barbaric and is last resort.

I don't see how it would be humane to kill them because they're stupid or ignorant and certainly not to torture them for days on end, let alone eternity. I can only grasp that as ignorant and sadistic as well as nonsense but also certainly in line with the pantheon of other human stories of The Gods not altogether unlike Roman Emperors, definitely human and ancient human at that.

It is also quite apparent that this is the essence of the problem. Farm animals don't apparently grasp what it is to be human and that gulf is infinitely smaller than the gulf between animals on some little podunk planet and creator(s) of Universe(s). Yet some of us assume we understand and managed to put that understanding into words at a time when humans hadn't the faintest of clues what even The Earth comprised let alone the entire Universe. Yeah, that makes sense <sarc>.

To begin: One of the motives in writing/publishing Apocryphal books was a desire for personal prominence. Another was as support for Apostate teachings. The Book of Enoch was written probably in the 2nd century, and Christianity was officially not believing any Trinity - just bending over backwards to make their doctrines more acceptable to Greeks. In other words, Apostasy(=rot) was setting in. That's where the cruel God burning people forever came from too, and the immortal soul. They are pagan doctrines held by pagans for centuries. I am as disgusted by that version of Christianity as you are.

@enorbet: An interesting treatise on man's inhumanity to man, woman, and animals.

Personally, I agree with your comments on the cruelty of eternal torture. I hope you don't think I believe any of that nonsense. The soul dies. The immortal soul is a lie. The lie of an immortal soul is an imaginative and excellent tool for making God look bad. None of God's actions are sadistic. A study of the Scriptures make clear the dead are terminated, not tortured. The way you complain about God's character, you sound like a believer.

@sundialsvcs: What 'ad hominem?' I'm straight. If I meant to attack you, you'd certainly have known about it.

'…the subject…' '…this book…' '…portraying the Trinity…' is it the Revelation or the book of Enoch you are talking about? Presuming it's Revelation, my last post applies.

Sure loads of people have beliefs about cruelty and torture, making God look bad. I don't believe any of that. In Revelation, he terminates people. But the imagery has been twisted to make it look like eternal torture.

The Bible is not like a paperback, which you can read, and get the sense of. You need to study it and build a picture, like putting the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle together. That's why there's Bible Study courses offered by us.

I don't cotton to the idea of anyone being "thrown into a lake of fire" for any reason at all. No matter how many screw-ups they committed during their inevitably very-brief mortal lives. God has no need to be vindictive. He doesn't need to inflict a "Tribulation" upon a world that cannot resist. He also doesn't need to fight a war in which "the blood runs as high as a horse's bridle." That is sadistic. And that's why I don't accept this book.

It rather bothered me that Tim LaHey was so damned successful in his "Left Behind" series of books. It's too-obvious that there are people out there who relish the idea of being teleported to a front-row seat where they can watch "all those sinners getting what's coming to them" while they get to just sit back and watch the fireworks. More than a few of the passages which he wrote struck me as being very bloodthirsty.

Just FTR I wasn't "complaining about God's behaviour" but rather Man's perception of how a God should behave. In my view, all bibles have a human view of "The Creator" that is as limited as Man's perception of The Universe. Unfortunately, Man's view of God has progressed very little and has not even begun to keep pace with human knowledge of The Universe, big and small. Mostly since around 1880-1900 religion "dug in" to That Olde Tyme Religion at a time when Science gathered steam.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs I don't cotton to the idea of anyone being "thrown into a lake of fire" for any reason at all. No matter how many screw-ups they committed during their inevitably very-brief mortal lives. God has no need to be vindictive. He doesn't need to inflict a "Tribulation" upon a world that cannot resist. He also doesn't need to fight a war in which "the blood runs as high as a horse's bridle." …

Well it may surprise you to find that I agree with you. As I have posted before, Revelation is in signs, so there's no literal lake of fire. "Tribulation" was a word used in a passage referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. That was real bad. The history is online Josephus' Wars, primarily books V & VI.

Another image is the blood up to a horse's bridle. That bit, iirc is already over, and nobody was harmed although it did cause a stir. Images, guys, or Signs - it's not literal.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs It rather bothered me that Tim LaHey was so damned successful in his "Left Behind" series of books. It's too-obvious that there are people out there who relish the idea of being teleported to a front-row seat where they can watch "all those sinners getting what's coming to them" while they get to just sit back and watch the fireworks. More than a few of the passages which he wrote struck me as being very bloodthirsty.

I have never read Tim LaHey. You do turn out your "own brand" born again Christians who seem to believe and relish that everyone they don't like is going to hell (and they mean the nastiest versions). JWs are high up on the list of persons they don't like. And like Muslims do the Haj, they all seem to go to Israel at least once.

I should correct myself slightly ...

Originally Posted by business_kid "Tribulation" was a word used in a passage referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. That was real bad. The history is online Josephus' Wars, primarily books V & VI.

That's correct history. And it was real bad - what the Jews did to each other and what the Romans did top them.

But the prophecy also has an application to the end times in the near future. I would normally refer to that time as Armageddon, but others refer to that time as the "Great Tribulation."

This is widely expected in the near future. It certainly will be the largest judicial execution in history. For unbelieving Bible Students (mentioning no names) some other passages thought to refer to this time period are:

• Jeremiah 25:31-38 (2nd fulfillment of this prophecy).
• Ezekiel chapter 38, particularly 14-23
• 2 Peter chapter 3:10-13. It is good to know that 'heavens' often signifies governments
• Revelation's image is Rev 19:17-21. The 'sword protuding out of his mouth' signifies power of Judgement.

It's good to read context, but those are the key verses. Those folks will be terminated, not tortured. I don't take any of the imagery as literal, although I'm sure someone will go out of their way to do exactly that.

As these events are still future, I don't know exactly how they will work out. The imagery of the 'great evening meal of God' clearly isn't literal, as a little basic math on the bird population will inform you.

It is or at least should be worthy of note that while it certainly still exists to this day, the concept that "God's Justice" is enforced in the finest details of daily life was nearly universal 2000 years ago. That people actually carried signs just a few years declaring "Aids is God's way of punishing fags" isn't much different from assuming a city or the entire world was all but wiped out for being wicked, isn't much different from assuming that people get sick because of being wicked or the target of a demonic possession or witches curse, but all those were far more common ages ago.

Today large numbers of people feel compelled to wonder why "bad things happen to good people" when it should be obvious - Nature doesn't judge us for goodness or wickedness, some even flourish from wickedness, Nature just doesn't care. It's not only non judgmental, it's not sentient so it doesn't, and most likely cannot care. Nature doesn't, but Humans do and rightfully so.

In my view the entire notion of "End Times" from God's judgment is not only irrationally ancient (not supported by evidence then or now, but at least ancients didn't know any better) but holds the danger of a self-fulfilling prophecy, sort of like expecting to win a race when you're convince you haven't a spectre of a chance to... or worse, actually wishing for it. On a day to day basis I find it actually despicable that some devout people turn against their neighbors because getting sick is somehow brought on by not being devout enough. I suppose the 15,000 children who die every single day, 365 days of the year, deserved such "judgment" <sarc>.

http://soas.academia.edu
OR
http://soas.ac.uk

That's an interesting link for anyone researching older stuff that's often argued about here. The link is to an English University in London. They are very coy about what the SOAS stands for. The Ancient Middle East is big for them. They have papers on 'E-temen-anki'(=The Tower of Babel to ordinary mortals like me), or Joshua's Jericho, and a lot of this Bible history stuff is supported by findings from the actual locations.

You can also become a mine of useless information. Like the original tower of Babel doesn't exist any more. But they have found the depression where it previously stood. It bricks were early attempts instead of the much lighter baked brick we use today. But from the depth of the depression left by the tower, they have calculated that the original tower of Babel weighed 384,000 tons! The thing became hugely unstable because water got in, and expanded individual bricks, which then softened and were crushed under the tremendous weight.

Well, @business_kid, I would not now recommend that you read any of Tim's "Left Behind Series," but I will say that just a few years ago his publisher's marketing department was getting it sold in churches. They even were providing sermon topics for lazy preachers!

And I must now say that the creepiest thing about it was that ... for many(!) apparently-successful volumes ... he seemed to focus, not upon the "chosen few" who had been "miraculously teleported to nirvana," but those who had been "left behind." One might reasonably ask why "someone who had thus been 'teleported' would then care about the poor schleps who had not, and would then want to pore over their misery. (Especially such a violent and bloody or even bloodthirsty misery!)

The whole thing – wildly successful as a commercial venture, apparently – just gave me the creeps. I'm very glad that they finally achieved their marketing objectives ... and went away. (???)

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs I'm very glad that they finally achieved their marketing objectives ... and went away. (???)

I don't give much for the fables you say he was putting out either. But then, as he only hung around churches, that shouldn't have been cause for concern?