From: nelson@pdn.paradyne.com (Bill Nelson)
Subject: Re: Ye Great Sinners
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 15:03:46 GMT

>> My bible says cypress wood, too; but neither here nor there, marshall
>> misquoted Genesis when he spoke of Bartholomew and Shazera.
>
>I suggest you learn to read followups more accurately; twisted and not marshall
>gave the "misquote." Marshall is the one offering "corrected" quotes.


I stand corrected and apologize for any misunderstandings that may have been 
caused by my reply.  But at least you acknowledge who gave the misquotes and 
who gave the corrected quotes.  :-)


>
>> That is not to be found in Gen 6:14, where was it found originally?
>
>I suspect it may be found in the Newer New Revised Bobo the Clown Translation;
>this exciting new text is believed to be the one most closely approximating the
>meaning intended by the Word of God (TM).


Do you have a copy of this, it would prove to be most interesting reading since 
it is where you seem to be getting most of your information from.


> 
>>>God couldn't turn a turnip into a  tomato.
>> 
>> 
>> Too long of a debate to discuss here.
>
>Why? Are you not truly up to it? Because I am.


I see no reason for God to want to turn a turnip into a tomato, there are 
already enough tomatos out there in the world.  But if you must argue your
point, go for it!


>I said it to Marshall and I'll say it to you:  we repeated what we found in
>Ecclesiastes 5:14. We could as easily fault both of you for quoting the wrong
>verse.
>
>But I find it more informative to ponder for a moment on the implications. What
>happened to our missing verse? Or is your version contaminated by later
>insertions that our translator was clever enough to spot?
> 


I have looked in several translations (NIV, KJV, NKJV, Ryrie) and they all 
concur on this verse.  I would be most interested in the name of your 
source so that at least we could converse on the same level of reference.


>>>> John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son,
>>>> that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
>>>> 
>>>> At least you got one verse partly correct.
>>>
>>>However, you are in error (as usual).  The real words from It:
>>                                            ^^^^^^^^^^
>> 
>> 
>> To say one is in ERROR, assumes that both parties have the same origin of
>> study. It appears that marshall's translation is someone different than the
>> one Rick (or I) have so such an assumption is false.
>
>A clarification here:  I understand you to mean by Marshall the first person to
>quote "correctly" and Rick (who made the original post) to be the one with the
>Newer New Revised Bobo the Clown Translation (i.e. the one you both are
>disputing).


Thanks for the clarification.


>
>> Why do you say that
>> yours are the REAL WORDS?  Such a statement indicates that others are
>> incorrect and yours is the only truth.  Why is yours the correct version and
>> all other incorrect?  It all lies in the translation.  
>
>Ah, he grasps the Point.
>
>Yes, it all lies in what you're reading, doesn't it? How are we to know what's
>right and what's not? Why, it's even possible that I might take my _The Holy
>Bible_ to a _The Holy Bible_-reading session and when we started reading
>Ecclesiastes, I would end up reading a different verse because I am using The
>Wrong Translation (gasp!) How embarrassing!
> 


I agree with you if you follow the "Name it, Claim it, Frame it" method of 
reading the Bible, where you pull particular verses out of the Bible and focus 
on them without evaluating the entire theme, setting, and tone of which the 
verses were written, then you could be in a most embarrassing situation.  Its 
kind of like reading "Cliffs Notes" to a book and trying to convince your teacher 
that you read the entire book.  If you, however, read preceeding and subsequent 
verses, as well as those verses that are either referenced to or reference to it, 
then you can get a better picture.  In that case, you would not be embarrassed, 
but enlightened.  If you read the Bible in this manner, then you'll find that
different translations DO NOT contradict themselves.

I cannot argue with you that it is very confusing to read different versions of
the Bible, esp. older versions with "thees and thous".  These versions may have
different meanings to previous societies than those in which we have now.  Cultures
of yesterday had different mannerisms of speach.  Words have different meanings 
now than even 5-10 years ago, so when you read a translation that was written 
several years ago, yes, you can get confused.  But you can also get confused 
reading a novel written by Charles Dickens because he uses words and phrases that 
don't pertain to our society today.  That is why you need to read situations, not
exact words.

One of the best translations of the Bible is the NIV.  Work on this translation 
began in 1967 when scholars from the US, Great Britain, Canada, Austrailia, and 
New Zealand came together to create a translation more fitting of today's society.
These scholars were from many denominations, including:  Anglican, Assemblies 
of God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free, 
Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Wesleyan, and others as 
well.  This was to safeguard the translation from being sectarian biased.

The preface to the NIV states:

"The first concern of the translators has been the accuracy of the translation
and its fidelity to the thought of the biblical writers.  They have weighed the 
significance of the lexical and grammatical details of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and 
Greek texts.  At the same time, they have striven for more than a word-for-word
translation.  Because thought patterns and syntax differ from language to 
language, faithful communication of the meaning of the writers of the Bible
demands frequent modifications in sentance structure and constant regard for the
contextual meaning of words."

This is because the meaning of our words are constantly changing!

It further goes on to say:

"As in other ancient documents, the precise meaning of the biblical texts is 
sometimes uncertain.  This is more often the case with the Hebrew and Aramaic
texts than with the Greek text.  Although archaeological and linguistic 
discoveries in this century aid in understanding difficult passages, some 
uncertainties remain.  The most significant of these has been called to the 
reader's attention in the footnotes."

No one says that this is "THE ONE AND ONLY BIBLE TRANSLATION TO END ALL 
TRANSLATIONS"; acknowledgment is given to those things in which there is an
uncertainty.  There may not come a time in our lifetimes when every fact and
detail is revealed to us.  That is why one must not read the Bible by relying 
on his own finite knowledge, but by relying on the infinite knowledge of the 
Holy Spirit which is sent to teach us.
 

>>>"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who
>>>believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life."
>>>                ^^^^^ ^^^            ^^^^^
>>>
>>>My other _The Holy Bible_ says (John 3:16):
>>>"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that
>>>whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
>>>                           ^^^^^^ ^^^
>>>
>>>I find it interesting how a couple words can make a great difference in how
>>>one is led.
>> 
>> 
>> I agree, but thank God that we are not to rely on the "words" in themself, 
>> but by the Holy Spirit who leads us.
>
>How do you know that it is truly the Holy Spirit as you claim, and not Satan
>misleading you?
>


Because if it IS Satan who is leading me, then my posts would be harsh and
discriminitive such as yours.  I hold no ill will towards anyone on this newsgroup
-- after all it is named "alt.satanism", not "alt.trying.to.convert.satanists.to.
christians".  I simply put my thoughts out for discussion, and am not trying to 
convince you of anything.


>How do you know that it isn't all in your imagination?
>


My imagination is not that good.  Besides, I would have to share the same 
imagination with quite a few other people - and aren't imaginations supposed 
to be personal?


>Because it is written in _The Bible_? But that's exactly what's in question
>right now.


All this talk about the Bible, I'm interested, what do you derive your source(s) 
of information from.  I don't know what you believe, only that we disagree (no 
problem there).  Do you have a book that you turn to, or writings, or something
from which you gain your knowledge?  I don't want to condem it, I'm just
curious.

We have all arrived at the point we are currently at in our lives by previous
experiences and how we have reacted to those experiences.  I may not agree
with your beliefs (we could all find a point of arguement in any conversation),
but I respect your right to express them.  I am simply curious as to how you
have arrived at them?


> 
>> Whats the problem? Both are quoting the same scripture, only in one, the word 
>> "woman" is left out in one (I think that Rick made a mistake there) and 
>> "Samaritans" has been interchanged with "people".  When you are referring to
>> the "Truth", both verses are saying the SAME THING!  The fact remains the
>> the original posting by marshall is riddled with misquotes and thus the
>> rebuttal by Rick.
>
>I just realized something:  perhpas when you are saying "Rick" you really mean
>"Rick" and when you say "Marshall" you really mean "Marshall"! You *do* have
>the Newer New Revised Bobo the Clown Translation after all! You *do* agree with
>the original post!
>
>After all, it's all jsut a matter of interpretation, isn't it?


No, I still disagree with the original post.


>  
>>>And how many have been led astray by all the translations of _The Holy Bible_
>>>which were slightly "off"?  (Why, the answer is simple, Xians say:  "None; God
>>>would not allow His Word to be Misquoted!")  Xians are blind to the world 
>>>about them, carving new venues in the realms of Ill-logic. . .right? 
>>>Silence will be interpreted as the Holy Yes.
>> 
>> 
>> Not true, the bible has been misquoted since the early days of its origin 
>> and has been misquoted up to this day - see marshall's original post.  
>
>If it's being misquoted up to this day, how are we to know that any given
>translation isn't a misquote?


See my response following your "embarrassing" comment.  The problem with
misquotes is not the the Bible, itself, is a misquote, but that people are
misquoting the Bible.  And yes, Christians are as guilty as Satanists in 
that realm.


> 
>>>It is written:  "They who quoteth ye Bible in the name of God quoteth
>>>nonsense."
>> 
>> 
>> And it is written that: 
>> 
>>         "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking,
>>          correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God
>>          may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
>>                                                             2 Tim. 3:16, 17
>
>But is it the correct translation?


What does your New Revised Bobo the Clown Translation say?


> 
>>>Know ye, God has had a profound effect on my life.  He has taught me His Way 
>>>for He has told Me His Secret.  The real Truth is that He was Lying all along;
>>>He was fabricated by Its Creators in order to control Its Worshippers. I see 
>>>His Light and I am pleased; We are all Doomed for there is no Heaven and 
>>>there is no Hell; we prey for Nothing:  Death itself. 
>>>
>>>--Shaitan & Semhaza--
>> 
>> 
>> What a light cheery thought!  :-)
>
>Really brightened your day, huh?
> 


Sure has, its been real fun talking to you guys.  :-)



My love to all of you in Christ Jesus, Amen.


--
| Bill Nelson    |                                  | Opinions expressed do not necessarily |
| AT&T Paradyne  |    This space intended blank!    | reflect those of my employer; in fact,|
| (813) 530-8696 |                                  | they may not represent mine either.   |
+----------------+----------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.satanism