I was baptised in the Methodist church, but we rarely went. Got sent to Baptist Vacation Bible School as a kid. My mom went through a Catholic wannabe phase so we all went there for a while. When I was 18 my mom converted to Judaism. So I got a little “taste” of several different religions, and found I couldn’t really agree with any of them.
When I was pregnant with my first child I discovered Unitarian-Universalism, and that’s the church for me.
The short version of what the religion is about is: it’s a centuries old liberal religion based on Judeo-Christian beliefs.
The long (and much better) version of what the church is about can be found here:
Monty: Why don’t you read my post again. Only this time, take in everything that I wrote, and then decide how I view those tracts. Here’s a good summary for you:
I don’t like them.
(But of course, you already knew that I think other religions are twisted)
Adam: exactly what did I miss? You stated the tracts were true, albeit comical. But you did state they’re true, at least in your opinion.
You also stated that in your view LDS is twisted and sick and that Judaism is a sick joke.
What I fear you will never understand is that all of those statements from you is opinion and that your opinion is based on ignorance as you refuse to learn.
Class: what is it we call those who refuse to learn and delight in ignorance?
Adam, on what do you base this? How do you know which is a more precise translation? From what I’ve been able to gather, you’ve never done any research into Bible translation. How is it that you come to the conclusion that the NIV is a superior translation?
“I think it would be a great idea” Mohandas Ghandi’s answer when asked what he thought of Western civilization
Well, I looked over the Chick stuff and the links it provided. The “truths” it provides are not just “comical,” they are, in many horrible ways, wrong. The linked sites devoted to “explaining” Catholicism and Islam have so many factual errors that a “truth in publishing” law would get them suppressed. (The article by J.M. Carroll with two links to it were particularly nasty. He stays close enough to an encyclopedia’s view of history that the average person would not immediately be able to check on his lies, but his version of history is, indeed, filled with untruths, distortions, and re-interpreted history.) If this is the sort of stuff that people have prattled at Adam, it’s no wonder he can’t distinguish between reality and his version of it.
(On the other hand, the site libeling Islam has a whole section on “logical fallacies” that is a hoot to read, considering how many logical fallacies are found throughout the Chick tripe–including the section on logical fallacies of Islam.)
Yeah, Adam’s assertions about the Bible versions struck me as rather ridiculous, too. I have a Bible called the Lamsa Bible, which is, to my knowledge, the most precise translation of the Bible we have. It was translated directly from the original texts, many in the dead language Aramaic, which was supposeedly Christ’s tongue. The differences between that and other Bibles are startling, to say the least.
That’s the thing with the Bible; the language in it is so arcane, how can anyone claim to have a perfect understanding of it? Almost everythign I’ve read of it has struck me as maddeningly ambiguous and open to interpretation. Which is why there are so many interpretations, no doubt. But that anyone (particularly Joe Six Pack) could read it and say: “Oh yeah, perfefctly clear!” strikes me as laughable.
As for the Chick stuff, I can see why they would be effective with a certain type of person. My favorite part is the last page of all of them: Let Jesus Save you TODAY! - sounds like an ad for Crazy Eddie’s stereos. The Halloween was was SO ludicrous, I sat dumbfounded that anyone could be that ignorant and paranoid. Anyone see the one where Suzie gets AIDS? Did you know the virus can pass through surgical gloves? Info provided by the medical journal “Focus on the Family Newsletter” - that Dr. Dobson! Thank the Lord we have him to set the medical community straight, eh?
Are YOU ready for Y2K? Take my advice: Panic early and avoid the rush.
. I have used the KJ, and NIV version, and I think the NIV is vastly superior. (sentence cut) I just think the NIV is a more precise translation, and it’s a lot easier to read.
ARG, the NIV is a much more “readable” version of the scriptures. Personally, I prefer it over any other version for day to day, multi-purpose use.
But as for translation precision, its not necessarily any better than KJV. I know just enough about the bible’s original languages to be dangerous, and often find myself using the Greek or Hebrew Lexicon to look up the precise meaning of a scriptural phrase. I have discovered on a word-by-word basis, there is no english translation of the bible that is a more faithful renering of the literal meaning of the original texts than the KJV. It might turn out cumbersome. It might miss some of the subtle meanings lost in idioms which are not easily translated. But its the most literal version I’ve ever come across.
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
A note on ARG’s comment above about the concordance:
It takes a heck of a lot more than a dictionary to translate one language into another. If that’s all you’re relying on here, try this example, and I’ll not even tell you what language the word is:
gift
Now give the presice meaning in English of the word above in bold.
Here’s Arg’s problem: He thinks that John 3:16 reads “For God hated the world so much that he sent his only son so that whoever does not believe in him will perish and be denied eternal life.”
Well, I saw the Chick Tract on Buddhists, and I must say it’s incredibly amusing! In fact, Mr. Chick clears up some misconceptions about Buddhism, since the historical Buddha himself stated he was not a god.
In any event, these comics are very funny, and I recommend them to anyone who tends to know the truth of the matter in regards to their subject matter.
Matt…or anyone for that matter: Do you think that God hates you? Do you think that God hates people? I suspect that some of you are angry with God. And perhaps you could tell me why.
Adam – I am often accused of being “angry with God.” Just a few weeks ago, at alt.support.cerbral-palsy in a thread on alternative medicine, a woman accused me of being “angry at God for letting [my] child be disabled.” Nonsense. I’m no more angry with God than I am with the Wicked Witch of the West, Santa Claus, Hannibal Lector or any other fictional character. I don’t belief in God – I am NOT angry at him/her/it. Get it?
I’m angry at your god for being arrogant, hypocritical, and self-contradictory. I’m angry at you for spreading a message of hatred and calling it love. I am not angry at my god and goddess. There.
I refuse to believe that if there is a higher power the power would be as unfair as described in many Christian fundamentals. Take the basis of Christianity; if you accept Jesus as your savior, you will not suffer eternal damnation. Because this is so critical to Christianity, all of the Christians I have debated with claim that Jesus presents himself to everyone at least once in their life, however, statistically, people raised in Christian families are more likely to be Christian. Why is it fair that most Christians who will be saved were saved simply because they grew up that way? In the matter of natural born sin, why should an infant who dies at 2 months suffer eternally because they weren’t baptized soon enough and weren’t even cognizant of the idea of god?
Matt: Are you angry at God because of what His word, and what Christians say about gays?
Jess: Yep, I read you loud and clear.
Threemae: You ask:
Actually, if I took a poll of Christians around the globe, I’d guess that far more were converted as teens, or adults, rather than being raised that way…especially in other countries where Christianity is the foreign religion. BTW, when I say Christian, I mean Protestant, not Catholic.
As for babies going to hell, I do not believe this is true. God is love, and God is just. There is no way that He could send little ones to hell, when they have no possible idea of how to become saved. Also, there is no Biblical basis to the belief that babies go to hell. But there is evidence that they go to heaven. (I can’t recall the verses at this time)
Oh, BTW Matt: I never spread any message of hatred. That’s just how you perceive it, even though you’re dead wrong.
