The Cellar - Faith... to what/whom?

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Philosophy (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=25)

- - Faith... to what/whom? (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=5982)

ok. that's very impressive. as accurate as it could reasonably be, you say. fine. that's your entire point? I'll concede it. my point can be summed up as: "GIGO"

Quote:

Originally posted by lumberjim
ok. that's very impressive. as accurate as it could reasonably be, you say. fine. that's your entire point? I'll concede it. my point can be summed up as: "GIGO"

Fair enough; that's a different discussion. I just reached my multi-clausal sentence quotient for the week, so we'll have to catch that one on another thread.

-sm

Quote:

do you think there were any misspelled words in the "original" bible? any typos? grammatical errors? hmmm? wonder how well god wrote that "first bible"? word of god....literally....bah! god doesn't even have a tongue. or teeth. I fart in your general direction

But he has a dick, go figure..

Catholics have this really cool thing called "transubstantiation" (spelling?).
What that is, as I understand it, is when someone takes their holy wafer and sip of wine, it transforms into the ACTUAL blood and body of The Christ.
Let me repeat that, for it bears repeating.
The wafer and wine turn into the actual, physical manifestation of Jesus.
A mouthful of 2000 year old corpse.
If this is the way that Catholics view this event, are they aware, then, that the Church supports and practices cannibalism?
Don't say "IT'S NOT CANNIBALISM!"
Cannibalism is the eating of the flesh of the same species.
"Transubstantiation" turns the wafer and wine into flesh and blood, which is then eaten.
Cannibalism.

Quote:

Another big news story of year concerned the ecumenical council in Rome, known as Vatican II. Among the things they did in an attempt to make the church more commercial was to introduce the vernacular into portions of the mass, to replace Latin, and to widen somewhat the range of music permissible in the liturgy, but I feel that if they really want to sell the product, in this secular age, what they ought to do is to redo some of the liturgical music in popular song forms. I have a modest example here. It's called The Vatican Rag.

First you get down on your knees,
Fiddle with your rosaries,
Bow your head with great respect,
And genuflect, genuflect, genuflect!

Do whatever steps you want, if
You have cleared them with the Pontiff.
Everybody say his own
Kyrie eleison,
Doin' the Vatican Rag.

Get in line in that processional,
Step into that small confessional,
There, the guy who's got religion'll
Tell you if your sin's original.
If it is, try playin' it safer,
Drink the wine and chew the wafer,
Two, four, six, eight,
Time to transubstantiate!

So get down upon your knees,
Fiddle with your rosaries,
Bow your head with great respect,
And genuflect, genuflect, genuflect!

Make a cross on your abdomen,
When in Rome do like a Roman,
Ave Maria,
Gee it's good to see ya,
Gettin' ecstatic an'
Sorta dramatic an'
Doin' the Vatican Rag!

Tom Lehrer rocks.

Tom Lehrer is one of my personal heroes. I was so thrilled when Rhino released all his stuff together in one box set, even the songs from the old children's show.

Quote:

Originally posted by smoothmoniker

The Old Testament was written in Hebrew – I’m not nearly as familiar with the textual record for the OT as I am for the NT, but I do know that the Jewish priestly cult was meticulous about their copying methods, to the point where they had a letter count for each line of each scroll, and it had to be checked by multiple people. Remember, this is a nation that believes that it’s text is the literal Word of God. It makes sense that they would place a very high value on the transmission of the text.

Palestine at the time Jesus lived was Quadra-lingual (don't even know if that's a word - we'll assume it is. :) ) Hebrew was the language spoken in religious circles, the temple and synagogues around the country. Aramaic was the indigenous language, the local language of the northern part of the country, up around the Sea of Galilee. Greek was the trade language used throughout the near east, and would have been commonly understood by everyone – Greece ruled that whole part of the world just a few years earlier. Latin was the official language of the Roman Empire.

We don’t know what language Jesus spoke, but we can make some educated guesses. He undoubtedly spoke Aramaic and Hebrew, since he grew up in the North and had religious training. He probably spoke Greek, since some of the quotes in the New Testament are word-plays and puns that only make sense in Greek.

-sm

(BTW, forgive me if I'm slipping into professor mode. It's one of those things where education and passion cross)

But then don't we still have the translation problem Hebrew to Greek to English or possibly even Aramaic to Greek to English? Maybe the Greek texts are as wonderful as you say. I'm not going to argue something I know nothing of. But I do know Jewish rabbi's have a long tradition of arguing the Torah. Learned Jewish scholars were doing the same thing thousands of years ago. Entire books were left out of the Jewish canon depending on who won these disputes. Like have you ever seen the texts that refer to Sophia? Jewish scholars at the time felt that references to Sophia might enourage a return to some sort of fertility rites, so all mention of her was left out of the official Jewish writing. How do we know that the Hebrew texts which survived to be translated in Greek were really the "correct" ones. Maybe a rabbi with an ax to grind burned the ones that were actually the official version. That probably didn't happen, but you have to admit that its at least a possibility.

And were Mathew, Mark, Luke and John trained stenographers? Three of them weren't anyhow. Look at the differences in the Gospels. OK, say they were following Jesus around with pieces of parchment and quill pens (or whatever the writing implements were in Jesus' time. Did they translate Aramaic into Greek on the fly as they took down their notes? If so, how good were their translations? If they wrote them later, how good were their memories? I've sat in classes and taken painstaking notes and then gone home and re-written them to keep them fresh in my mind, but even back in the days when my memory was far more functional than it is now, I couldn't have given a verbatim transcript of exactly what the professor said.

Perhaps religion is one massively complex game of Telephone!

Quote:

And were Mathew, Mark, Luke and John trained stenographers?

Isnt there some suggestion that one of them was totally doolally? The one who predicted armageddon.....it certainly would explain a lot :P

Quote:

Originally posted by Undertoad
No... BANANAPHONE!

Now THIS is a quality thread hijack.

ring ring ring ring ring ring ring BANANAPHONE

Quote:

Originally posted by DanaC
Isnt there some suggestion that one of them was totally doolally? The one who predicted armageddon.....it certainly would explain a lot :P

Revelations is classic lunatic ravings.

Sort of like...if Tim Burton wrote a gospel.

Quote:

Originally posted by Undertoad
No... BANANAPHONE!

My cellular, bananular phoooooooooooooooooooone...

Quote:

Originally posted by Happy Monkey
Revelations is classic lunatic ravings.

Wow. Talk about presenting unsubstantiated opinions-as-fact.

Revelation (singular, not plural) is part of a genre of literature called Apocalyptic. It’s by no means limited to Judeo-Christian literature. The genius of John’s writing is that he picks up threads from Daniel, Isaiah, and Habakkuk and weaves them together into a compelling narrative.

How arrogant is it to assume that because something is nonsensical to us, it must be the ravings of a lunatic. Are you a 1st Century Diasporic Jew living in Asia Minor? How do you know what images and themes were coherent to his readers?

Revelation is a political commentary; the imagery that John uses was established by the writings of the late Babylonian era prophets. He doesn’t actually mean a 4 headed beast with 7 horns – he’s using that image in the same way Daniel used it, but he’s reapplying it to the Roman empire. His readers understood exactly what he was referencing.

-sm