the bible

[RVR II]

 

[Tripe]

Ok so NSFW then? I only see a red x.

[Tripe]

You love Retro Junk Twice?

Actually the red X thing is at my end, the firewall here blocks some sites at random. I'll be able to see it when i get home.

I can do a work around using photobucket but before I do i tend to ask if it's SFW 

[esoobaC .T bocaJ]

darn, it was working before

it was a picture of Eris from The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy

[Tripe]

Ah ok yes Discodianism meets Madge 

[anais.jude]

my question was actually inspired by reading moby dick....odd.


Tripe, you said Jesus for one. What about Satan? I am working on a theory about the metaphor in moby dick. Some of Ahab's speeches mimic Paradise Lost, but I am not sure if Satan reffered to himself in the third person.

As a rhetorical technique, i find reffering to yourself in the third person var var annoying

[Tripe]

No Satan generally uses I if he refers to himself at all.

And he doesn't turn up all that much as Satan as we now envision him wasn't really how he was envisioned at the time of writing for most of the bible.

[RoninFox]

And I imagine it's the same for when he's referenced as Lucifer.

[DarthChimay]

There's actually only one verse in the bible that mentions the name Lucifer, and it is Isaiah 14:12. Saying that this is a reference to Satan is a stretch, since there really isn't justification in the context. It could be referring to an invading king, but most likely it's referring to Venus.

[Tripe]

yep Darth gave what would have been my answer.

Satan doesn't really feature all that much in the Bible. He's more like a guest starring role, sort of like Walken on SNL

[RoninFox]

Ah.  The whole various names for seemingly different evil beings that may or may not refer to the same adversary thing has always confused me.

[AmandaGal]

I've actually heard Christians quote things about Satan said in Paradise Lost like they were from the Bible.  It's quite strange.

[mrbasehart]

Being the secular heathen that I am, I've never ever read the Bible (or been Baptised, but that's another story).  Anybody know which version is the best? I'm a little "eh" on the whole King James version, but I feel it's something that I need to read at least once.

[basselope]

Ah.  The whole various names for seemingly different evil beings that may or may not refer to the same adversary thing has always confused me.

Funny, Tripe and I were just talking about a great resource for just such questions... John Romer's "Testament". A little understanding of the (pardon the term) evolution of today's more popular text can add a lot to understanding the seeming inconsistencies. I'm not a scholar by any stretch of the imagination, but when you begin to see how many cultures, themes and motivations have shaped the texts we most commonly see today it's amazing to me there's anything coherent left.

If you can manage to read it as just a novel, it's a little trippy, but a great window into the social mind-set of the times... dependin on, as Tripe said, which version you read.

Anybody know which version is the best?

Not touching that one!
(now where's that :coward: smilie?)

[DarthChimay]

Being the secular heathen that I am, I've never ever read the Bible (or been Baptised, but that's another story).  Anybody know which version is the best? I'm a little "eh" on the whole King James version, but I feel it's something that I need to read at least once.

I was in the same boat as you. In fact, I didn't read the bible until a deconverted from being an evangelical. I was finally able to appreciate it for what it was.

I've always been partial to the Oxford Annotated Bible, which is a New Revised Standard version, but has footnotes for a lot of the words and ignores some of the silly pc translations made.

I've also been told that the New American Standard version is very accurate. Keep in mind, when I'm talking about accuracy, I mean it has all the warts and contradictions found in the earliest manuscripts we've found thus far. The Revised Standard Version is also pretty good.

My favorite translation of the New Testament is the Pre-Nicene New Testament, translated by Robert M. Price (who has written some great books on textual criticism). It has all of the books found in the canon, as well as a lot of other really interesting, lesser-known books (e.g. the Shepherd of Hermas, the Gospel of Peter, etc.).