Actually, I struggled with just this very thing, long before I started going to church. As an intellectual non-Christian, I found it disturbing that the Nicene Council just categorically removed entire texts of the Bible, and that early coptic and gnostic texts were ignored.
It was not until I began studying the Bible as a Christian that I found that the Bible itself rules out many of these texts; for instance, you refer to the Book of Thomas. I'll assume you're speaking of the gnostic text (there is a coptic "Gospel of Thomas" that is different). Gnostic theology is thoroughly rejected in the Bible itself, especially in the Pauline epistles where he refers to it directly as heretical. A text containing such contradictory doctrines can hardly be included in the very book that rejects it.
Other books were excluded simply because there was no evidence that they belonged. Every book but one in the Old Testament as we know it was quoted by Jesus in one of the four gospels, and so those books were taken as divinely authenticated. The only other book, Song of Songs (or sometimes Song of Solomon) is definitely older than Jesus, and yet is believed to contain messianic prophesy.
I agree with you that no one should accept what they're handed without careful scrutiny. The Bible itself asserts this. True devotion to the Bible (and therefore, to God) requires far more scholarship and investigation into the texts and doctrines than I believe is given by the modern church. The problem, I imagine, is a knee-jerk reaction against "science", or scientific-y sounding things like "critical analysis". It's the same reason many modern Christians have a hard time following or understanding (on an intellectual level) Jesus's dissection of the Old Testament (as reported in the gospel's) or the apostle Paul's deductions; understanding his epistles is difficult without at least a passing understanding of the ancient Greek philosophy and proof technique.
The differences between versions are largely a matter of preference. The New International Version places emphasis on phrasal translation, while the New American Standard emphasizes a tighter word-for-word translation (good for referencing against hebrew or greek, but otherwise hard to read). More contemporary translations also try to update some of the more archaic idioms that confuse modern readers.
There are very few translations that most Christians consider "wrong". The King James Version, for instance, was written without access to many of the oldest original language texts we have today, and the style of English it is written in has... well... passed on. The English language as presented is no longer spoken today. Other versions, such as the New World Translation written by the Jehovah's Witnesses, makes deliberate changes to support doctrines not espoused by the original language. Most such bibles, however, are dismissed because there is little to known expert involvement. Most widely accepted bibles today are translated by a large board of academics in philology (and other stuff like that with big words that escape me right now).
In general, the wide variety of bible translations presents no trouble at all to the modern church. The pastor preaches in one version, I read in another. It's no biggie.
1) Argentina calls for a boycott of US trade policy (this was on CNN THIS MORNING by the way). 2) The US responds by inacting a trade embargo of Argentina. 3) This embargo includes de-registering all Argentinian domains from the global DNS. 4) Well, you can see how this would be bad.
Your points 2-4 are based not on anything that has happened, but what you think could happen. And then you say "because this can happen, we need to take precaution X".
So, your justification of the UN taking over DNS sounds, at its barest essentials, like a pretty good justification for the war in Iraq ("Saddam hasn't attacked America yet, but one day he might!").
BTW, I'm not implying it's a good justification. I think it's a crappy one. You can't plan policy around what another country hasn't even done yet.
Reminds me of one time I was in 1st grade, and I talked a lot in class. The teacher told me to be quiet, so I said, "Don't we have freedom of speech in America?"
To which the teacher replied, "This isn't America. This is my classroom. Now be quiet."
Re:In the words of Kent ibn Al-Brockman
on
Homer Becomes Omar
·
· Score: 1
I'm here from the future to tell you they've already done it in the year 2066. Now if you'll excuse me, it's time for my geriatric supplements.
In the words of Kent ibn Al-Brockman
on
Homer Becomes Omar
·
· Score: 3, Funny
I, for one, welcome our new American overlords.
Okay, I'm sorry. That was insensitive and I should never have pressed the submit button.
Simple; the US is not #1 anymore, China is starting to stand on their two feet, so, this is suddenly an ego thing again. God I love being Canadian.
Hah! You earth-bounders are just jealous of our enormous rocketships! If you had rocketships like we do, you'd be racing, too. But you'd lose, because our rocketships are bigger than anyone else's!
I think it's about status. By saying \me instead of "I", he establishes himself as the IRC alpha-male around here; it's his way of marking his territory full of hot babes he talks to all day on the internet.
Those of us unwilling to challenge him must bow to his superior dorkage.
Look, you can put down English meat n' potatoes, and you can mock the French hoity-toity cuisine, but the Germans? They sell whole rotisserie chickens by the road-side, and drink beer from glass pitchers! Boil a bratwurst in some beer and taste the difference, my friend. The Germans may not mean much on a global scale, but they have truly conquered my stomach, and therefore my heart.
I choose to believe that the gastrological abominations of saurkraut and beets were inadvertantly imported from some inferior neighbor. Like Luxemburg.
proof that there is a direct correlation between the amount of FOX 'News' programming you watch and your level of ignorance
And everyone that has ever drunk Coca-Cola has either died or will die. Time to drink Pepsi.
Yes, there is a strong correlation. And correlation still doesn't mean squat. FOX News doesn't make you dumb. If you're dumb, you're dumb no matter what you watch.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I struggled with just this very thing, long before I started going to church. As an intellectual non-Christian, I found it disturbing that the Nicene Council just categorically removed entire texts of the Bible, and that early coptic and gnostic texts were ignored.
It was not until I began studying the Bible as a Christian that I found that the Bible itself rules out many of these texts; for instance, you refer to the Book of Thomas. I'll assume you're speaking of the gnostic text (there is a coptic "Gospel of Thomas" that is different). Gnostic theology is thoroughly rejected in the Bible itself, especially in the Pauline epistles where he refers to it directly as heretical. A text containing such contradictory doctrines can hardly be included in the very book that rejects it.
Other books were excluded simply because there was no evidence that they belonged. Every book but one in the Old Testament as we know it was quoted by Jesus in one of the four gospels, and so those books were taken as divinely authenticated. The only other book, Song of Songs (or sometimes Song of Solomon) is definitely older than Jesus, and yet is believed to contain messianic prophesy.
I agree with you that no one should accept what they're handed without careful scrutiny. The Bible itself asserts this. True devotion to the Bible (and therefore, to God) requires far more scholarship and investigation into the texts and doctrines than I believe is given by the modern church. The problem, I imagine, is a knee-jerk reaction against "science", or scientific-y sounding things like "critical analysis". It's the same reason many modern Christians have a hard time following or understanding (on an intellectual level) Jesus's dissection of the Old Testament (as reported in the gospel's) or the apostle Paul's deductions; understanding his epistles is difficult without at least a passing understanding of the ancient Greek philosophy and proof technique.
The differences between versions are largely a matter of preference. The New International Version places emphasis on phrasal translation, while the New American Standard emphasizes a tighter word-for-word translation (good for referencing against hebrew or greek, but otherwise hard to read). More contemporary translations also try to update some of the more archaic idioms that confuse modern readers.
There are very few translations that most Christians consider "wrong". The King James Version, for instance, was written without access to many of the oldest original language texts we have today, and the style of English it is written in has... well... passed on. The English language as presented is no longer spoken today. Other versions, such as the New World Translation written by the Jehovah's Witnesses, makes deliberate changes to support doctrines not espoused by the original language. Most such bibles, however, are dismissed because there is little to known expert involvement. Most widely accepted bibles today are translated by a large board of academics in philology (and other stuff like that with big words that escape me right now).
In general, the wide variety of bible translations presents no trouble at all to the modern church. The pastor preaches in one version, I read in another. It's no biggie.
1) Argentina calls for a boycott of US trade policy (this was on CNN THIS MORNING by the way).
2) The US responds by inacting a trade embargo of Argentina.
3) This embargo includes de-registering all Argentinian domains from the global DNS.
4) Well, you can see how this would be bad.
Your points 2-4 are based not on anything that has happened, but what you think could happen. And then you say "because this can happen, we need to take precaution X".
So, your justification of the UN taking over DNS sounds, at its barest essentials, like a pretty good justification for the war in Iraq ("Saddam hasn't attacked America yet, but one day he might!").
BTW, I'm not implying it's a good justification. I think it's a crappy one. You can't plan policy around what another country hasn't even done yet.
Coincidence, or conspiracy? Hrmm...
You would see a lot more originality in games and less uninspired clones in the software "market" if the profit motive is done away with.
Sorry, there are only so many different versions of Tetris a man is willing to play in his lifetime.
Stick, meet dead horse. Dead horse, meet stick. Now go run along and play.
If I could build a Mars rover from old beer cans and a Radio Shack kit, and have it last 10 seconds on Mars, I'd get a job offer from NASA.
Reminds me of one time I was in 1st grade, and I talked a lot in class. The teacher told me to be quiet, so I said, "Don't we have freedom of speech in America?"
To which the teacher replied, "This isn't America. This is my classroom. Now be quiet."
I'm here from the future to tell you they've already done it in the year 2066. Now if you'll excuse me, it's time for my geriatric supplements.
I, for one, welcome our new American overlords.
Okay, I'm sorry. That was insensitive and I should never have pressed the submit button.
What's the dollar-to-hour ratio? If you're making $100K and spending 100 hours a week to make it, it's not worth it.
Real men unmask their portage packages.
No, what you've got is a really, really expensive pencil and paper. All you save is eraser rubbings.
Simple; the US is not #1 anymore, China is starting to stand on their two feet, so, this is suddenly an ego thing again. God I love being Canadian.
Hah! You earth-bounders are just jealous of our enormous rocketships! If you had rocketships like we do, you'd be racing, too. But you'd lose, because our rocketships are bigger than anyone else's!
TO THE MOON!!!
We have seen stories on transparent aluminum before:
Transparent Aluminum posted February 20th, 2002 by Hemos
Transparent Aluminum is Here posted August 23rd, 2004 by Hemos
It's around. We get it. It's not news anymore.
It could be worse. At least newspaper text won't have blinky tags or scrolling marquee. Be thankful for the little things, my friend.
I think it's about status. By saying \me instead of "I", he establishes himself as the IRC alpha-male around here; it's his way of marking his territory full of hot babes he talks to all day on the internet.
Those of us unwilling to challenge him must bow to his superior dorkage.
Yes, the nation that taught us it can solve its problems through war
Correction: we solve all of your problems through war.
Look, you can put down English meat n' potatoes, and you can mock the French hoity-toity cuisine, but the Germans? They sell whole rotisserie chickens by the road-side, and drink beer from glass pitchers! Boil a bratwurst in some beer and taste the difference, my friend. The Germans may not mean much on a global scale, but they have truly conquered my stomach, and therefore my heart.
I choose to believe that the gastrological abominations of saurkraut and beets were inadvertantly imported from some inferior neighbor. Like Luxemburg.
proof that there is a direct correlation between the amount of FOX 'News' programming you watch and your level of ignorance
And everyone that has ever drunk Coca-Cola has either died or will die. Time to drink Pepsi.
Yes, there is a strong correlation. And correlation still doesn't mean squat. FOX News doesn't make you dumb. If you're dumb, you're dumb no matter what you watch.
Around here, we get two milks to the sprint, and we like it that way!
I just remembered I had milk in the office fridge from 03/05. I guess that was the Longhorn countdown milk. Here's hoping OO.o can do better!
The fine is $100,000 for each offense. That's a grand total of $5,000,000,000. That's 5 BILLION dollars.
Copyright law sucks.
I think it would be very interesting to see a divided internet.
Hell, yeah! No more spam from Russia!
GMail.