Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 86
  1. #61
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,386
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    It doesn't matter what other sects believe. It doesn't matter what other Christians believe. What matters, is the argument presented in this thread. If you have an argument that objections to the op, then present it. Merely saying "But others do or say differently" isn't an objection that holds water.

    ---------- Post added at 09:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:44 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    Well why not explain it? The bible says that it will be preserved by the all powerful God. The bible says one way to tell what is from God is aways 100% accurate. The KJV is obviously not accurate so I have narrowed the truth down to exclude the KJV. Now that doesn't prove all others are also false, but it leads me to believe there is a high chance.
    You are equivocating. There is The Bible (original manuscripts) and there are the translations of The Bible put into different languages.

    ---------- Post added at 09:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:46 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Those restrictions were not from God however. Those who follow the bible have held to wildly different standards over the centuries showing de facto that it is not strong guidance on the matter. The specific laws have always been and will always be secular creations by and large. Even when they are interpreted from indirect scripture. Even the explicit laws printed in the bible most Christians simply ignore based on an implicit statement in the new testament. Men have argued for centuries about the meaning of the commandment, and that more than anything shows its lack of clarity.
    Broad sweeping statements without support or examples sink in the sea of evidence. You need to provide actual support for your argument Sig.

    Furthermore, that people have debated the meaning, in no way invalidates the law or reduces its intrinsic meaning.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  2. #62
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis View Post
    You are equivocating. There is The Bible (original manuscripts) and there are the translations of The Bible put into different languages.[COLOR="Silver"]

    .
    They are all supposed to be the bible. They are all supposedly the preserved word of God. I am not equivicating religion does. The books have bible written on them most of the time.

    Are you saying the KJV isn't the bible, and isn't the preserved work of God?

    If the KJV is the word of God then Kill is correct. If the KJV isn't the word of God then perhaps murder is correct.

  3. #63
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    NY, NY
    Posts
    670
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    They are all supposed to be the bible. They are all supposedly the preserved word of God. I am not equivicating religion does. The books have bible written on them most of the time.

    Are you saying the KJV isn't the bible, and isn't the preserved work of God?


    If the KJV is the word of God then Kill is correct. If the KJV isn't the word of God then perhaps murder is correct.
    Yes. Quite enthusiastically, in fact.
    Ah, well - apparently my kids were too distracting to stay as a sig. I take that as a compliment

  4. #64
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivam View Post
    Yes. Quite enthusiastically, in fact.
    Do you believe there is a true bible?

  5. #65
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,386
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    They are all supposed to be the bible. They are all supposedly the preserved word of God. I am not equivicating religion does. The books have bible written on them most of the time.
    rofl! I'm taking that last line there as a witty statement instead of being serious (but w/o smiley's, it's kinda hard). I'm hoping you aren't being serious here. If so, oh boy...there are some serious critical thinking issues here to struggle through...if not, then good one.

    Are you saying the KJV isn't the bible, and isn't the preserved work of God?
    Like the NIV, ESV, NASB, they are translations of the original word (which has been preserved over time).

    You DO realize that the Bible was written in languages other than English...right? Please tell me you know at least this much about religion kevin...I think it's just going to be too difficult to start a discussion if we have to go that far back into the basics...
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  6. #66
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Apok
    Are you seriously suggesting that the meaning of murder has not been a hotly contentious moral issue among Christians over recorded human history and that I need to provide citations to support that contention?

    That people have debated a meaning absolutely speaks to the quality of the written instruction. It is not a black and white case. It is not either all bad or all good. I write instructions as part of my work and I very often read instructions as part of my work. There is a clear demonstrable difference between clear precise instructions and vague open to multiple interpretations instructions and the level of consensus each can generate among multiple readers.

    Don't Murder, is not a clear and precise instruction. It is open to a very very wide range of interpretation that can mean the difference between life and death of an individual or even an entire society. If that were the only law the US had on murder we'd be in big trouble trying to enforce it consistently. This is why oral traditions and Church doctrine were developed, to provide some measure of practical clarity on such moral issues. But those are human institutions and they vary widely because humans vary widely. Were the quality of the supposed divine instruction greater, that could be significantly reduced. As it is, human beings have had to provide the more practical definitions for themselves.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  7. #67
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,386
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Apok
    Are you seriously suggesting that the meaning of murder has not been a hotly contentious moral issue among Christians over recorded human history and that I need to provide citations to support that contention?
    That it is relevant to your claim that the command is useless...absolutely. The burden is on you to support your own claims Sig.

    That people have debated a meaning absolutely speaks to the quality of the written instruction. It is not a black and white case. It is not either all bad or all good. I write instructions as part of my work and I very often read instructions as part of my work. There is a clear demonstrable difference between clear precise instructions and vague open to multiple interpretations instructions and the level of consensus each can generate among multiple readers.
    Already addressed: Furthermore, that people have debated the meaning, in no way invalidates the law or reduces its intrinsic meaning.

    Don't Murder, is not a clear and precise instruction. It is open to a very very wide range of interpretation that can mean the difference between life and death of an individual or even an entire society.
    Now you just have to support that as an ancient commandment to the tribe of ancient Hebrews, it is an irrelevant and useless commandment.

    And in fact...since such a commandment is "useless", then doesn't it stand that many of the other commandments are useless as well? Such as not to steal, lie, commit adultery, etc...? It's great that you find yourself to be an expert in the fields of ethics, anthropology, sociology and history...but until we see some actual support...there is no need for us to actually accept such broad sweeping and dismissive claims.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  8. #68
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis View Post
    rofl! I'm taking that last line there as a witty statement instead of being serious (but w/o smiley's, it's kinda hard). I'm hoping you aren't being serious here. If so, oh boy...there are some serious critical thinking issues here to struggle through...if not, then good one.


    Like the NIV, ESV, NASB, they are translations of the original word (which has been preserved over time).

    You DO realize that the Bible was written in languages other than English...right? Please tell me you know at least this much about religion kevin...I think it's just going to be too difficult to start a discussion if we have to go that far back into the basics...
    I know that the bible was written in Hebrew, but that is irrelevant as God is to preserve the meaning even through translations.

    If the Jewish bible is the only true bible then the only true religion is the Jewish religion. Is that your stance?

  9. #69
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,386
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Oh boy...so you were serious. No, that is not my stance kevin. The original manuscripts were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. These are considered the "true word" of God, and it is these manuscripts, these words and meanings, that are said to be preserved by God. It isn't the case that every single translation imaginable must be 100% accurate because "God made it so." You clearly misunderstand the claim of theists on the issue of scripture being preserved. It would behoove you to actually do a little study on your own about these topics instead of trying to debate them as if they were "gospel" (pun intended) because it just makes your argument look foolish. In other words...know exactly what it is your opponent argues, believes, asserts...BEFORE disagreeing or objecting to it. NO ONE kevin...asserts the argument that you are arguing against. When you do that, it's called a strawman fallacy.

    If I were you, I'd seek a little help from your fellow atheists here at ODN. You don't have to take my word for it as to what I and other Christians and people of the faith believe (although why you wouldn't go directly to the source is beyond me and is IMO, just a sign of inexperience)...go to those with similar worldviews (atheists here at ODN) to see if they think your objections hold up and if you understand the opposition properly and clearly enough to actually provide a proper objection). We do have an atheists only forum here you know. It's a great place to get support and clarity.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  10. #70
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis View Post
    Oh boy...so you were serious. No, that is not my stance kevin. The original manuscripts were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. These are considered the "true word" of God, and it is these manuscripts, these words and meanings, that are said to be preserved by God. It isn't the case that every single translation imaginable must be 100% accurate because "God made it so." You clearly misunderstand the claim of theists on the issue of scripture being preserved. It would behoove you to actually do a little study on your own about these topics instead of trying to debate them as if they were "gospel" (pun intended) because it just makes your argument look foolish. In other words...know exactly what it is your opponent argues, believes, asserts...BEFORE disagreeing or objecting to it. NO ONE kevin...asserts the argument that you are arguing against. When you do that, it's called a strawman fallacy.

    If I were you, I'd seek a little help from your fellow atheists here at ODN. You don't have to take my word for it as to what I and other Christians and people of the faith believe (although why you wouldn't go directly to the source is beyond me and is IMO, just a sign of inexperience)...go to those with similar worldviews (atheists here at ODN) to see if they think your objections hold up and if you understand the opposition properly and clearly enough to actually provide a proper objection). We do have an atheists only forum here you know. It's a great place to get support and clarity.
    Ok so the only ones God promised to preserve were the originals, but those weren't preserved either as they are lost or destroyed. Did God break that promise?

    Any translation must be 100% accurate to actually be the word of God. This test is given in the bible about prophecy.

  11. #71
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Apok
    You are exaggerating my case when you demand I support it. I do not claim that "Don't Murder" is absolutely useless. I am claiming it is to vague to be a good guide to moral behavior in a typical human society. It is a decent foundational principle but also one that requires a great deal of elaboration, further definition, and explanation in order to have practical value as a code of moral law.

    Count the number of times you use the word "useless" in your response. Then count the number of times I used the word "useless" in the post you were responding to.

    For evidence of this I present the common knowledge case that religious practitioners and adherents have debated widely what actual acts of killing constitute murder and what acts do not. I can offer countless examples of specific differences but they would only distract from the overall point. If you demand such proof I will simply write you off as unreasonable on this topic and not worth responding to.

    You mention the other commandments and they too have issues though the definitions are more widely understood and agreed to.
    Don't Stealing - this requires some definition of property. In many cases property is self evident, but in the case of land, other human beings, and a number of other potential items of property there has been historically wide variance. Even today there is hot debate if taxation is theft or not.

    Don't Lie - Again there is debate as to if lying for a moral purpose actually counts as lying or not and you get into a case of lawful or unlawful falsehoods. Still, I find this far easier to adjudicate than murder and that the notion of a lie is more consistent than that of murder. There is also the principle of deception. You can easily deceive someone by telling truth in a selective way.

    No Adultery - This can be read as a direct ban of sex outside of a marriage, or it can be extended to other acts of affection and commitment. Exactly what constitutes adultery is something religious and secular lawgivers have had to elaborate on to provide practical guidelines to moral behavior.

    Most of the 10 commandments are simply too vague to be a practical code of law even if they are a good start to one. They are more like ideals and principles than they are fully developed moral codes that can be used to ensure adherence to moral acts. Certainly the bible goes on to enumerate many specific codes, but Christians have mostly rejected those over time as relics of a past era. I think they fail to realize they were part and parcel of the principles that are outlined in the commandments and essential for understanding the full implications of them.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  12. #72
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,386
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    The words of the original manuscripts are preserved. We don't need the actual originals to know that. We apply the same test as we do to other ancient literature. We have more copies (that do not deviate) from the books of the Bible than any other ancient work of writing. That is, we can confirm what the original manuscripts said through verification of the thousands of copies that we do have in our possession. Again, this is something IMO, you should already know about before engaging in this type of discussion kevin. This has been discussed before in other threads dedicated to the topic. But for your convenience:


    Part I (D) : Unique in its survival

    Through Time:

    Although it was first written on perishable materials, and had to be copied and recopied for hundreds of years before the invention of the printing press, the Scriptures have never diminished in style or correctness, nor have they ever faced extinction. Compared with other ancient writings, the Bible has more manuscript evidence to support it than any 10 pieces of classical literature combined (more on this on the historical accuracy of the NT which is forthcoming).

    "It seems strange that the text of Shakespeare, which has been in existence for less than two hundred and eight years, should be far more uncertain and corrupt than that of the New Testament, now over eighteen centuries old, including nearly fiften of which it existed only in manuscript...With perhaps a dozen or twenty exceptions, the text of every verse in the New Testament may be said to be so far settled by general consent of scholards, that any dispute as to its reading must relate rather to the interpretation of the words than to any doubts respecting the words themselves. But in every one of Shakespeare's thirty-seven plays there are probably a hundred readings still in dispute, a large portion of which materially affects the meaning of the passages in which they occur." (Lea, GBW, 15; as quoted in the Greates Book in the World by Jean Lea)

    Through Persecution

    The Bible has withstood vicious attacks by its enemies. Many have tried to burn it, ban it, and outlaw it from the days of Roman emperors to present-day Communist-dominated countries.

    In A.D. 303, the Roman emperor Diocletian issued an edict to stop Christians from worshipping and to destroy their scriptures. He ordered the razing of churches to the ground, burning of the scriptures, proclamation that all who held high positions in the church would lose all civil rights, and those who professed their Christianity would be deprived of their liberty.

    The historic irony of this event, is that just 25 years later after Diocletian's edict, the Roman emperor Constantine issued an edict ordering that fifty copies of the Scriptures should be prepared at the governments expense. (Eusebius, EH, VII, 2, 259)

    The noted French infidel Voltaire, who died in 1778, declared that in 100 years after his death, Christianity would be swept from existence and passed into history.

    Only 50 years after his death, the Geneva Bible Society used Voltaire's press and house to produce stacks of Bibles.

    The Bible's enemies come and go, but the Bible remains. Jesus was right when he said "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." (Mark 13:31)

    Through Criticism

    HL Hastings said it best: "Infidels for 1800 years have been refuting and overthrowing this book, and yet it stands today as solid as a rock. It's circulation incrases, and it si more loved and cherished and read today than ever bfore. Infidels, with all their assaults, make about as much impressoin on this book as a man with a tack hammer would on the Pyramids of Egypt. When the French monarch proposed the persecution of the Christians in his dominoin, and old statesmena and warrior said to him, "Sire, the Church of God is an anvil that has worn out many hammers." So the hammers of infidels have been pecking away at this book for ages, but the hammers are worn out, and the anvil still endures. If this book had not been the book of God, men would have destrowyed it long ago. Emperors and popes, kings and priests, princes and rulesers have all tried their hand at it; they die and the book still lives." (Lea, GBW, 17-18)

    Bernard Ramm adds: "No other book has been so chopped, knived, sifted, scrutinized, and vilified. What book on philisophy or religion or psychology or has been subject to such a mass attack as the Bible? with such venom and skepticism? with such thoroughness and erudition? upon every chaper, line and tenet?" (Ramm, PCE '53, 232-233).

    Biblical scholars once deferred to "the assured results of higher criticism." But the reults of the higher critics are no loonger as assured as we once believed.

    Example: It was believed that the Pentateuch (first 5 books of the Bible) could not have been written by Moses, as the "assured results of higher criticism" had proven that writing was not in existence at the time of Moses, or if in existence, was used sparingly. Therefore, it was concluded that it had to be of later authorship. The minds of critics went to work, devising a theory that 4 writers, designated as J, E, P, and D had put the pentateuch togther. These critics formalated great structures of criticism.

    Then, some people had discovered the "black stele". It had wedge-shaped characters on it and contained the detailed laws of Hammurabi. Was it post Moses? Nope! It was pre-Mosaic. Not only that, but it preceded Moses' writings by at least 3 centuries! (Unger, UBD, 444). Amazingly, it antedated Moses, who is supposed to have been a primative man lacking an alphabet.

    The "assured results of higher criticism" concluded that there were no Hittites at the time of Abraham, as there were no records of their existence apart from the OT (Old Testament). They must be myth, therefore the Bible is false. Wrong again. Archaeological research has now uncovered evidence revealing more than 1,200 years of Hittite civilization.

    Nelso Glueck, one of the three greatest archealogists of our time says "In all of my archaelogical investigation I have never found one artifact of antiquity that contradicts any statement of the Word of God" (Radmacher, PC, 50)

    Robert D. Wilson, a man fluent in more than 45 languages and dialects, concluded after a lifetime of study in the OT: "I may add that the result of my forty-five years of study of the Bible has led me all the time to a firmer faith, that in the OT we have a true historical account of the history of the Israelite people."

    If you wish to discuss specifically this issue, it would be better served either in that other thread, or a thread of its own, instead of a topic dedicated to the specific meaning of a specific verse.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  13. #73
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis View Post
    The words of the original manuscripts are preserved. We don't need the actual originals to know that. We apply the same test as we do to other ancient literature. We have more copies (that do not deviate) from the books of the Bible than any other ancient work of writing. That is, we can confirm what the original manuscripts said through verification of the thousands of copies that we do have in our possession. Again, this is something IMO, you should already know about before engaging in this type of discussion kevin. This has been discussed before in other threads dedicated to the topic. But for your convenience:


    Part I (D) : Unique in its survival

    Through Time:

    Although it was first written on perishable materials, and had to be copied and recopied for hundreds of years before the invention of the printing press, the Scriptures have never diminished in style or correctness, nor have they ever faced extinction. Compared with other ancient writings, the Bible has more manuscript evidence to support it than any 10 pieces of classical literature combined (more on this on the historical accuracy of the NT which is forthcoming).

    "It seems strange that the text of Shakespeare, which has been in existence for less than two hundred and eight years, should be far more uncertain and corrupt than that of the New Testament, now over eighteen centuries old, including nearly fiften of which it existed only in manuscript...With perhaps a dozen or twenty exceptions, the text of every verse in the New Testament may be said to be so far settled by general consent of scholards, that any dispute as to its reading must relate rather to the interpretation of the words than to any doubts respecting the words themselves. But in every one of Shakespeare's thirty-seven plays there are probably a hundred readings still in dispute, a large portion of which materially affects the meaning of the passages in which they occur." (Lea, GBW, 15; as quoted in the Greates Book in the World by Jean Lea)

    Through Persecution

    The Bible has withstood vicious attacks by its enemies. Many have tried to burn it, ban it, and outlaw it from the days of Roman emperors to present-day Communist-dominated countries.

    In A.D. 303, the Roman emperor Diocletian issued an edict to stop Christians from worshipping and to destroy their scriptures. He ordered the razing of churches to the ground, burning of the scriptures, proclamation that all who held high positions in the church would lose all civil rights, and those who professed their Christianity would be deprived of their liberty.

    The historic irony of this event, is that just 25 years later after Diocletian's edict, the Roman emperor Constantine issued an edict ordering that fifty copies of the Scriptures should be prepared at the governments expense. (Eusebius, EH, VII, 2, 259)

    The noted French infidel Voltaire, who died in 1778, declared that in 100 years after his death, Christianity would be swept from existence and passed into history.

    Only 50 years after his death, the Geneva Bible Society used Voltaire's press and house to produce stacks of Bibles.

    The Bible's enemies come and go, but the Bible remains. Jesus was right when he said "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." (Mark 13:31)

    Through Criticism

    HL Hastings said it best: "Infidels for 1800 years have been refuting and overthrowing this book, and yet it stands today as solid as a rock. It's circulation incrases, and it si more loved and cherished and read today than ever bfore. Infidels, with all their assaults, make about as much impressoin on this book as a man with a tack hammer would on the Pyramids of Egypt. When the French monarch proposed the persecution of the Christians in his dominoin, and old statesmena and warrior said to him, "Sire, the Church of God is an anvil that has worn out many hammers." So the hammers of infidels have been pecking away at this book for ages, but the hammers are worn out, and the anvil still endures. If this book had not been the book of God, men would have destrowyed it long ago. Emperors and popes, kings and priests, princes and rulesers have all tried their hand at it; they die and the book still lives." (Lea, GBW, 17-18)

    Bernard Ramm adds: "No other book has been so chopped, knived, sifted, scrutinized, and vilified. What book on philisophy or religion or psychology or has been subject to such a mass attack as the Bible? with such venom and skepticism? with such thoroughness and erudition? upon every chaper, line and tenet?" (Ramm, PCE '53, 232-233).

    Biblical scholars once deferred to "the assured results of higher criticism." But the reults of the higher critics are no loonger as assured as we once believed.

    Example: It was believed that the Pentateuch (first 5 books of the Bible) could not have been written by Moses, as the "assured results of higher criticism" had proven that writing was not in existence at the time of Moses, or if in existence, was used sparingly. Therefore, it was concluded that it had to be of later authorship. The minds of critics went to work, devising a theory that 4 writers, designated as J, E, P, and D had put the pentateuch togther. These critics formalated great structures of criticism.

    Then, some people had discovered the "black stele". It had wedge-shaped characters on it and contained the detailed laws of Hammurabi. Was it post Moses? Nope! It was pre-Mosaic. Not only that, but it preceded Moses' writings by at least 3 centuries! (Unger, UBD, 444). Amazingly, it antedated Moses, who is supposed to have been a primative man lacking an alphabet.

    The "assured results of higher criticism" concluded that there were no Hittites at the time of Abraham, as there were no records of their existence apart from the OT (Old Testament). They must be myth, therefore the Bible is false. Wrong again. Archaeological research has now uncovered evidence revealing more than 1,200 years of Hittite civilization.

    Nelso Glueck, one of the three greatest archealogists of our time says "In all of my archaelogical investigation I have never found one artifact of antiquity that contradicts any statement of the Word of God" (Radmacher, PC, 50)

    Robert D. Wilson, a man fluent in more than 45 languages and dialects, concluded after a lifetime of study in the OT: "I may add that the result of my forty-five years of study of the Bible has led me all the time to a firmer faith, that in the OT we have a true historical account of the history of the Israelite people."

    If you wish to discuss specifically this issue, it would be better served either in that other thread, or a thread of its own, instead of a topic dedicated to the specific meaning of a specific verse.
    I noticed you didn't copy the one that says through translation. Also, if God didn't preserve the originals we can guess at what they said, but we can never know. As has been pointed out many times just because the majority agree isn't evidence at all. So that old versions that aren't the bible say the same or similar things doesn't mean we know what the originals said.

  14. #74
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,386
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    I noticed you didn't copy the one that says through translation.
    Of course I didn't. The amount of translations offered is not synonymous with preservation. That's a weird objection kevin...

    Also, if God didn't preserve the originals we can guess at what they said, but we can never know.
    Of course we can know. If we have 10,000 copies that are dated close to the original, and there is less than a 1% deviation among them (and even then, only being numerical differences such as leaving a "0" off or a letter of a name), then we can indeed know what the originals said. This is how the authenticity and verifiability of ancient works are understood kevin, you were not aware of this?

    As has been pointed out many times just because the majority agree isn't evidence at all.
    ...what? What does this have to do with anything?

    So that old versions that aren't the bible say the same or similar things doesn't mean we know what the originals said.
    Clearly you don't understand the issue or I've not communicated well enough how it works. However, this is a bit too elementary for my tastes and time (to me it is like explaining to someone who Jesus is who has never heard of them, it's that elementary...but this particular topic about "Murder vs Kill" in a particular verse is not an elementary discussion...the basics should already be understood by those participating in the discussion). I'm willing to discuss this elementary issue of preservation and how it applies to the manuscripts issue with you, but in its appropriate place (not in this thread).

    So I'll give you a couple links that may better explain this (since apparently, what I posted above isn't working to your satisfaction), then you can either create a brand new thread on the topic if you are still interested. However, discussing how we got the Bible and how we know the copies are representative of the originals is not a topic that will be discussed in a thread that discusses the meaning of a particular verse. This thread requires at least some basic knowledge in religion as well as the texts...without such an elementary foundation, the actual topic cannot be discussed productively.

    A few sources, in respective relevance (read at least the first 4 if you are truly interested in this topic, but all 7 directly relate to the questions/objections you have posed and I would imagine that if you started a thread on the topic, the answers will just be coming from these 7 sources anyway as they seem sufficient to answer them. These articles not long and will give you a solid understanding of the theist's position:



    1. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-corrupted.html
    2. http://www.gotquestions.org/translat...spiration.html
    3. http://www.gotquestions.org/preservation-Bible.html
    4. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-inerrancy.html
    5. http://www.gotquestions.org/dead-sea-scrolls.html
    6. http://www.gotquestions.org/KJV-only.html
    7. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-translations.html


    Again, to be clear. If you wish to continue discussing the issue of preservation or authenticity of translations, that's fine...but it must be in a new thread. The issue of this thread is specific...it is about a particular commandment. All discussions about preservation and corruption will be removed from this thread...they should instead be contained in a dedicated thread about that topic.

    I mention this twice so there is no confusion as to why posts will be removed (which I highly suspect they will be for some reason) that are not specifically addressing the thread's topic.


    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  15. #75
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    NY, NY
    Posts
    670
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    Do you believe there is a true bible?
    Yes.

    ---------- Post added at 03:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:27 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    I know that the bible was written in Hebrew, but that is irrelevant as God is to preserve the meaning even through translations.
    Where did you get that idea from?
    If the Jewish bible is the only true bible then the only true religion is the Jewish religion. Is that your stance?
    Nailed it in one, kevin
    Ah, well - apparently my kids were too distracting to stay as a sig. I take that as a compliment

  16. #76
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis View Post
    Of course I didn't. The amount of translations offered is not synonymous with preservation. That's a weird objection kevin...


    Of course we can know. If we have 10,000 copies that are dated close to the original, and there is less than a 1% deviation among them (and even then, only being numerical differences such as leaving a "0" off or a letter of a name), then we can indeed know what the originals said. This is how the authenticity and verifiability of ancient works are understood kevin, you were not aware of this?


    ...what? What does this have to do with anything?


    Clearly you don't understand the issue or I've not communicated well enough how it works. However, this is a bit too elementary for my tastes and time (to me it is like explaining to someone who Jesus is who has never heard of them, it's that elementary...but this particular topic about "Murder vs Kill" in a particular verse is not an elementary discussion...the basics should already be understood by those participating in the discussion). I'm willing to discuss this elementary issue of preservation and how it applies to the manuscripts issue with you, but in its appropriate place (not in this thread).

    So I'll give you a couple links that may better explain this (since apparently, what I posted above isn't working to your satisfaction), then you can either create a brand new thread on the topic if you are still interested. However, discussing how we got the Bible and how we know the copies are representative of the originals is not a topic that will be discussed in a thread that discusses the meaning of a particular verse. This thread requires at least some basic knowledge in religion as well as the texts...without such an elementary foundation, the actual topic cannot be discussed productively.

    A few sources, in respective relevance (read at least the first 4 if you are truly interested in this topic, but all 7 directly relate to the questions/objections you have posed and I would imagine that if you started a thread on the topic, the answers will just be coming from these 7 sources anyway as they seem sufficient to answer them. These articles not long and will give you a solid understanding of the theist's position:



    1. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-corrupted.html
    2. http://www.gotquestions.org/translat...spiration.html
    3. http://www.gotquestions.org/preservation-Bible.html
    4. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-inerrancy.html
    5. http://www.gotquestions.org/dead-sea-scrolls.html
    6. http://www.gotquestions.org/KJV-only.html
    7. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-translations.html


    Again, to be clear. If you wish to continue discussing the issue of preservation or authenticity of translations, that's fine...but it must be in a new thread. The issue of this thread is specific...it is about a particular commandment. All discussions about preservation and corruption will be removed from this thread...they should instead be contained in a dedicated thread about that topic.

    I mention this twice so there is no confusion as to why posts will be removed (which I highly suspect they will be for some reason) that are not specifically addressing the thread's topic.


    Ok.

    I really don't know what there is to debate about the OP. If we had the original we would know if it said murder or kill, but we don't that's the point. It is both, and neither because there is no original to compare it to. We have some really old ones that we can take with faith say the same thing. What do those say? Is it murder or kill? I think the theists try to make it too difficult to debate so that every debate goes in circles and endlessly splits into other circular topics. The goal of the theist to me isn't to find truth, but force all debate to stalemate as to not be shown false.

    I am also suspicious of a religion that says I know the book says this, but trust me in the original version which is lost, and written in an ancient language few understand it says this. That is what get people in trouble see heavens gate, branch davidians, jones town etc.

  17. #77
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,386
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Your objections (or misunderstandings) are addressed in the links. Had you read them, you'd not have regurgitated the same claim.

    As to whether it is murder vs kill...you admitted you didn't read the thread. That's a problem. The reason for it being murder (and not merely "kill") are given within this thread. If this is really a topic that interests you then you'd do a little reading (of the thread and links) and at least give yourself a better education on the issue. I suspect however, that like some other atheists who post in theist threads...there really is no interest about the particular topic, it's just a desire to try to throw a few jabs here and there when possible, hoping that one will land. It's unfortunate of course (and it certainly isn't an intellectual exercise), but it does happen from time to time. I'd stick to topics that really interest you, that way your objections and input can be taken much more seriously and it ends up being a productive, meaningful and insightful discussion.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  18. #78
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manchester, NH
    Posts
    80
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis View Post
    The commandment applies to human beings, not to animals.
    Questions: How do you know it applies only to humans? Does it specify?
    It is not our abilities in life that show who we truly are; it is our choices. Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

  19. #79
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by ladykrimson View Post
    Questions: How do you know it applies only to humans? Does it specify?
    The commandments came from God to His people, as described in the book of Exodus. God prefaced His commandments with “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery" and then listed the commandments. So, the text makes it clear that God was speaking to only people, and not animals.
    "If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

  20. #80
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manchester, NH
    Posts
    80
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Thou Shalt not: Murder or Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    The commandments came from God to His people, as described in the book of Exodus. God prefaced His commandments with “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery" and then listed the commandments. So, the text makes it clear that God was speaking to only people, and not animals.
    Yes, he was speaking to people. But it does not say "Thou shall not murder people." It says "Thou shall not murder."
    It is not our abilities in life that show who we truly are; it is our choices. Albus Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

 

 
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •