New Proposed Dynamic Translation

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Phillip, Jan 5, 2005.

  1. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I propose we do a new dynamic translation for many people calling themselves Baptist that (for some reason) are allowed to post here simply because they call themselves Baptist.

    By doing this, we could save a LOT of space and paper (just think of the trees we could save just by shortening Genesis.

    Here is a sample:

    1. In the beginning God created the universe, including the Earth and man after millions of years of natural forces and evolution.

    (That should just about cover Genesis 1 and 2)

    Genesis 3:1
    Man sinned and continued to die, but didn't get to go to heaven, although there is no hell that lasts forever.

    (That should just about cover Genesis 3 and 4)

    Genesis 5:1 There were a bunch of people, we don't know who, but a few were possibly Enosh, Kenan and others, IF they actually existed.

    (That should just about cover Genesis 5)


    Genesis 6 Myth has it there was a flood, but ince this is impossible, there is no reason to repeat that story here. The man's name was Noah, for those who wish to keep the myth alive. If there truly was a flood it was regional so please ignore any stories that all man comes from Noah and his family.
    (Since there is no need for details we can do the flood in chapter 6 and wrap the book up in chapter 7)

    Chapter 7 A Bunch of un-named people were called the Jews and wound up in Egypt where a bunch of other myths continue until they escaped and wound up in Israel where they killed all of the inhabitants and became so powerful they even somehow wound up there again in the early 1940's.

    (Wow, not only did I get Genesis in my new translation, I covered some more territory. Oh well, just more trees saved for the tree-huggers.)

    Everybody happy with this new translation and should we continue it with the entire Bible? :D
     
  2. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    :rolleyes: [​IMG] :D WHAT A MESS Phillip....the sad thing though is that some of these so-called "baptists" might actually be satisfied with that!

    Greg Sr. [​IMG]
     
  3. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sad, but true. Yes, it is QUITE a MESS.
     
  4. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    Let's just get rid all the "Baptists" that don't understand the first eleven chapters of Genesis and interpret them to be a strictly literal, historical and scientifically accurate narrative. Doing so would allow us who do understand the first eleven chapters of Genesis and interpret them correctly to go about doing the Lord’s work rather than trying to teach Phillip and his friends the basics of Biblical hermeneutics.

    [​IMG]
     
  5. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or we all could just decide to turn the Bible into one big allegory even when there is no indication in the text to do so. That way we don't have to believe anything as being true. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

    Bro Tony
     
  6. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    You could do that, but according to the little poll we ran you would only have 18% left who are as smart as you and can understand what the Bible really says. :D
     
  7. KeithS

    KeithS
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    0
    Phillip,

    Although your post is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I do kind of wonder why someone has not come out with a dynamic equivalent "Allegory Version" of the Bible. I suppose the problem would be whose allegory to use. They would have even more versions than the English has. :D
     
  8. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    So unless someone believes and interprets Genesis as you do, they are ignorant of basic biblical hermeneutics?
     
  9. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    It is not my interpretation—it is the interpretation of the vast majority of Bible scholars since the dark ages of Roman Catholicism! But if you choose to believe that the earth is flat :rolleyes: , that the earth is the center of the universe :rolleyes: , that the sun revolves around the earth :rolleyes: , and that the story of Noah’s Ark was inspired to provide us with a text book on the creation of the earth rather than to teach us Biblical truths :rolleyes: , what can I say to change your mind. :eek:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  10. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Craig, I don't CARE what your interpretation besides the fact that my proposed version fits your interpretation, so therefore, let's chunk the garbage you do not believe in. And save some precious trees that you can hug! [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  11. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    I believe in the Bible, but I sure don't believe in your 6th century Roman Catholic interpretation of it. :eek:

    [​IMG]
     
  12. GeneMBridges

    GeneMBridges
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Messages:
    782
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe in the Bible, but I sure don't believe in your 6th century Roman Catholic interpretation of it. :eek:

    [​IMG]
    </font>[/QUOTE]How ironic, since you are an admitted Arminian, and have thus sided with Rome in views on the depravity of man, the nature of election, the nature of the atonement, the restibility of grace, and the perseverance of the saints...

    I guess you side with Rome when it suits you...
     
  13. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Great post Gene,

    Craig, Let me put on an easier level. You claim that you do not interpret the Bible like I do. When in reality, you interpret it the way I did in the proposed "Allegorical" version above. (Yes, you really do.)

    So, why not just accept that new version and throw away the parts that are not part of your translation? Obviously, according to you, the entire first and second chapters of Genesis are an allegory. If so, why even bother. Translate it the way you wish, Interpret it the way you wish. Just say: God created Earth through natural causes and created man through evolution.

    Would this NOT greatly simplify your interpretation? I don't see that you are "missing" anything, do you?
     
  14. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    First of all, I am not Arminian and I do not base any of my beliefs on anything that Arminius wrote. And obviously you do not know what my views are regarding the depravity of man, the "restibility" of grace, or the perseverance of the saints, (nor the Roman Catholic view either).

    And am I to suppose that you disagree with the Roman Catholic view of the Trinity, the Divinity of Christ, and the Virgin Birth? [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  15. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    I get the very strong impression that you either do not know what an allegory is or that you have not understood what any of the educated [​IMG] people on this message board believe to be the form of the literature found in Genesis 1 – 11, or that you do not know or understand either of these things, and probably more besides :D . But, as I said, that is only the impression that I am getting from your posts—for all I know you are a Nobel Prize laureate in creation “science,” ancient oriental literature, and nautical engineering :D .

    Persunaly, i fluncked owt auve tha secound graide. [​IMG]
     
  16. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your new version would probably find some support.How would you allegorize the life of Christ? How would you allegorize the Bible prophecies that have already come to pass?
     
  17. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's the problem Bill. I think it was mentioned before that there would be more versions of this than all of the other English Versions. If I were the type to get rich off of religion with no thought of results--off I would probably go...no joke. Just think, a whole series of "compromised" Bibles. Call them the "Guiltless Bibles". Leave out the sins you want to wallow in.

    Sad, isn't it?
     

Share This Page

Loading...