| | |  | This is the Conversation Forum for The Bible - a Perspective
<< A question for the biblical scolars
Rather Cynical? >> | |
| | | Subject: A Challenge! A criticism! and "deadly serious bits"!
Posted Jun 29, 2000 by Lucinda (et al) - Dun Researchin'
| | Posting
1
 | | Since this entry has come into criticism from christians, might I suggest they return the favour by giving a critique on one of Nietzches books, or perhaps some of Kant's work? A hostile review of Origin of Species would work too...  ("It's pretty dull, and it glosses over a lot of the tricky bits. It has been argued that it's the product of the devil, designed to lure the religious to their doom.")
Criticism: I don't think that "yhwh" is the name of god. I think it's "Yahweh". Other contenders include "God", "Lord", "I am that I am", "Allah", etc, etc. There's at least enough uncertainty that the cut and dried statement in the entry is unwarranted.
Oh, and I'd like to kick off the "deadly serious bits of the bible", with the statement made by Jesus that "No-one can get into heaven, except through me". I'm sure y'all can do better than that...
|
| | | Subject: A Challenge! A criticism! and "deadly serious bits"!
Posted Jul 4, 2000 by Lucinda (et al) - Dun Researchin'
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
3
 | | and, carrying on your theme, Scientologists are the best people to comment on Scientologist theology? Wrong!
In any case, by your own analogy, theology students would be better qualified to comment on Xian theology, not run of the mill Xians. And most of those people seem to have highly skewed religious beliefs, generally a long way away from any dominant religion.
I thought the objection was because their beliefs were being ridiculed, not dues to the inherent holiness of the book - at least, that's how it was phrased. *shrugs*
(as many xtians as non-xtians? aren't most of the xtians in the so-called "developed" world, compared with other religions? that's not a statistic I'd want to brag about, myself...  )
|
| | | Subject: A Challenge! A criticism! and "deadly serious bits"!
Posted Jul 5, 2000 by James Casey
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
4
| | Now listen, you cheeky little dice.
I seem to be repeating myself, so I'll try and make some sense once more. When I was talking re. the Torah and Koran, I wasn't saying Jews/Muslims shouldn't be mentioned. Of course they must be. But surely the Bible is more Xian than anything else - at the very least since it was the Xian Church who compiled it?
Yeah, the point about who should comment on what was badly made. I actually meant Xians are more likely to *object* to stuff written about the Bible than to stuff written about, say, Nietzche. Anyway - where did theology students come into it? We were only mentioning Xians at first, then you brought in the philosophers!
It's been a bit since I sort of started this whole thing off, and I must admit that my views have changed; partly through re-reading, partly through comments from other, like yourself - for which many thanks!
I now have only two real complaints...the first that the language used could have been much less anti-Xian in tone at times, and secondly that it seemed to spend a bit too much time criticising the text. I've no problem with someone ridiculing my beliefs...I just think it's unnecessary to do so in an approved Guide article.
And that...is that?
|
| | | Subject: A Challenge! A criticism! and "deadly serious bits"!
Posted Jul 8, 2000 by Anya
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
7
| | So one doesn't pronounce the name of the Eternal. . .only one person pronounced it ever, according to Jewish lore, and that was the High Priest, who would enter the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem once a year (on the day of atonement, Yom Kippur) and utter the Name. Now, of course, the Temple is lost, and no one utters the name.
In Ansky's play The Dybbuk, there is an interesting monologue given by a Hasidic rebbe. In part it reads:
Every place where a man raises his eyes to heaven is a Holy of Holies. Every man is a High Priest. And every word a man utters with sincerity is the Name.
Btw, the Jews canonized their version of the Bible long before the Christians. Though the Christian Old Testament has the same content, it is organized differently.
For a good, well-footnoted and lucid modern translation of the Tanach, that is, the Jewish Bible, try the 1985 Jewish Publication Society edition. For a good modern commentary on the Torah, Ellen Frankel's The Five Books of Miriam offers a refreshing feminist take on Biblical interpretation.
|
| | | Subject: A Challenge! A criticism! and "deadly serious bits"!
Posted Jul 10, 2000 by Nihil
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
9
| | Ahem.
When you read the 'Old Testament' of the bible in English translation, whenever it says 'God', the Hebrew word is 'Elohim', which translates literally to 'Gods'. Whenever your Engligh version says 'The Lord', the Hebrew says 'YHWH'. The reason there are no vowels is that biblical Hebrew _never_ has vowels, we base the vowel sounds for transcription on the pronounciation. Of course, God's proper name should never be spoken in Judaism. Hence the more respectful use of 'The Lord'. Incidentally, the Christian approximation of 'YHWH' is 'Jehovah'.
|
|
|
   
Conversation list
Most of the content on h2g2 is created by h2g2's Researchers, who are members of the public. The views expressed are theirs and unless specifically stated are not those of the BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of any external sites referenced. In the event that you consider anything on this page to be in breach of the site's House Rules, please click on the relevant  button to alert our Moderation Team. |
Home
