28 messages over 4 pages: 1 2 3 4 Next >>
Arekkusu Hexaglot Senior Member Canada bit.ly/qc_10_lec Joined 5381 days ago 3971 posts - 7747 votes Speaks: English, French*, GermanC1, Spanish, Japanese, Esperanto Studies: Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Estonian
| Message 9 of 28 20 August 2010 at 3:22pm | IP Logged |
JW wrote:
As an objective Historian, the only conclusion possible is to accept the life, crucifixion, death, burial,and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth as historical facts. Both the Biblical and extra-Biblical data demand this conculsion. These are the most well attested facts of Ancient History, thus to reject them would require one to reject all of Ancient History. |
|
|
No, an objective historian would question historical facts that are unproven and as such, would look for solid proof of the existence of Jesus as man before accepting it as truth.
From that point, there would still be a HUGE gap before any of the supernatural claims that are attributed to him could even begin to be considered conceivable. To this day, no supernatural claim has ever been backed up by evidence. To paraphrase you, as an objective human being, the only conclusion is to accept that it doesn't exist -- until proof is presented, of course.
With all due respect for this forum devoted to learning languages, I won't comment further since I know very little about languages spoken two millenia ago.
1 person has voted this message useful
| JW Hexaglot Senior Member United States youtube.com/user/egw Joined 6122 days ago 1802 posts - 2011 votes 22 sounds Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Ancient Greek, French, Biblical Hebrew Studies: Luxembourgish, Dutch, Greek, Italian
| Message 10 of 28 20 August 2010 at 4:39pm | IP Logged |
Arekkusu wrote:
No, an objective historian would question historical facts that are unproven and as such, would look for solid proof of the existence of Jesus as man before accepting it as truth.
From that point, there would still be a HUGE gap before any of the supernatural claims that are attributed to him could even begin to be considered conceivable. To this day, no supernatural claim has ever been backed up by evidence. To paraphrase you, as an objective human being, the only conclusion is to accept that it doesn't exist -- until proof is presented, of course. |
|
|
All I can say is, compare the Biblical data with the secular references from the same time period and linguistic milieu. They are in agreement vis-a-vis the facts as I stated above. You can do this using the links below:
Bible: http://www.biblegateway.com/
Ancient Secular References: http://www.westarkchurchofchrist.org/library/extrabiblical.h tm
1 person has voted this message useful
| kidshomestunner Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 6405 days ago 239 posts - 285 votes Speaks: Japanese
| Message 11 of 28 20 August 2010 at 5:43pm | IP Logged |
Further to my previous post
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Who-Moved-Stone-Frank-Morison/dp/057 1032591
1 person has voted this message useful
| JW Hexaglot Senior Member United States youtube.com/user/egw Joined 6122 days ago 1802 posts - 2011 votes 22 sounds Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Ancient Greek, French, Biblical Hebrew Studies: Luxembourgish, Dutch, Greek, Italian
| Message 12 of 28 20 August 2010 at 6:07pm | IP Logged |
kidshomestunner wrote:
Further to my previous post
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Who-Moved-Stone-Frank-Morison/dp/057 1032591 |
|
|
Oh yes, this is indeed a fantastic book.
1 person has voted this message useful
| Doitsujin Diglot Senior Member Germany Joined 5320 days ago 1256 posts - 2363 votes Speaks: German*, English
| Message 13 of 28 20 August 2010 at 7:29pm | IP Logged |
@JW & kidshomestunner
Religious discusssion are best kept out of the forum because they usually lead to nowhere since believers usually fail to convince non-believers and vice versa.
Most people who visit this site are mainly interested in finding out more about foreign languages. In that respect this thread contains little new information even though there are many interesting language related questions when it comes to the translation of Christian religious texts.
For example, in this article someone claims that the concept of the virgin birth might simply be a translation mistake.
Quote:
The Old Testament talks about almah 'young woman,' not bethulah 'virgin.' However, the scholars in the 3rd century BC translated the Hebrew almah as parthenos in Greek. Thus the 'young woman' in Hebrew metamorphosed into a 'virgin' in Greek—and she has remained a virgin ever since in translations across the world. The notion of 'virgin birth' was born, thanks to a mistranslation. |
|
|
Another article, Problems of Bible Translation, mentions numerous other translation issues.
3 persons have voted this message useful
| JW Hexaglot Senior Member United States youtube.com/user/egw Joined 6122 days ago 1802 posts - 2011 votes 22 sounds Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Ancient Greek, French, Biblical Hebrew Studies: Luxembourgish, Dutch, Greek, Italian
| Message 14 of 28 20 August 2010 at 7:51pm | IP Logged |
Doitsujin wrote:
@JW & kidshomestunner
Religious discusssion are best kept out of the forum because they usually lead to nowhere since believers usually fail to convince non-believers and vice versa. |
|
|
I fully agree but if you read the entire thread, you will see that it was Arekkusu who started the "religious" debate. My objective with this thread is only to discuss the linguistic aspects which I feel are very intriguing to those of us who are interested in ancient languages.
1 person has voted this message useful
| Arekkusu Hexaglot Senior Member Canada bit.ly/qc_10_lec Joined 5381 days ago 3971 posts - 7747 votes Speaks: English, French*, GermanC1, Spanish, Japanese, Esperanto Studies: Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Estonian
| Message 15 of 28 20 August 2010 at 8:00pm | IP Logged |
JW wrote:
Doitsujin wrote:
@JW & kidshomestunner
Religious discusssion are best kept out of the forum because they usually lead to nowhere since believers usually fail to convince non-believers and vice versa. |
|
|
I fully agree but if you read the entire thread, you will see that it was Arekkusu who started the "religious" debate. My objective with this thread is only to discuss the linguistic aspects which I feel are very intriguing to those of us who are interested in ancient languages. |
|
|
Your post quoted biblical passages, and contained no question. Essentially, you were presenting us with the translation of biblical verses. In that respect, it was you who started the religious debate.
1 person has voted this message useful
| JW Hexaglot Senior Member United States youtube.com/user/egw Joined 6122 days ago 1802 posts - 2011 votes 22 sounds Speaks: English*, German, Spanish, Ancient Greek, French, Biblical Hebrew Studies: Luxembourgish, Dutch, Greek, Italian
| Message 16 of 28 20 August 2010 at 8:13pm | IP Logged |
Arekkusu wrote:
Your post quoted biblical passages, and contained no question. Essentially, you were presenting us with the translation of biblical verses. In that respect, it was you who started the religious debate. |
|
|
No sir. I specifically read the room rules before making my post. I have re-read them and I still see no contravention on my part.
"Discussions of a neutral and academic nature about religions and politic abroad will be tolerated as long as they do not include any flames, inflamatory messages or attacks against other forum members or groups of people."
1 person has voted this message useful
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.3594 seconds.
DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|