There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

jsomae ,

Which bible is censored?

sndmn ,

Everybody Poops

scrubbles ,
@scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech avatar

Pretty much any version we know now has taken very liberal translations to change the meanings. Most scholars agree that the translations were not accurate. Then on top of that entire books of the Bible were debated and thrown out, the gospel of Mary magdeline is the most famous. They picked and chose what message they wanted.

skullgiver ,
@skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl avatar

There are different translations for this very reason. Very few people can read the original Hebrew and Greek originals, let alone understand the classical poetic customs.

It’s not exactly written to be read easily, either, large parts of it were written using text complicated even for the native speakers back in the time.

There are plenty of mistakes in the translation, the funniest one being the translation mentioning unicorns, and some of them try to hide the sea monsters from the old testament and use flowery language to talk around the vile things described on the old stories.

Bonifratz ,

Pretty much any version we know now has taken very liberal translations to change the meanings.

That’s not true. Bible translations differ wildly on the approach they take, but there exist many (at least for English) that are focused on offering a rendition as close to the original meaning as possible. Also, Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic as well as Koine Greek have been deeply studied over centuries and are well understood, so accurate translations are possible with the exception of a small percentage of rare vocabulary. Obviously, perfect translations aren’t a thing, but that’s a moot point and not exclusive to Bible translations.

Most scholars agree that the translations were not accurate.

Which scholars? Which translations? These blanket statements make no sense. Again, many translations have been made or reviewed/proofread by scholars of the Bible’s languages, making your claim dubious at best.

Then on top of that entire books of the Bible were debated and thrown out, the gospel of Mary magdeline is the most famous. They picked and chose what message they wanted.

It’s no secret that settling on a canon was a process that took centuries both in Judaism (for the Tanakh) and in early Christianity (for its New Testament), and was never really finished in the latter case, considering the different canons in use in the major Christian churches even today.

That said, I think this process was a necessity. In early Christianity, there were hundreds if not thousands of Jesus-inspired texts floating around, so if the new church was to have any sort of guiding document(s), they had no choice but to pick and choose. Of course, if you think a text (like the Gospel of Mary you mention) is an important witness of the early church, or a more accurate reflection of early Christian thought than are the New Testament writings, you have every right to make that argument. But I don’t think it’s fair to hold it against early Christians that they “picked and chose what message they wanted”, because that’s kind of the whole point of founding a new religious movement.

LaGG_3 ,
@LaGG_3@hexbear.net avatar

IDK, convert to Islam if you’re that worried about reading your holy texts in their original language?

CanadaPlus , (edited )

It does have the nice feature that the holy book as it exists is definitely a faithful copy of the one dictated by the known, independently attested historical figure.

Of course, most of the actual practices derive from the Hadiths, lol.

anarchoilluminati ,
@anarchoilluminati@hexbear.net avatar

That won’t help. Qur’an was also edited and altered over time.

Personally, I don’t see a need for Christians to covert to Islam, especially for something so trivial. The religions are so similar already, and Muslims already believe that Jesus was a prophet and other aspects of Christianity. If a Christian has some deviating opinion from mainstream Christianity, I am willing to bet good money that there was already a sect or group that had the same idea a long time ago. There’s no reason not to just consider oneself part of that group without having to convert religions and still hold Islam in high regard.

I know too many people that converted to Islam from Christianity for silly reasons like this that were already addressed by some other Christian group or whatever, in my opinion. I understand if someone is coming from a totally different religion and wants to be Muslim, that’s okay to me I guess. But Islam and Christianity are already so similar, there’s almost no point. I think some people just got caught up in the anti-Islamaphobia wave (good thing) and then fetishized Islam as the better or politically acceptable religion among Leftists that doesn’t have similar issues to Christianity (not good, in my opinion).

LaGG_3 ,
@LaGG_3@hexbear.net avatar

I’ll admit that I was making a bad faith suggestion lol. OP’s concern over censorship and Lemmy profile makes them come off kinda reactionary. Plus, the question seems kinda goofy.

anarchoilluminati ,
@anarchoilluminati@hexbear.net avatar

For sure, I do think it’s either a bot or a troll fishing but it’s a subject worth discussing. Haha

DmMacniel ,
@DmMacniel@feddit.org avatar

As religious people most often just pick and choose from scripture to make their point, it doesn’t matter to them that their version of scripture is edited/corrected/censored.

CanadaPlus ,

Lemmy is, like, all atheists. You’re going to get a lot of “we can’t” answers.

jsomae ,

The orthodox would agree.

xmunk ,

So basically Predator handshake meme of religious extremists and atheists?

CanadaPlus , 

<span style="color:#323232;">     The Bible is lies
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Atheists   -o-   Christian revisionists
</span>

I don’t know if that’s what OP meant, though.

CanadaPlus ,

Yeah, Biblical inerrancy is specific to a subset of Protestants. They’re just loud about it. The Catholic church has also flirted with it, but their stance has always been that the church itself is the final authority on all matters, and in Vatican II they soften their endorsement of it with something like “inerrant for the purposes of salvation”.

It’s possible lay believers of other denominations sometimes take the same stance out of confusion, though. I’ve never personally heard someone say “I’m a Christian that doesn’t believe the Bible is all authentic”.

anarchoilluminati ,
@anarchoilluminati@hexbear.net avatar

You haven’t met a single Christian that knew anything about their religion then.

Sad truth.

CanadaPlus ,

Well, I know a lot of evangelicals too, so that skews it.

anarchoilluminati ,
@anarchoilluminati@hexbear.net avatar

Yeah, that’s definitely a skewed demographic. Haha

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •