Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

[DOC]

You really ought to be ashamed of yourself. The New Testament was written in Greek. In Greek, Doulos means "slave." You know this and yet you lie about it. Why? Who are you trying to convince with your lies?

It can mean slave and it can mean servant (in Greek) according to the link joobz provided.

And the word was used in reference to the Jewish culture not the Greek culture.

Bottom line, 9 translations translate it as servant. If you would have read all of this thread you would have known this.

 

[DOC]

DOC,

Is there any chance you'll be telling me/us where and when Simon the Zealot died?

you promised to give me "evidence".

Which post?

 

[Akhenaten]

DOC,

Is there any chance you'll be telling me/us where and when Simon the Zealot died?

you promised to give me "evidence".

Which post?

Why do you need to know in which post the question was first asked in order to answer it now?


Tell you what, DOC, for the sake of the exercise, forget about Rincewind having asked you before and answer the question as though he and I were just asking it now.

Where and when did Simon the Zealot die?​

Go!

 

[DOC]

Occasionally I wonder if DOC isn't someone's idea of Performance Art, someone parodying Christian Apologetics.

It's hard to make fun of books and authors who use stone cold logic in their arguments like the book mentioned in the 1st post by Geisler, and also the book "Examine the Evidence" by Ralph Muncaster. Also, there is a lot of modern science in both of these books for those interested in science.

 

[Akhenaten]

It can mean slave and it can mean servant (in Greek) according to the link joobz provided.

And the word was used in reference to the Jewish culture not the Greek culture.

Bottom line, 9 translations translate it as servant. If you would have read all of this thread you would have known this.

If you'd read even half of this thread yourself you'd realise that your poor scholarship regarding this particular matter has been demonstrated so comprehensively that peals of laughter erupt in the cheap seats at the mere mention of it. Even the Dress Circle chortles quietly to itself.

You lose red flags when you do that.

 

[carlitos]

It can mean slave and it can mean servant (in Greek) according to the link joobz provided.

And the word was used in reference to the Jewish culture not the Greek culture.

Bottom line, 9 translations translate it as servant. If you would have read all of this thread you would have known this.

9 translations have chosen to soften this passage for modern audiences by changing the word, yes. Unlike you, 99% of us understand that the original language in a book is the "original," while a translation that changes the meaning is "different from the original."

Anyway, the whole lie is moot, since the passage tells the master how to beat his slave (ahem, "servant") for doing absolutely nothing the he knew to be wrong. Which shows that Jesus was a vindictive, immoral prick. So much for your God of the New Testament. He's a jerk too.

 

[Akhenaten]

Occasionally I wonder if DOC isn't someone's idea of Performance Art, someone parodying Christian Apologetics.

It's hard to make fun of books and authors who use stone cold logic in their arguments like the book mentioned in the 1st post by Geisler, and also the book "Examine the Evidence" by Ralph Muncaster. Also, there is a lot of modern science in both of these books for those interested in science.

Apart from the fact your response is a load of codswallop, DOC, it in no way at all answers the post that it's pretending to.

Can you spell "non sequitur"?

I'll help you out:

n_o_n s_e_q_u_i_t_u_r​

Hope this helps.

 

[carlitos]

It's hard to make fun of books and authors who use stone cold logic in their arguments like the book mentioned in the 1st post by Geisler, and also the book "Examine the Evidence" by Ralph Muncaster. Also, there is a lot of modern science in both of these books for those interested in science.

Where and when did Simon the Zealot die, DOC?

 

[joobz]

It's hard to make fun of books and authors who use stone cold logic in their arguments like the book mentioned in the 1st post by Geisler, and also the book "Examine the Evidence" by Ralph Muncaster. Also, there is a lot of modern science in both of these books for those interested in science.

DOC, I've read both of those books and believe they are excellent reading for 5th graders as examples of poor logic and reasoning.
1.) They are written at a 6th-7th grade level.
2.) The concepts are easy to understand and even easier to refute.
3.) They provide excellent opportunities to show the dangers of making up stuff when forming an argument (E.g., Diversity etymology)

DOC,
you hurt your position when you make claims that are so obviously based upon personal bias and not reality.

 

[Helen]

It can mean slave and it can mean servant (in Greek) according to the link joobz provided.

And the word was used in reference to the Jewish culture not the Greek culture.

Bottom line, 9 translations translate it as servant. If you would have read all of this thread you would have known this.

9 translations, heavily dependent on each other, out of thousands and thousands of translations in this world of ours, where there are more languages than English.

Here's a dictionary in another of those languages:
http://lexin.nada.kth.se/sve-gre.html Put the word δούλος in the little box to the left, and see what it comes up with.
Since I am sure that you are eager to understand what doulos really means, here is a link with an explanation of the Swedish word träl: http://www.synonymer.se/index.php?query=tr%E4l&SOK.x=25&SOK.y=10
And here is a link translating the Swedish slav for you: http://tyda.se/search?form=1&w=slav&w_lang=&x=0&y=0

There, that should put a stop to this discussion... Right about when we are infested with these

And here is an English translation, from a dictionary you ought to find particularly pleasing: http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1401

(And we have been over why the word that is cited first is the most accurate one... Although you very creatively suggested that translators shouldn't be afraid of using one of the other words. Which I can see might be fun, but which does unfortunately also defeat the purpose of translation.)

 

[DOC]

9 translations have chosen to soften this passage for modern audiences by changing the word, yes. Unlike you, 99% of us understand that the original language in a book is the "original," while a translation that changes the meaning is "different from the original."

Anyway, the whole lie is moot, since the passage tells the master how to beat his slave (ahem, "servant") for doing absolutely nothing the he knew to be wrong.

I've already discussed the passage at least 10 times so I'm not going to repeat my response.

 

[amb]

It's hard to make fun of books and authors who use stone cold logic in their arguments like the book mentioned in the 1st post by Geisler, and also the book "Examine the Evidence" by Ralph Muncaster. Also, there is a lot of modern science in both of these books for those interested in science.

DOC, you should never write science and magic fairy books like " Examine The Evidence" in the same paragraph.

 

[joobz]

I've already discussed the passage at least 10 times so I'm not going to repeat my response.

That's a smart move. Those previous "arguments" were quite poor.

To summarize:

1.) Regardless of your interpretation (dolous OR servant), one sees jesus as condoning the beating of another for violating a rule they were unaware of. Not just punish, but physical beating.
2.) Yes, jesus was talking to a different culture, but he is supposedly the timeless son of god. Yet, he still acted as though beating another human as an acceptable form of punishment.

 

[pizzadeliveryninja]

I've already discussed the passage at least 10 times so I'm not going to repeat my response.

In the Pizzadeliveryninja version of the Gospel of DOC, this would be translated as:

"I am aware I cannot win this argument and therefore I am going to stick my fingers in my ears and hope that it goes away."

 

[John Jones]

That's a smart move. Those previous "arguments" were quite poor.

To summarize:

1.) Regardless of your interpretation (dolous OR servant), one sees jesus as condoning the beating of another for violating a rule they were unaware of. Not just punish, but physical beating.
2.) Yes, jesus was talking to a different culture, but he is supposedly the timeless son of god. Yet, he still acted as though beating another human as an acceptable form of punishment.

But no worse than a sunburn.

 

[Akhenaten]

I've already discussed the passage at least 10 times so I'm not going to repeat my response.

Excellent. Only two years and 16000 posts and we've got a final answer from you on one question already. Super!

Now, where and when did Simon the Zealot die?

I'll check back in another two years, will I?

 

[Lothian]

I've already discussed the passage at least 10 times so I'm not going to repeat my response.

You have discussed your post count over 50 times, since when did repetition become a problem?

 

[bikerdruid]

You have discussed your post count over 50 times, since when did repetition become a problem?

how many times have we heard that luke was a great historian?
..or how many american presidents were christian?
....or....or.....or...???

 

[Rincewind]

Thank you guys, for pressing for a reply - I've been away for the weekend!

C'mon DOC - you're not doing your credibility any good by pretending you've not seen my question.

So - when/when and how did Simon the Zealot die?

How about I refer you to post 16116?

And another question - is there a validated signature for ANYBODY in the Bible?

You've told us how important signatures are...

Ciao!

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

I've already discussed the passage at least 10 times so I'm not going to repeat my response.

And your ability to discern appropriate Translations from poor ones shows a lot to be desired.

The vast majority of Bible Translations seem to have a lot of problems with correctly or appropriately translating from the original sources. They often "soften" or slightly skew words in a manner that seems to favour certain interpretations over another.

A case in point is Isaiah 34:14, which has the only (remaining?) Biblical mention of Lilith, ascribed in Hebrew Oral Tradition* as being Adam's first wife (and likely based on a Sumer-Babylonian "Demon" Goddess). So reticent to mention Lilith are various translators, that they have numerous interpretations of the passage that refer to Lilith as Night Bird, Night Birds (plural ), Hag, Night Owl, Night Beast, Screech Owl, Night Demon etc. etc. (though there are a couple of Translations that are brave enough to mention her by name).

It is one of the very few cases one can find in the Bible of attempts to "etymologize" a personal name. It would be like calling Abraham's wife Princess instead of Sarah. This indicates that a lot of translations do in fact try to minimize certain uncomfortable phrases or passages, in both the "Old Testament", and the NT.

* One of DOC's favoured recourses when he's in a bind, not that he has any real knowledge of it.

GB