[AnonymousBosch]

(04-18-2018 06:43 AM)Mage Wrote:  

As you can see Reform Judaism is but one group among many. If you want to make arguments against Judaism as a whole please include all groups shown in this image, with explanation why the one group of Judaism you belong to is better then others.

Uh-huh.

You've previously-shown that you're disingenuous and flippant to considered thought. Matthew 7:6 (in once school of interpretation) is most likely applicable, but Proverbs 9:8 definitely is.

In a non-religious context, my girlfriend was talking the other night about a friend of her wasting all of his time writing 'reams of text' on Facebook when fighting Leftists, "... like they're even capable of changing their mind when they hear the truth."

I nodded. "Like Gamma Males."

This is why it's taught that you don't argue with souls that need the most mercy, you simply pray for them to be enlightened by the Holy Spirit, which offer a useful act of compassion rather than dismissive judgmentalism.

-----

As to the graphic, (a /leftypol/ and /pol/ favourite), it's simply strengthened my suspicions that my line of thought was on the right track.

Everything that the majority of people would consider 'Judaism' - as being separate to Christianity, Mormonism, Islam etc - other than Sadduccee, and which exists through observation, teaching and action as clearly Adversarial to Christianity, descends from the Pharisees, whom Jesus rebuked as listening to their Father, Satan. He wasn't fond of the Sadduccee's either.

As such, I don't hate Jews. I just recognise that I expect them to oppose Christianity at every opportunity - an easily-observable pattern of behaviour - so pray for their eventual conversion to Christ. They possess free will.

Which makes me think of an article I read recently, by a Jewish writer congratulating her people for constantly being annoying and overturning political and social structures of their host countries in their favour.

NATURAL LAW

(To hear God) You only need to be still.

REFORM JUDAISM

Be a constant irritant.

The choice is like being an eagle on high, floating, suspended in an updraft, or being a mosquito buzzing around everyone's heads. Observing the first inspires a sense of awe in the soul, the latter... well, everyone's relieved when it goes away.

[Mage]

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

Now, with a ridiculing tone switched on, you are just being a bully.

Nah, man, that's just ridiculing. As in what the pagans in this thread seem to have decided to go with, notwithstanding that to anyone reasonable watching they have pretty much zero reason to be in a thread that's talking about comparisons between Biblical translations; if you can't take it, don't dish it out.

The one who is too happy to win the humor and ridicule battle often misses the truth while being happy about his jokes.

I will discuss any religion I want, they are all interconnected and all have truths and fallacies. Again a close-minded Christian viewpoint is that you need to talk an research your faith only and not even peek in others to not be seduced by Satan. Muslims use that argument to shut down criticism about their religion a lot saying - you are not a scholar of Islam, you are not qualified to criticize. You see as a Christian you fall into the same sins as Muslims - you can become aggressive, you can use these fake arguments. Christianity is a bit better, but it's the same type of thing basically.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

Proving Pagan point about Christians being bullies who's religion only expands and survives by force.

Because the personal is political, right, bro?

Not sure what you mean. Anyway while this is Marxist phrase and at least I hope we can both find common ground as non-socialists it is despite that undoubtedly true. Personal beliefs of individuals shape political actions of a nation, therefore all social engeners try to remake people's faith - be it communist propaganda or an emperor declaring Christianity as a state religion or King choosing a brand of Protestantism as state religion to be independant from Rome or a pagan king declaring one set of gods above other set of gods - happens all the time.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

[quote] (04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

By our logic Communism is superior to Christianity because Communism took over traditional Christian countries by force and kicked Orthodox Tsar's ass.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

Funny, I seem to remember Russia isn't communist anymore. Or any of the Warsaw Pact countries, really. That only took 50 years or so to get over that silliness, the church has been around roughly 2,000 - which one was superior again?

So many things wrong with this argument:
1.Communism came into Russia by force, but ceased to exist peacefully.
2.Christianity came in Non-latin parts of Europe by force and has now became mostly irrelevant peacefully.
3.Muslims also argue their religion is great because it is 1600 years old. Again you can see how you are the same. 600 years difference is not much.
4. Paganism is older then 2000 years if age means so much to you.
5 Is 2000 years a long time? In some context it is, in some context it is not. Our whole civilization is an experiment, our whole human history is abut a brief second in geological timeline.
6. Communism is still a powerful ideology in the world. Russia still has a communist party. China is still communist and that is one fifth of all humanity. There are four other communist countries and a few more where a communist party is a part of coalition in government and many more where there is an official communist party in opposition, but still rather popular. Not to mention all the socialist parties which do not bear the name of Communism but in fact are trying to achieve it. Even in USA, capital of capitalism, socialism is as strong as never before. I think Comunism will be lurking in the world for a long time, because what Communism basically is, is a temptation to take things away from successful people and divide it among losers. It's a temptation that can arise at any age at any time.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

But while we're at it, would you like to specify a nation on the planet where the majority of the population fill in the word 'pagan' on their census?

First of all popularity is irrelevant to truth.
Second, such option is probably not even included in most censuses. Because paganism is a group of beliefs, similarly to Abraham faiths being a group of beliefs.
Thirdly - India and Nepal is majority Pagan. In Latvia and Lithuania many people identify as both belonging to some nominal Christian denomination (because they were baptized as child) and practice some old pagan rites as national holidays, some do it only as part of cultural heritage but very many people identify as pagan. But as with Hinduism, we have our own name for local pagan tradition, so there is no such a choice as "pagan" on a census list. I suspect there are many more nations like this.
Fourth - number of people who identify as pagans grows more and more in Europe as people become unsatisfied with both Christianity and Atheism.
Fifthly - Censuses are made for politicians to know their demographics. In Latvia politicians want to know who is Catholic, who is Lutheran, who is Baptist and who is Orthodox, because they want to know with which churches to cooperate and how many people are loyal to western types of Christanity and how many people follow Russian religions and may be subverted by Russia. Nobody cares about the amount of pagans and Yogis and other free thinkers because these groups are hard to exploit politically. Paganism is harder to exploit politically then Christianity, that is the reason it was substituted with Christianity by royalties in the first place.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

You see you Christians act as if you preach love and peace, but it takes very little for you to start insulting those who believe differently and bragging about Crusader victory and what not. Even trough you have as much to do with ancient Crusaders as I have to do with ancient Vikings. Christians are in very big denial about their aggressiveness - it takes little to provoke a Christian to get angry and get violent and become a fanatic soldier for benefit of King.

What you're doing here is called "Projection".

When have pagans tried to convert Christians by force? Pagans may have persecuted Christians subversive agents (you call them saints and evangelists) in their own land, but unlike Christians pagans have never invaded Christian lands with a justification of a Crusade or Jihad or other name for a holy war.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

Also, you don't understand Paganism. You try to understand it like a Scriptural religion, like yours, and when it fails you conclude it is inferior. You see paganism doesn't depend on uninterrupted line of tradition, scripture and priesthood being passed down generations like Abrahamic scriptural religions, because paganism is about Natural law and seeing internal and external forces around and within human as divine. So it can be reconstructed by observing and learning from natural forces each time anew. Paganism is immortal, in fact Game itself as most members practice it is paganism, recognition and application of forces of masculine power and identity - it is cult of Pan, even trough no one in game recognizes pan as a God anymore. It is defiantly not Christian to seduce and game women - it is a pagan devotion to Pan.

Too bad that without an authentic set of texts or a clear idea of where and what paganism came from, you have literally zero idea about whether you're actually a pagan or just doing something entirely different to what pagans in past centuries or ages did. Paganism is just a cult, dude, thanks for identifying it as such.

Reread this paragraph I wrote again. You have understood nothing from it.
In paganism - you are not right or wrong because you listen to somebody who wrote something. In theory Christians also sometimes preach that you must have a personal relationship with God and use your heart to understand things - in practice it's all fallowing scripture and the churches official interpretation of it.
Paganism is all about personal relationships with God and Nature. No scripture is necessary. it might be helpful as general guidelines, but it is not necessary and is secondary to direct experience. Now as a Christians you will immediately accuse this of being unreliable- saying you need scripture not to venture off the track. But you can see by the splintering of Judaism and it's offshoots - Christianity, Islam and Mormonism - that scripture doesn't protect from venturing off the track and fallowing your own delusions. (See the chart in one of my previous posts). Paganism however provides feedback, because if you do something wrong Nature will punish you. Therefore paganism is less faulty and gives more wisdom and connects more directly with reality then scripture based religions.

[Mage]

(04-18-2018 11:01 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 06:43 AM)Mage Wrote:  

As you can see Reform Judaism is but one group among many. If you want to make arguments against Judaism as a whole please include all groups shown in this image, with explanation why the one group of Judaism you belong to is better then others.

Uh-huh.

You've previously-shown that you're disingenuous and flippant to considered thought. Matthew 7:6 (in once school of interpretation) is most likely applicable, but Proverbs 9:8 definitely is.

In a non-religious context, my girlfriend was talking the other night about a friend of her wasting all of his time writing 'reams of text' on Facebook when fighting Leftists, "... like they're even capable of changing their mind when they hear the truth."

I nodded. "Like Gamma Males."

This is why it's taught that you don't argue with souls that need the most mercy, you simply pray for them to be enlightened by the Holy Spirit, which offer a useful act of compassion rather than dismissive judgmentalism.

-----

As to the graphic, (a /leftypol/ and /pol/ favourite), it's simply strengthened my suspicions that my line of thought was on the right track.

Everything that the majority of people would consider 'Judaism' - as being separate to Christianity, Mormonism, Islam etc - other than Sadduccee, and which exists through observation, teaching and action as clearly Adversarial to Christianity, descends from the Pharisees, whom Jesus rebuked as listening to their Father, Satan. He wasn't fond of the Sadduccee's either.

As such, I don't hate Jews. I just recognise that I expect them to oppose Christianity at every opportunity - an easily-observable pattern of behaviour - so pray for their eventual conversion to Christ. They possess free will.

Which makes me think of an article I read recently, by a Jewish writer congratulating her people for constantly being annoying and overturning political and social structures of their host countries in their favour.

NATURAL LAW

(To hear God) You only need to be still.

REFORM JUDAISM

Be a constant irritant.

The choice is like being an eagle on high, floating, suspended in an updraft, or being a mosquito buzzing around everyone's heads. Observing the first inspires a sense of awe in the soul, the latter... well, everyone's relieved when it goes away.

Natural Law is paganism.

Christianity has been about celibacy and sending your children to Monasteries and Crusades for thousands of years.

Only in 20th century when atheism and communism and widespread acceptance of homosexuality started to threaten Christianity has it started this polemic about natural law.

Throughout most of those "2000 years"Christians love to brag about (which is but a brief glimpse compared to natural religions a.k.a. paganism) - it was pagan practices that ensured procreation and family bounds, while Christians were very busy preaching the next world and renouncing the rules of this world for the world to come. Christians fostered Chivalry which fostered feminism and all this unnatural view of life in the first place.

Look, I myself mingle a lot with Christians who are pro natural law - I send my children to Christian school, because I know they will not be thought there that homosexuality is good like in a normal school. And Christian environment will install some family values. But when my children grow up enough they will question all this especially because their father is not going to Church. Then I will initiate them further and reveal them the red pill truths which are not Christian at all. Christians can only go a limited distance in Natural law because their dogma is unnatural.

[Paracelsus]

Quote:

(04-19-2018 12:40 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

Now, with a ridiculing tone switched on, you are just being a bully.

Nah, man, that's just ridiculing. As in what the pagans in this thread seem to have decided to go with, notwithstanding that to anyone reasonable watching they have pretty much zero reason to be in a thread that's talking about comparisons between Biblical translations; if you can't take it, don't dish it out.

The one who is too happy to win the humor and ridicule battle often misses the truth while being happy about his jokes.

Did you spend a lot of time making that one up?

Even the Gods love jokes.
- Plato

Quote:

I will discuss any religion I want, they are all interconnected and all have truths and fallacies. Again a close-minded Christian viewpoint is that you need to talk an research your faith only and not even peek in others to not be seduced by Satan. Muslims use that argument to shut down criticism about their religion a lot saying - you are not a scholar of Islam, you are not qualified to criticize.

This from the guy who said one page ago that I Do Not Understand Paganism as though that were some sort of argument that disposes of the entire objection?

Quote:

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

Proving Pagan point about Christians being bullies who's religion only expands and survives by force.

Because the personal is political, right, bro?

Not sure what you mean.

Then let me make it explicit: you're performing the same logical fallacy as most idiot leftists do, that being the fallacy of Inappropriate Generalisation. Go look that one up and we can continue on this one.

Quote:

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

By our logic Communism is superior to Christianity because Communism took over traditional Christian countries by force and kicked Orthodox Tsar's ass.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

Funny, I seem to remember Russia isn't communist anymore. Or any of the Warsaw Pact countries, really. That only took 50 years or so to get over that silliness, the church has been around roughly 2,000 - which one was superior again?

So many things wrong with this argument:
1.Communism came into Russia by force, but ceased to exist peacefully.
2.Christianity came in Non-latin parts of Europe by force and has now became mostly irrelevant peacefully.
3.Muslims also argue their religion is great because it is 1600 years old. Again you can see how you are the same. 600 years difference is not much.
4. Paganism is older then 2000 years if age means so much to you.
5 Is 2000 years a long time? In some context it is, in some context it is not. Our whole civilization is an experiment, our whole human history is abut a brief second in geological timeline.
6. Communism is still a powerful ideology in the world. Russia still has a communist party. China is still communist and that is one fifth of all humanity. There are four other communist countries and a few more where a communist party is a part of coalition in government and many more where there is an official communist party in opposition, but still rather popular. Not to mention all the socialist parties which do not bear the name of Communism but in fact are trying to achieve it. Even in USA, capital of capitalism, socialism is as strong as never before. I think Comunism will be lurking in the world for a long time, because what Communism basically is, is a temptation to take things away from successful people and divide it among losers. It's a temptation that can arise at any age at any time.

So let's see:
(1) Changing the subject: you were speaking to Communism's supposed superiority over religion. We've demonstrated it's not, particularly when you remember the work the churches did in bringing it down.
(2) Funnily enough, paganism hasn't come back to replace it, that apparently being the dominant belief system before the Romans arrived. Let's leave aside that AB has already demonstrated pretty well across months if not years the direct work that's been engaged in to undermine the church over the years.
(3) In evolutionary terms only, Islam is great. It survives. Consumes every culture it touches, of course, but it survives. That's more than can be said for the religious practices of paganism.
(4) And how many people are actually left actually practicing it? Again I direct you to my question, show me a nation with a majority of people who say they're pagans. After all, if Christianity is all irrelevant and nasty and stuff, it's not like you have to worry about crusaders any more. Maybe because paganism actually isn't much use for modern life.
(5) Also changing the subject. If you're going to try and escape arguments by saying 2,000 years is not a significant time period on the human scale you're going to have some difficulties.
(6) Also changing the subject since China was not traditionally Christian before communism overtook it; it had its own culture entirely. Although China's Christian populations keep resisting all attempts by communism to wipe it out, too.

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

But while we're at it, would you like to specify a nation on the planet where the majority of the population fill in the word 'pagan' on their census?

First of all popularity is irrelevant to truth.
Second, such option is probably not even included in most censuses. Because paganism is a group of beliefs, similarly to Abraham faiths being a group of beliefs.
Thirdly - India and Nepal is majority Pagan.[/quote][/quote]

Funny, India's own census holds that the overwhelming majority of its population is Hindu. Hinduism is not pagan. If you're now going to slipslide and pronounce that Game and Hinduism are pagan as well as every other religious or superstitious practice that suits your argument, well, I can't stop you, but it's not a very convincing argument.

Quote:

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

You see you Christians act as if you preach love and peace, but it takes very little for you to start insulting those who believe differently and bragging about Crusader victory and what not. Even trough you have as much to do with ancient Crusaders as I have to do with ancient Vikings. Christians are in very big denial about their aggressiveness - it takes little to provoke a Christian to get angry and get violent and become a fanatic soldier for benefit of King.

What you're doing here is called "Projection".

When have pagans tried to convert Christians by force? Pagans may have persecuted Christians subversive agents (you call them saints and evangelists) in their own land, but unlike Christians pagans have never invaded Christian lands with a justification of a Crusade or Jihad or other name for a holy war.

Nah, pagans tended to just sack and burn churches for their booty and because churches were an easy target - Deventer, 772, also known as why Charlemagne decided to stop tolerating the pagan nations on his border and intervene to put an end to the party, or the Saxon Wars as they were otherwise known.

Quote:

(04-18-2018 07:16 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-18-2018 11:54 AM)Mage Wrote:  

Also, you don't understand Paganism. You try to understand it like a Scriptural religion, like yours, and when it fails you conclude it is inferior. You see paganism doesn't depend on uninterrupted line of tradition, scripture and priesthood being passed down generations like Abrahamic scriptural religions, because paganism is about Natural law and seeing internal and external forces around and within human as divine. So it can be reconstructed by observing and learning from natural forces each time anew. Paganism is immortal, in fact Game itself as most members practice it is paganism, recognition and application of forces of masculine power and identity - it is cult of Pan, even trough no one in game recognizes pan as a God anymore. It is defiantly not Christian to seduce and game women - it is a pagan devotion to Pan.

Too bad that without an authentic set of texts or a clear idea of where and what paganism came from, you have literally zero idea about whether you're actually a pagan or just doing something entirely different to what pagans in past centuries or ages did. Paganism is just a cult, dude, thanks for identifying it as such.

Reread this paragraph I wrote again. You have understood nothing from it.
In paganism - you are not right or wrong because you listen to somebody who wrote something. In theory Christians also sometimes preach that you must have a personal relationship with God and use your heart to understand things - in practice it's all fallowing scripture and the churches official interpretation of it.
Paganism is all about personal relationships with God and Nature. No scripture is necessary. it might be helpful as general guidelines, but it is not necessary and is secondary to direct experience. Now as a Christians you will immediately accuse this of being unreliable- saying you need scripture not to venture off the track. But you can see by the splintering of Judaism and it's offshoots - Christianity, Islam and Mormonism - that scripture doesn't protect from venturing off the track and fallowing your own delusions. (See the chart in one of my previous posts). Paganism however provides feedback, because if you do something wrong Nature will punish you. Therefore paganism is less faulty and gives more wisdom and connects more directly with reality then scripture based religions.

I'm amazed how often you take the rhetorical tactic of answering your own questions. Really the most general guideline you can take from this self-referential rubbish is to distrust somebody who on one hand criticises religions for saying they believe they're better than the others and on the other proclaims that his own religion is less faulty and gives more wisdom because it relies wholly on the music going on in his own head.

[Mage]

Well it is time to tie up this discussion Paracelsus, it been segmented too much to be neatly overlooked and most of your latest replies are ad hominems.

Also arguing with a person who claims that Hinduism is not a form of paganism is just pointless. If you can just take and make completely stupid claims like that then what is there to talk about.

[Paracelsus]

(04-19-2018 01:53 PM)Mage Wrote:  

Well it is time to tie up this discussion Paracelsus, it been segmented too much to be neatly overlooked and most of your latest replies are ad hominems.

Also arguing with a person who claims that Hinduism is not a form of paganism is just pointless. If you can just take and make completely stupid claims like that then what is there to talk about.

If you're going to claim Hinduism is a form of paganism, then you're also going to have to give up your assertions that Hindus have never engaged in violence for the sake of their religion, but hey, we'll just let that slide too.

Quote:

In the past decade, extremist Hindus have increased their attacks on Christians, until there are now several hundred per year. But this did not make news in the U.S. until a foreigner was attacked. In 1999, Graham Staines, an Australian missionary who had worked with leprosy patients for three decades, was burned alive in Orissa along with his two young sons. The brutal violence visited on Muslims in Gujarat in February 2002 also brought the dangers of Hindu extremism to world attention. Between one and two thousand Muslims were massacred after Muslims reportedly set fire to a train carrying Hindu nationalists, killing several dozen people.

[Mage]

(04-19-2018 07:05 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-19-2018 01:53 PM)Mage Wrote:  

Well it is time to tie up this discussion Paracelsus, it been segmented too much to be neatly overlooked and most of your latest replies are ad hominems.

Also arguing with a person who claims that Hinduism is not a form of paganism is just pointless. If you can just take and make completely stupid claims like that then what is there to talk about.

If you're going to claim Hinduism is a form of paganism, then you're also going to have to give up your assertions that Hindus have never engaged in violence for the sake of their religion, but hey, we'll just let that slide too.

Quote:

In the past decade, extremist Hindus have increased their attacks on Christians, until there are now several hundred per year. But this did not make news in the U.S. until a foreigner was attacked. In 1999, Graham Staines, an Australian missionary who had worked with leprosy patients for three decades, was burned alive in Orissa along with his two young sons. The brutal violence visited on Muslims in Gujarat in February 2002 also brought the dangers of Hindu extremism to world attention. Between one and two thousand Muslims were massacred after Muslims reportedly set fire to a train carrying Hindu nationalists, killing several dozen people.

What I said is that Pagans don't invade other countries under religious pretext. I never said anything about nationalists not cleaning house against agents of hurtful foreign multiculturalism. In fact I said that pagans do so.

As a Christian, you would like to clean your house and get rid of Muslims too, but Christians are too cucked to do it. Hindus are not that way.

Hindu religious agression is actually that same nationalism you would like to see revived in western world and Anglosphere is mainly a defensive action directed against Muslims and you know full well that Muslims deserve it. I believe these instances when Christians get attacked is due to Hindu's not caring to make a difference between Christians and Muslims. And they are right, the difference is little especially now when Christians with Pope in forefront cuck for Islam. Also you need to remember the great hypocracy and harm that sisters of Calcuta do in India with their bogus charities. You would hate it too if you would be picked for care and would be cared with unsanitized needles and no painkillers - "because God finds sufferin of the poor beutiful" - actual life phylosophy of Mother Theresa, that criminal bitch.

[Paracelsus]

(04-20-2018 03:42 AM)Mage Wrote:  

What I said is that Pagans don't invade other countries under religious pretext. I never said anything about nationalists not cleaning house against agents of hurtful foreign multiculturalism. In fact I said that pagans do so.

Riiiiiight, so pagans are happy to kill people not of their own faith, just so long as they're standing on the correct side of an arbitrary line drawn on a map. Yep, sure, totally superior religious doctrine to Christianity.

[Mage]

(04-20-2018 03:55 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-20-2018 03:42 AM)Mage Wrote:  

What I said is that Pagans don't invade other countries under religious pretext. I never said anything about nationalists not cleaning house against agents of hurtful foreign multiculturalism. In fact I said that pagans do so.

Riiiiiight, so pagans are happy to kill people not of their own faith, just so long as they're standing on the correct side of an arbitrary line drawn on a map. Yep, sure, totally superior religious doctrine to Christianity.

You know very well you are taking this one out of context. The context is Muslim agression and subversion. It exists in India just as well as in Europe and anywhere else where there is Muslims. Hindus are brave enough to fight back, Christans, except few voices, are not.

[AnonymousBosch]

(04-16-2018 05:40 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

Your point is well taken.

However you are looking at it from the point of view of an intellectual.

My point is that God can reach a sincere heart.

But Jesus was, functionally, a Working Class Intellectual. His teachings are meant to be deeply-considered to see the wisdom and truth within.

What you're mainly discussing is not believing in the concept of There being no salvation outside of the church, and the interpretation of that depends on your church and denomination.

For example, in Catholicism, all Salvation is thought to come from Christ (the Head) through his Body (the Church). However, Vatican II relaxed this, then the 2000-era Dominus Iesus happened, allowing the possibility that certain believers who understand the relationship between the Head and the Body, but remain outside the church, are offered Saving Grace depending on the will of Jesus. If you dip into any post 2008-Catechism, you'll see the Church has visibly-softened its beliefs further.

Historically, Protestants were far stricter. Greek Orthodox belief sounds, charmingly, like the shrug of a stoner: "Who really knows? Do your best."

The mentally-retarded are offered grace through the doctrine known as Inculpable Ignorance. If they are incapable of understanding the choice of Free Will, they are offered the chance of Grace upon death.

Quote:

What about being born again? Many churches think that unless you are willfully and consciously born again, you cannot be saved.

Hence, why I was researching Bibles. What were the original beliefs? What was modified or obscured and when?

I'll write my particular viewpoint here, given that I grew up in a heavily-occultist household.

Look, I'm wary of "all roads lead to Christ", given that the Luciferians aim to bring all faiths together in a 'one world church'. This is what Oprah sells - we're all one people and all expressions of faith are really the same God - when we're warned multiple times in the bible about there being only One God. If various rituals and rites and religions of Eastern Religions - pushed heavily in the 60's-70's New Age push out of SF, are all worshipping 'expressions' of God, then, aren't the Pagans? Aren't the Satanists?

Jesus promises the grace of final perseverance isn't easy, and that the gate is narrow. He also says that many who do great miracles in his name and think they are believers will be eventually rejected by him. I don't think 'God's got this' due to Free Will. He will nudge you in small ways - but you have to have learnt to hear and not be distracted by the world, and have to be an active participant in seeking and asking for the truth, which involves a sincere commitment, including an effort to remove the stain of sin. I've never seen the truth given to those who haven't first had a strong desire to seek it to begin with.

Quote:

Is one of these practices more relevant than the other? Is it based on this kind of legalism, or is it based on loving God and your neighbor.

I've spoken before about how increasingly-legalistic belief seems, the more you look into it. Observe those without the Holy Spirit and how they reliably-react to Christ's name - they can't NOT react - and it seems almost to be a legal requirement for Liars and Satanists to signal their deceptions to you, so you can't say you weren't warned, (hence all the stupid signalling with hands and symbols). Even by Church Belief, there is nothing the demonic can do to you if you don't sin, and that by sinning you allow them legal entry.

Some other forum members and I have been discussing the concept of family curses, and how reliably the sins of the children match those of their parents. It's almost as if you fail in your parental duties under Christ, your children become Satan's property. I think its described as being 'to the third generation'.

Belief isn't lightweight stuff: there's a constant battle around us attempting to keep our souls from Christ. Of course, scripture will be corrupted and diluted through what becomes 'Chinese Whispers'.

Here's a good example of a passage that always held little value for me. Matthew 5:13, from the KJV:

Quote:

Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

Note HIS savour.

A modern reader, reading this, will think this is about TASTE, and that flavourless ie. unsalty salt is useless and should be discarded. It's not really offering anything of use to the believers being described as salt as what is to be expected of them.

This is the Intellect that wowed the temple at 12, and continually-bested the Pharisees?

Now, how many modern readers would understand an archaic meaning of 'savour' was 'Reputation'? (Hell, I doubt most people even know it can mean 'to excite interest'). See how the picture gains a little more complexity.

Unfortunately, via the process of 'modernization', you end up with this kind of thing:

Quote:

New International Version
"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.

New Living Translation
"You are the salt of the earth. But what good is salt if it has lost its flavor? Can you make it salty again? It will be thrown out and trampled underfoot as worthless.

English Standard Version
“You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet.

Note the salt is now spoken of as an it, not a him.

Note these translations are based upon Dynamic Equivalence, that purport to be swapping 'thought for the same thought, reworded'.

From the 1582 Rheims New Testament, a Formal Equivalence translation, which means word for the same word, matching grammar and flow:

Quote:

"But if the salt lose his virtue, wherewith [meaning, by which or by what] shall it be salted?"

Note its similar appearance in Luke 14:34:

Quote:

"Salt is good. But what if the salt lose his virtue, wherewith shall it be seasoned."

Both times, it's discussing VIRTUE being the key quality needed for his followers: morality, merit, valor, chastity. See how 'Savour' in the KJV needs to be understood as 'reputation'?

Now, if you have an understanding of the archaic meaning of what seem to be modern words, you'll get a deeper appreciation for both his wit and wisdom with the Rheims text, as he's being playfully-amusing with the salt metaphor.

Take 'salted': one of its older usages was 'to give the appearance of value by fraudulent means'.

And 'seasoned', in Luke: 'to be made fit by experience', or 'to make more agreeable by tempering unpleasant qualities'.

See how much richer - though less 'clever' - the passage becomes if I translate my interpretation into Dynamic Equivalence?

"You, my followers, are to be my Salt upon the earth. But there is no substitute for true virtue that would make you fit for my purposes. Lacking it, you will be worthless to all."

The lesson is clear: 'Be Virtuous'. How exactly is 'being salty' for Christ good? Humble, sure? Unsophisticated and crude? Definitely not. At a stretch - piquant? 'Provocatively charming'? I don't think most would come to that conclusion from reading 'salty'.

Do you see why I was looking for the translation that offers me the most meaning and actionable guidance out of each passage? I no longer think it's a dumb and obvious statement.

Now, note that almost every translation on this page speaks of flavour (and that I had reasons for not trusting the majority of them to begin with):

https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Matthew%205%3A13

Note, that I'm not daunted by seeing that. I always operate on the possibility that everyone else is wrong.

Still, they could be worse. From my New American Bible (1970):

Quote:

"But what if the salt goes flat?"

In what Autistic world would anyone ever describe salt as tasting flat'?

I'll explain the appealing qualities of the the (pre-1750) Douay-Rheims Bibles when I have more time.

[Tex Cruise]

AB managed to slip that post in as I slowly put this one together while cooking and eating dinner. A few points in it have been covered but I think it's still worth throwing in as is.

So... English language Bibles then...

Once again I've waded far over my head into the Deep Forum. I was just looking for a nice, smooth reading Bible.

Trying to understand KJV wording is painfully tedious and only leads to me giving up for months or years. I'm only fluent in Rural Bogan (For those outside Australia that's somewhere between Redneck and Chav) though I can understand most styles of modern english except txtspeak.

As I mentioned on the first page, I'll often read a chapter here and there on the free WEB. Just enough that I've got something to go and think about as I work, but it involves sitting at my desk and reading on a monitor. Plus now I see that it's down the chain from Westcott and Hort who, if they were around today, would evidently be having meetings in the back rooms of pizza parlours and exchanging emails with the Clintons.

The other day after reading this thread, and the links within, and the Wiki list of all the abbreviations I was in town and happened to find a brand spanking new NIV in very convincing imitation leather for two bucks.

I forgot that the NIV was actually the subversive satanic trick bible from the video on the first page.
I like the way it is laid out, with bold headings and clear language. I can read it. Taking into account that I very well understand it is not to be trusted (mine's a gender inclusive one too). Would I not be better off reading it and turning to the KJV to clarify certain passages rather than trying to battle through the KJV and having to get out the NIV every time there's something I don't understand?

I put a lot of thought into trying to understand a bookmark I found in an old book I'm reading that says;

"Men ought always to pray, and not to faint. Luke 18 Vs 1"

What does that mean? I wondered. Men should treat praying like lifting weights, so that if shit hits the fan they don't put the back of their hand against their forehead and buckle at the knees like a corseted woman? Or? What?

NIV says "Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up."

Oh right, gotcha.

[Grizzly Bear]

Does anyone know if the Martin Luther translation of the Bible has been TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH? Ideally the 1534 one with Old and New.

I've been seeking a copy for years but have never found one, which strikes me as bizarre from a scholary and historical perspective.

[Mage]

(04-21-2018 06:18 AM)Grizzly Bear Wrote:  

Does anyone know if the Martin Luther translation of the Bible has been TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH? Ideally the 1534 one with Old and New.

I've been seeking a copy for years but have never found one, which strikes me as bizarre from a scholary and historical perspective.

Wait... you are not intrested in the book, and not even in translation of the book, but you ar intrested in a translation of a translation of the book?

You value a translation, just because it is made by a founder of Lutheran denomination higher then the original?

It's so crazy when people value preachers higher then God, but it happens all the time. Sounds absolutly insane to me.

[AnonymousBosch]

Tex:

What denomination are you? There are Study Bible sites online where you can seek clarification on each passage, such as this one:

http://biblehub.com/

or this one:

https://www.biblegateway.com/

If you don't understand something, you can select various commentaries from the drop down menu in the biblehub site, though it would be worth looking up who the commentators are so you know that the one you select matches your denominational beliefs, which can vary widely.

I've been put to sleep by multiple versions of the bible, never to finish: the Confraterntiy, the King James, the English Standard Edition. The New American Bible kept me awake because the translation was so bad.

Here's a reading level measurement for various bibles, Name, Abbreviation, recommended reading age. Maybe it will help.

The King James Version KJV 19
Young's Literal Translation YLT 18
The American Standard Version ASV 17
Douay Rheims DR 17
The New American Standard Bible, 1977 NASB 16
The Amplified Bible Amp 16
The Revised Standard Version RSV 16
The New American Standard Bible, 1995 Update NASB95, NASU 15
The New Revised Standard Version NRSV 15
The English Standard Version ESV 15
The Weymouth New Testament 15
The Philips New Testament 14
The New English Bible NEB 13
The New Jerusalem Bible NJB 13
The New King James Version NKJV 13
The New International Version NIV 13
Today's New International Version TNIV 13
The Holman Christian Standard Bible HCSB 13
The Living Bible LB 13
The Jewish New Testament 13
The World English Bible WEB 12
The New American Bible NAB 12
The Common English Bible CEB 12
Today's English Version TEV 12
The New English Translation NET 12
The New Living Translation NLT 11
The Revised English Bible REB 11
The Message 10
God's Word GW 10
The Contemporary English Version CEV 10
The New Century Version NCV 9
The New International Reader's Version NIrV 8
International Children's Bible ICB 8

The main problem I see is that you're always going to sacrifice readability for accuracy. Take the Good News bible, which I find painful to read: Mary is referred to as being a 'virgin' 14 times in the KJV, but only 3 times in the GNT. Since I see repetition in the bible being used to drill certain points home, this sort of change weakens doctrine.

You might want a Study Bible, these are ones with various footnotes and commentaries that are meant to enlighten or instruct.

(04-21-2018 05:29 AM)Tex Cruise Wrote:  

"Men ought always to pray, and not to faint. Luke 18 Vs 1"

What does that mean? I wondered. Men should treat praying like lifting weights, so that if shit hits the fan they don't put the back of their hand against their forehead and buckle at the knees like a corseted woman? Or? What?

'Faint' means, in that context, 'not to lack strength or vigor'. It's clarified as 'weary' in the DR.

Quote:

"And he spake also a parable to them that it behooveth [be necessary fit or proper] always to pray, and not to be weary, saying..."

The Douay Rheims lists this as The Gospel for the 10th Sunday after Pentecost.

It says that this is the lead in to a parable to teach that the revenge for persecutions of the Church should be committed to God's Will, and, instead, one is to pray incessantly for Christ's return.

A margin note at the side says "We should pray always by faith, hope and charity, and by working the things that be acceptable to God," then discusses Canonical Hours Prayers, (such as a Book Of Hours) as a sign of External Devotions to God.

[ilostabet]

I have several versions, both Catholic and Protestant, in two languages (Portuguese and English), plus Apocryphal KJV (books that are included in Catholic canon). I tend to read all of them and compare passages and translations.

After watching the video that AnonymousBosch shared I checked all the versions I have for Luke 9:56 verse and none of them had the complete verse, not even the Catholic one I got from Church, nor the one I got from my Grandmother which is from the 80s. It pissed me off.

I never thought the 'translation' issue was innocuous, but also never thought it was so bad as to erase complete sentences - I honestly thought it was just rephrasing for clarity.

So I just bought yet another Bible (mentioned in this thread): The Orthodox Study Bible - it contains the Orthodox canon, and also comes with commentary from Early Church Fathers, which is sound perspective. I'll report once I start digging through.

[Raylan Givens]

(04-16-2018 01:09 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  

(04-16-2018 10:16 AM)rotekz Wrote:  

I didn't know which to get so started out with the C.S.Lewis NRSV, then acquired an Oxford NIV Schofield Study Bible and now have The Orthodox Study Bible as I'm leaning that way.

The Schofield Bible is a satanic Zionist trick Bible. It is the reason many "Christians" believe we exist to serve Jews and should start WW3 on Israel's behalf.

The N.I.V. is more or less the same.

[pitbullowner]

I'm an avid NASB guy myself. I've been told it translates directly from the Hebrew , Greek and Aramaic texts

[rotekz]

The Orthodox Study Bible uses a translation from the Greek Old Testament of the Septuagent (LXX) rather than the Hebrew Masoretic text used in most other modern bibles. This video shows how the Hebrew Masoretic text has likely been corrupted by Jews to allow denial that Jesus is the new 'High Priest' as per Hebrews 2:9-18. The time lines of the descendants of Shem get completely messed up and once corrected Genesis aligns much more closely to world history. There's so much great info here:

(It's quite long and comprises two great videos. It's the second one that is relevant here starting at 12:34)

[Wutang]

Any thoughts on the New Revised Standard Version?

[AnonymousBosch]

(04-27-2018 03:08 AM)Wutang Wrote:  

Any thoughts on the New Revised Standard Version?

Social Justice Warrior Garbage, created by PC Nutcases in the 90's whose driving goal was to make the text 'inclusive', rather than accurate. If you don't know the spiritual and religious allegiance of the kind of person who values the goal of inclusivity above all others by now, there's no helping you.

Quote:

In the preface to the NRSV Bruce Metzger wrote for the committee that “many in the churches have become sensitive to the danger of linguistic sexism arising from the inherent bias of the English language towards the masculine gender, a bias that in the case of the Bible has often restricted or obscured the meaning of the original text”. The RSV observed the older convention of using masculine nouns in a gender-neutral sense (e.g. "man" instead of "person"), and in some cases used a masculine word where the source language used a neuter word. The NRSV by contrast adopted a policy of inclusiveness in gender language. According to Metzger, “The mandates from the Division specified that, in references to men and women, masculine-oriented language should be eliminated as far as this can be done without altering passages that reflect the historical situation of ancient patriarchal culture.”

Lead translator Walter Harrelson sniffing his own farts here:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/harrelson1.html

Quote:

But problems clearly remain. Have we adequately addressed the language that gives trouble and offense to others who take exception to certain forms of reference? We have eliminated "dumb" in favor of "speechless" or the like, and we have rarely used the term "leper" but have referred to persons with "a leprous disease," with a note indicating that several kinds of skin disease are covered by the biblical term often translated "leprosy." But we probably are on the threshold of new forms of reference to persons with handicapping conditions, and it will be wise now to begin to collect references that can be used in a forthcoming revision.

More critical are such terms for the deity as "Lord," which the NRSV has put in small capital letters when the personal name for the deity, [231] YHWH, appears in the text. We did not consider long enough, perhaps, the question whether there might be a more suitable term than "Lord" for the Tetragrammaton. We did briefly consider the term chosen by James Moffatt in his translation of the Bible, "the Eternal," but there was no real support for its adoption. We talked of using "the Sovereign," but that seemed no more suitable than "the Lord." We needed "the Creator" for those occurrences of just that term in the Hebrew. Finally, since we found no better alternative for "the Lord," we let that familiar term stand.

We were in agreement that we should not eliminate all the personal pronouns for the deity, though we did find that often we could reduce the number of such pronouns by simply eliminating those that seemed unnecessary. I find that readers are actually in a rather good position with the NRSV to make such adjustments in public reading as they think appropriate, now that the unnecessary masculine references to human beings have been so widely removed. It is a genuine pleasure, as I have had occasion to discover, to be able to read the lessons appointed for the day in such a way as to eliminate entirely masculine references to the deity, and to do so without having had to retranslate or reproduce the biblical lessons.

At least he is dead, but, let me guess, if I dig into his background, will I find, yet again, the same pattern that repeats over and over?

His obituary was exactly what I expected: his expertise was (selective) Biblical interpretation, Jewish-Christian relations, and the churches’ response to social issues.

Sigh. He was a Gentile acting as a Reform Jew.

Quote:

Harrelson remained active in academic and community pursuits, including his work with Rabbi Randall Falk to increase dialogue and understanding between Christians and Jews. They also co-authored two books, Jews and Christians: A Troubled Family and Jews and Christians in Pursuit of Social Justice, and teamed up to teach a seminar in various cities, including Nashville, on the topic.

Uh-huh.

Due to my own beliefs and experience, I expect any 20th century translation and onwards to be Satanic in nature. As such:

- I'm convinced there are Spiritual Laws over us.

- I'm convinced there are certain practices that increase your connection to the Holy Spirit, and protect you from the forces of darkness.

- I'm convinced there protections and practices are being deliberately-obscured by Satanists whose are shaping the old Christian religion into a new Progressive one, which leaves everyone vulnerable to self-destruction.

- The rot is everywhere.

As such, I was looking for an English Bible that was as early a translation as possible, and, hopefully before the Reformation.

[AnonymousBosch]

I prayed for guidance, figuring the result would be tailored to exactly what I was seeking: A sense of tradition, accurate language, deeper instruction, and a history of being challenged or suppressed. We know how the adversaries of truth work by now.

What I found was the original Douay Old Testament of 1610 and the Rheims New Testament of 1582. Note the New Testament predates the King James.
Also note that neither of these are what is sold as the 'Douay-Rheims' nowadays, which either date from a 1750 revision to fall more in line with the King James or an 1899 American revision with different footnotes again.

It's a direct formal equivalent translation of the Latin Vulgate, which means occasionally-clunky rather than 'pretty' language, but it means exactly what was said.

It was written during the Reformation, and directly-challenges the heresies emerging in Germany, with copious margin notes, extended footnotes after each chapter and tables at the back of the book highlighting the repeating themes Jesus spoke of. Why the New Teachings are Heretical is clearly-explained, and it clearly-states where passages are assigned readings according to the church calendar.

It's a bible you could rebuild the Traditional Catholic Church with, particularly as the current Roman Catholic Church is speaking of forbidding the Latin Mass from being practiced, as to be expected from those we warned by Pope Leo XIII and Our Lady of Fatima would subvert the church for Satan during the 20th Century for 100 years, as Russia's evil [socialism] 'spreads throughout the world'.

Anyway, if you owned this bible in England, you were put to death up until the softened 1750 revision. So, deliberate persecution and later subversion. I suddenly knew this was the one.

There are spiritual rules for everything, and if you're 'tuned in' you'll find yourself guided-instinctively to them, so it's interesting to see these themes and laws clearly-indexed.

It's not just believing. It's not just being baptized. It's Eucharistic Communion with the bread being the Supernatural body of Christ, alms-giving, good works, fasting, and doing penance, including offering up your suffering as a sacrifice. All of these can repair the damage of our sins on ourselves and others, including, the sins of others we take on, for those who are dealing with the concept of Generational Curses.

The thing is, it's Early Modern English, so it's not hard to read once you learn the spelling patterns. If anything, it's far closer to 'normal' English that the weird bastardisations of the modern translations. If typed into Modern English, it scores lower on a grade reading scale that supposed 'easy-to-understand' translations like the NRSV.

Take a look, and go slowly at first:



Note the patterns:

vv = W
The f shape without a cross line = S
I = both I and J
U = both U and V
ie and ia = Y

It's not that complicated. Retyped in Modern English:

Quote:

"When Jesus was in Bethany in the House of Simon the Leper, there came to him a woman having a box of alabaster box of precious ointment, and poured it out upon his head as he sat at the table. And the disciplines, seeing it, had indignation, saying whereto is this waste? For this might have been sold for much and given to the poor.

And Jesus knowing it said to them, why do you molest this woman? For she hath wrought a good work upon me. For the poor you have always with you, but me you have not always. For she in pouring this ointment upon my body, hath done it to bury me."

See how readable and understandable that is, under the appearance of complication? It's probably a 7th grade reading level, other than a couple of archaic phrasings.

Note the cross-references to the Left, and the clarifications to the right. Here you can see the practice of remembering Saints - a heretical no-no - justified, as it will be in other places.

At the end of each chapter, you get the footnotes. Note the explanation of the Last Supper here, correcting the Calvinists, Lutherans and (soon to be) Protestants.



Note, 'creature' here means 'anything that is created on the earth' rather than animal, as in the old rites of blessing salt and holy water, which refers to them both as 'creatures'. Also note, the belief in the ability to bless is not shared by the Heretical Faiths, who instead 'give thanks'. But what if this is a real form of spiritual protection, now obscured?

Note the reinforcement of Transubstantiation.

In other cases, why is penance downplayed by the Heretics and Schismatics? Why do they loathe the veneration of Mary so? Why is fasting ignored, when Jesus gives clear instruction on how to fast? Why was I instinctively-feeling that I should be fasting during Lent, only to discover later that Vatican II removed the 40 Days Fast of Lent Christians used to be obligated to partake in? Why do all modern churches downplay the supernatural?

Why do I feel that following these instructions seems to be strengthening knowledge and connection to a higher source? Why did I instinctively look at my pictures of the Immaculate and Sacred Hearts a couple of weeks before Easter and think that it seems somehow disrespectful to display them with Good Friday coming up, to being accidentally-cum-deliberately led to the knowledge that, pre-Vatican II, you covered your iconography with purple cloth from Passion Sunday (the Sunday before Palm Sunday) until Easter Sunday. Why did I discover this two days before Passion Sunday, allowing me time to do it?

How did I find those pictures to begin with, at a random garage sale one morning, when I'd looked at the very same pictures the night before on Ebay and thought I couldn't really justify their expense, given their antique status? Why did the lady give them to me for nothing for doing her a kindness, asking me if "I believed."

What if, following these guidelines, the unexplainable is happening around me, with increasing-regularity. How could my sister have spoken to me a couple of days ago about realising our parents involvement in the occult was a stain upon our family, and that she'd undertaken the task a couple of months ago to 'own their sins and burn their cost of them away', whilst not knowing I'd come to the very same conclusion about generational curses, and decided it was my responsibility to do the very same thing. My avenue of attack was devotion to the Rosary, Denial of the Self and Good Works. Hers, fasting and offering up suffering.

"It should be crazy," she said to me, "But it isn't, is it? I'm getting used to this."

A friend of mine, previously atheistic, has noticed over the last year. "It's should be scary how you two are coming to the same realizations independently... but, well, it's not." His sister is a lesbian, so he more safely-labels it as coming from 'the powers that be' rather than God or the Holy Spirit.

Why did I tell my Sister none of this knowledge comes from greats signs and wonders, and not to look for it in the distractions of the world, but from small, gentle moment of guidance in the stillness. Why did she tell me she listens to a podcast called 'The Still Small Voice'? Why did I later read that's exactly how God came to Elijah in the Old Testament? Why, when I was wondering who could bless my Rosary, and hating my local Novus Ordo church, who promised me that 'exciting new changes were coming', did I end up at the local Carmelite Monastery, only to discover that they take a vow of silence so as to more easily hear God's voice 'that comes on a gentle breeze'.

Do you understand now why I wear a Brown Wool Scapular under my shirt?

I'm noticing, my acts of sacrifice and kindness for others are infecting those around me, almost like we have the power to heal the spiritual damage within each other. Even my atheistic friend is now volunteering to deny his own comfort or money to help others, understanding that repetition of good acts breeds virtue. I've watched my mate Bill turn from a guy who built up a wall to keep the world away, and saying I was 'foolish to help others', because then 'you don't get anywhere', and that I was 'too nice' and that he'd 'slap that out of me if I hung around him enough' - something the forum agreed with - to, well, charity winning. He's been housing an homeless alcoholic workmate in his shed, and learning patience and forgiveness.

None of this is virtue-signalling. It's just a sense of having tapped into some, well, old magic. If there is what we would consider 'magic' in following the practices of the Word, why does its power resonate more strongly than the power any Satanist I knew over the years seemed to possess?

Those of you who sense there's a very real Spiritual War happening over the last few years, and want to armour up and fight, this is the bible you need, particularly if you are willing to put in the work. I had the whole thing physically-printed out. It seemed important to do so. I always listen to these 'nudges' by now.

https://archive.org/stream/1610A.d.Douay...7/mode/2up

Apparently there is a Lulu, print-on-demand version of this bible, retyped in Modern English. I'll see if I can get one and report further on it.

How great is the sense of being part of an old tradition when seeing a page like this, compared to the empty Novus Ordo Churches with their New Masses, casual priests and rock music I attended as a child? No wonder I never sensed any greatness there.

[Aurini]

I'll repeat what I said to AnonymousBosch in PM, when he pointed me in the direction of this thread:

I just realized something - I had a dream last night (I just woke up) about visiting a hidden Bible store, an unassuming shop that I'd walked past a dozen times, but had exactly what I was looking for. Rather than the light crystals and lavendar of your modern bible store, it was like a used book store, deep red leathers and brown wood.

That's all I remember. Take it for what you will.

[AnonymousBosch]

Very little time here, so briefly, with regards to my earlier points on how resisting the natural law breeds psychological dysfunction:

Fasting and chastity are teaching self-control over your passions.

Good works are teaching you to get outside of your own head.

Alms-giving is teaching empathy and frustration of the self.

Penance teaches you to humility and the ability to honestly self-reflect.

Offering up your suffering teaches you resilience to hardship.

Being still teaches you considered, calm responses to events around you.

Considering the reality of the supernatural through the Eucharist teaches you to not be arrogant about your own knowledge.

The repetition of these 'good' acts programmes virtue. The result is Psychological Health.

Note however, the repetition of sins programmes vices. The result is Psychological Dysfunction. It's a Snowball effect.

Take what happens if you ignore the five points above. A possible dysfunction for each one, in order: Obesity, Narcissism, Greed, Gamma Pride, and Being a Snowflake, Catastrophisation, Ignoring information that contradicts your subjective reality (i.e. Liberalism).

It's a psychological textbook. No double think. No cognitive dissonance. No unrealistic expectations. No codependency. No addictions.

[debeguiled]

And there is a app for each one.

[stugatz]

The Douay-Rheims Bible I've been told is a much closer translation of the Latin Vulgate, and predates the King James by a number of years. It's the Catholic Church's official Bible - well, those that aren't converged and trying to hand out easy-to-read versions, anyway.

The King James Version is flat-out beautifully written, though, and has far better flow. I'd say read that one first, read the Douay-Rhiems next, and then move on to whatever suits you. (I believe the Greek Orthodox read an English translation of the Septuagint - that's somewhat easily found online for free. It also doesn't flow nearly as well as the KJV.)

If you want to compare translations, I'd recommend reading Psalm 23 (the Lord is my shepherd). It's such a well known psalm, you'll immediately notice the different character of the translations if reading them side-by-side.