Jump to content

formermav43

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3478
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by formermav43

  1. I think there’s some misconceptions out there about how translations work. It’s not as if we don’t have thousands upon thousands of Greek manuscripts, some dating backing to the early 2nd/even late 1st century. There are complete copies of the NT as early as the 4th century. The disagreements between these are usually matters of spelling, a word omitted here or there, a line skipped-basic human error. There are a few places where a verse or even a paragraph might appear in one manuscript and not another, but even these are nearly all insignificant. With the tools of textual criticism, we have a good idea of what the text originally said 99% of the time. And working from a common critical Greek text, no one is then just making up a translation out of whole cloth or anything. Most differences in various versions relate to how literal vs. functional the translation philosophy is. That said, there actually is one key issue in this verse that you’ll see reflected in those versions, and they both are good translations of the Greek: “All Scripture is God-breathed…” is most common; but it’s also possible to render it “Every Scripture breathed out by God is…” The former makes a statement about the nature of Scripture itself; the latter could be construed as saying the “God-breathed” Scripture is useful, but you have to separate that from the rest. So it kind of cuts to the heart of the issue you guys were discussing.
  2. Ironically, you sound just like someone on the Religious Right here.
  3. I do not vote. I think I've talked about that before on this board (or one of it's predecessors), so I won't write an extended theological defense of that right now; maybe later, it there's more interest or I have more time than I have at the moment. Partly that is practical, for reasons you seem to grasp yourself, in trying to conscientiously support either major party; partly it allows me to maintain what you might call a "prophetic distance" and be critical, like I talked about before, without anyone being able to dismiss me as a partisan. But mostly it is because I am deeply mistrustful of the church trying to co-opt the state to try and accomplish its goals. I think that misconstrues both our mission and our method. But we do not often think about that critically, because we think as Americans first and Christians second. More to the point, I see a pretty standard false dilemma at work in some of what you said (and in Brisket's response, for instance). Political activism in a conventional sense and withdrawal are not our only two options. How is that being "in the world but not of the world?" The former looks pretty worldly; the latter is not in the world in any meaningful sense. But what if we really tried to live like Jesus as a community? As Stanley Hauerwas so profoundly put it, "The church does not have a social strategy; the church is a social strategy." We are supposed to be an alternative polis; "Jesus is Lord" was a radical political statement in the first century world. But it's much easier to try to compel people than it is to walk the way of the cross.
  4. That’s not really true if you go back to the first page or so. But this thread has predictably devolved into the same tired talking points of every other religion thread. And it’s not just because of the “religious” people. #bothsides for real though
  5. Only on every thread about religion on the internet ever. You didn’t mention the “sky daddy” though, so you don’t get full marks.
  6. If only it were that easy. I am one of those oddballs discussed in the first few posts who is both educated and religious (though I’m not a paedobaptist, so no funny looks from me about not baptizing your kids). I would be considered to be theologically conservative. I obviously have a completely different worldview from you (and most posters on this board). But I’m also not part of the “religious right” because I try my best to take what Jesus said seriously. So there’s a lot of elements that go along with Republican politics or even just a “right wing” worldview that I cannot abide: pursuing wealth above all else, not taking care of the earth, the idolatry of American nationalism, the use of violence…I could go on and on. More fundamentally, I don’t believe Christians should pursue worldly power, because we are called to serve rather than to use force. It’s antithetical to our mission and the methods we should use. I agree with you that Christianity should not be the basis for law; I believe in the separation of church and state. Not only because I don’t believe in coercing you or others, but because I’m concerned with protecting the church, too, whether from questions about whose version of Christianity is enshrined in law (“I’d give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety’s sake” as Moore says in A Man for All Seasons), or from becoming corrupted in pursuing power and destroying its witness…which, you know, look around. That ship has sailed. I have been in a position to talk about this with others, to speak on it publicly, to write about it for well over a decade now, to audiences made up largely (though not exclusively) of Republican types, because I’ve been concerned about this from the Christian perspective long before Trump was ever a thing. At best, it’s treated as a sort of eccentricity of mine; at worst, it gets people angry (mostly because they agree with the premises, and then refuse to accept the conclusion). Basically no one is receptive, because their worldview isn’t really Christian, either. They worship the flag, they think America is God’s Chosen People-look even at the language of soldiers making a sacrifice, the “altar of freedom,” the capitol as the “temple of democracy” etc. The earliest Christians died rather than burn incense to the Emperor; these people would like to have the State punish those who don’t stand for the national anthem. You can’t show people that “your religion shouldn’t be the basis of law for everyone” when that IS their religion.
  7. Yeah, it was a real nail-biter as 20 point beat downs go. I guess.
  8. He’ll probably have Brantley 2nd too, based on what he’s said. And he won’t have 3 lefties in a row. So I’d look for Abreu to either hit 3rd or 4th.
  9. There are threads dedicated not only to Shaka, but Barnes, Brown, Herman, Strong. Seems unlikely. And there is a Beard thread.
  10. Bregman has a .375 career OBP and he sees a ton of pitches. Id argue he’s actually more of a prototypical leadoff guy that Altuve, speed notwithstanding. I don’t buy Pena pressing just because of who is behind him. Lineup protection is seriously overestimated-the numbers don’t really validate it. (And even if it is a thing, McCormick so far has actually been a better hitter than Pena, so…)
  11. I think that’s reading too much into it. I voted I wouldn’t hire him unless he made the Final Four. I’m not going to pull for him to fail if he loses to Xavier and they hire him just to satisfy my vanity over an internet poll. I want to win. I think there are probably better options than Terry to accomplish that long-term. But if Terry is hired, I’m pulling for him. Because I want to win.
  12. It “solves” it by creating the much larger problem of a bad leadoff hitter.
  13. Yeah, that’s a silly thing to say. The only guy who won’t root for Terry if he’s hired is Loop1604, and he’s clearly off his rocker.
  14. I don’t think those are fair estimates-they seem overwhelmingly negative. There’s no reason to expect Alvarez to be limited to 100 games, for instance.
  15. I'd go with Bregman, unless and until there is an improved approach from Pena. A guy with a sub .300 OBP leading off is less than ideal.
  16. Like I said-they’re hard.
  17. I disagree-I see no reason. Either hire him or don’t. Half-measures aren’t good for anyone. Just fire him if it comes to that, paying a buyout is better than setting him up to fail.
  18. To be fair, showing up everyday isn’t really anything to brag about in living your life. The alternative is you’re dead.
×
×
  • Create New...