fourdc - the OT was written in an early form of Aramaic, the NT was written in Classic Greek. Since then, other root languages used have included latin, hebrew, and many more, in fact translation is still continuing today.
Printable View
fourdc - the OT was written in an early form of Aramaic, the NT was written in Classic Greek. Since then, other root languages used have included latin, hebrew, and many more, in fact translation is still continuing today.
And as everyone can attest, you lose quite a bit in the translation. Which is why I think it's fairly humorous that people try to "interpret" English/American versions of both Bibles including but not limited to the King James version which, in and of itself is quite pathetic having all of his majesties hang-ups and bigotries.
Nevertheless it seems so many people flock to hear what these "great" men have to say about a bastardized version of hearsay, etc. etc.
Like flocks of sheep to the slaughter.
so, what about abu mazin, not to get back on topic or anything.
Hey leave poor king jimmy alone it wasn’t his bigotries that came into that bible but the bishop of Canterbury. King James at the time was being courted by the catholic church who kept sending him alter boys, the King James version of the bible had some specifically anti-homosexual bits added to it targeted at him..Quote:
Originally posted here by KorpDeath
And as everyone can attest, you lose quite a bit in the translation. Which is why I think it's fairly humorous that people try to "interpret" English/American versions of both Bibles including but not limited to the King James version which, in and of itself is quite pathetic having all of his majesties hang-ups and bigotries.
Nevertheless it seems so many people flock to hear what these "great" men have to say about a bastardized version of hearsay, etc. etc.
Like flocks of sheep to the slaughter.
As for using the bible as a reason for Israelis right to the land. Remember the Palestinians have just as much claim through Islam and the Koran.
Im getting real tired of this, let me make it clear. Here's what the muslim's holy book states.
From: http://www.israeltoday.co.il/article...&ArticleID=118Quote:
“On the contrary, despite passages that are very hostile to the Jewish people, the Koran clearly concedes that Israel belongs only to the Jews.” He cites three verses in particular that confirm the Jewish right to the Land of Israel:
Moses said unto his people [the Israelites]: “Remember the good deeds that Allah has done for you, who appointed and gave you prophets and rulers, something he has not given to any nation in the world; and now, my people [the Israelites], enter the Holy Land which Allah has destined for you. Do not turn back because otherwise, you might be doomed and come to ruin." (Sura 5:20-21)
Then, we let the people [Israel], who were despised, inherit the eastern and western parts of the land which we had blessed. And the fair word of the Lord was fulfilled for the children of Israel because of their endurance. (Sura 7:137)
Then we said to the children of Israel: “Dwell in the land, and when the promise of the hereafter will be fulfilled, we shall bring you as a crowd gathered out of various nations." (Sura 17:104)
This is what their very own religion teaches, it's awfully strange how they alway's skip past these verses.
um. I think you find that trend elsewhere as well.
The tendency to conveniently overlook aspects of an issue one wishes to ignore is widespread.
The Muslims consider themselves the decedents of Ishmihal, and as he was the eldest son they fell that they are the rightful inheritors of Israel not the Jews who where decnded from Abraham. So yes they fell that the Israelites should control the holy land, but they fell that they are the Israelites who should get that control. Remember christianity/judaism/muslum all originated with the same people, and is just the evolution of one religion.
But actually in the Koran it states that Israel was meant for the Jews and they should return to claim what is theirs.Quote:
Originally posted here by bballad
The Muslims consider themselves the decedents of Ishmihal, and as he was the eldest son they fell that they are the rightful inheritors of Israel not the Jews who where decnded from Abraham. So yes they fell that the Israelites should control the holy land, but they fell that they are the Israelites who should get that control. Remember christianity/judaism/muslum all originated with the same people, and is just the evolution of one religion.
Let me track down the actual passage but if you look you'll see it.
granted these religions were pretty much cut from the same cloth it's just that no one agrees on who is the "One God" and whether or not he had a son, etc. etc. etc. I think that is what sticks in their collective craw.(And what I mean by that is all of the religious zealots argue these points.)
If I remember my Koran correctly the holy land belongs to the Israilites, its been a few years and much like the bible there are diffrent versions. Now who are the isralites, the western european jews who invaded Palistine with the help of the British, or the Muslims who have lived there for centuries dateing back to before they where muslims? Yes it states that the holy land belongs to Isrialites, but in the muslims eyes that is them the sons of Ishmahail.
Here's one definition. (FIrst one I found, funny it's from a Catholic website..:))Quote:
Originally posted here by bballad
If I remember my Koran correctly the holy land belongs to the Israilites, its been a few years and much like the bible there are diffrent versions. Now who are the isralites, the western european jews who invaded Palistine with the help of the British, or the Muslims who have lived there for centuries dateing back to before they where muslims? Yes it states that the holy land belongs to Isrialites, but in the muslims eyes that is them the sons of Ishmahail.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08193a.htm
Israelites
The word designates the descendants of the Patriarch Jacob, or Israel. It corresponds to the Hebrew appellation "children of Israel", a name by which -- together with the simple form "Israel" -- the chosen people usually called themselves in Old-Testament times. Foreigners and Israelites speaking of themselves to foreigners used the term "Hebrews", commonly explained as denoting those who have come from "the other side" of the river (the Euphrates). Another synonym for Israelites is the term Jews (Ioudaioi), especially used by classical authors, but also often found in Josephus and in the New-Testament writings. The object of the present article is distinctly geographical and ethnographical, leaving, as far as possible, the other topics connected with the Israelites to be dealt with in the article on JEWS AND JUDAISM, or in particular articles on the leading personages or events in Israel's history.
That's a popular definition. It's a bit more complicated than that, but that's about the jist of it.