A readable version of the Bible without all the "thee"s and "thou"s cluttering everything up. Interesting to see the wealth of cultural icons here, not just Adam and Eve, but east of Eden, the mark of Cain, be fruitful and multiply, and so on.

submitted by Chipit from biblestudytools.com

sorted by:
top (suggested)
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (23 children)

So why don't you learn Aramaic and read the Bible in the original?

whatever fake translation

They are all translations from a dead language. Using one from centuries ago is foolish. We have a much better understanding of linguistics now and can make far superior translations.

[–]iamonlyoneman 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

This is why I wish saidit had a downvote button, for complete fools like you

[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Muslims will learn Arabic to be able read the Koran in the original. I guess you didn't know that.

[–]iamonlyoneman 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Will they? Are you sure it's not just that they brainwash their children in madaris by teaching them to read the koran?

If you love mudslimes so much, go educate yourself as to why the religion is both a) fake and b) incompatible with western civilization http://prophetofdoom.net/ https://archive.is/q0TMn

[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

No, adults will teach themselves Arabic so they can read the Koran in the original. If you'd like to read the bible without a crappy KJV translation muddying things up, learn Aramaic.

If you love mudslimes so much

Who said that? Did you seriously just make up something in your own mind, pretend I said it, and then come up with a counter-argument to something I didn't say? Really?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

they weren't originally aramaic they were greek

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

No, they were from Palestinian areas, which was Aramaic. There is evidence that our Greek gospels are based on translations of lost originals. Although a few not-so-carefully-copied and heavily revised copies of Matthew in Hebrew have survived.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

no they in greek

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Just because our current documents are in Greek doesn't mean that the authors spoke Greek, or even that the original writing was in Greek.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

it was in greek sorry

jesus and the guys speaking aramaic were illiterate so it makes sense, someone wrote it in greek later from oral teachings

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

That's possible, but that's still someone else who translated their ideas into Greek.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

yeah it helps explain also why they're not trustworthy, written 100 years after jesus died, the story can change many times thru oral tellings of it.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

It wasn't 100 years, and they clearly copied from written sources.

But the church fathers surely added a lot of their own material.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

70 to a hundred years

there is truth buried in there tho, a revolutionary movement determined to to oust romans and corrupt high priests. That movement succeeded in 70 AD.