Question for Bible readers .

[McCulloch]

Which translation do you prefer? More importantly, why do you favour that version?

[achilles12604]

Moderator intervention

I do not see how any of the comments directed at the opponent's debating abilities help to further this thread. It is fast becoming a thread worthy of locking entirely. Stay on topic, do not address the other person's abilities.

Allow the audience to decide who has what abilities and your tendency to attack the other debaters will go away.

I was asked via PM to clarify what I found inappropriate and why.

All the posts up to post 21 were on topic. They dealt with different versions and why.

Post 22, was a debating post about a different subject and thus began to lead the discussion onto a different topic. This was a breach of the rules concerning staying on topic.

Post 23 included a mention that a if a challenge is made, it should be directed toward the person who made the original claim. It then declined to debate and listed reasons why.

Post 24 struck me as flame bait. It was an attempt to simply be right and it ignored the previous posts request not to debate. It also drew the thread further off topic. It also includes personal assumptions about the other debater's life and decisions which clearly hold no place in the discussion and serve no purpose other than flame baiting the opponent into responding.

Post 25 was again off topic and was an un-needed answer to flame bait in post 24.

Post 26 included more flame bait, and attempted to get the debate to remain off topic. It also included personal remarks which were totally off topic, un-necessary, and bordered on attacking in nature. The author then wrote that the debater should not bring up topics if he won't back up his speculations because this was a debating forum. This of course was not correct because this is a discussion thread. Not a debate thread. Also, debating the topic of the word "virgin" was STILL off topic and thus, if one party wished to debate it, they should have made a new thread per the rules.

Post 27 included retorts to post 26 of a person nature. Return comments were made about the tendencies of the other debater. All these comments were of course still off topic and un-needed.

Post 28 was nothing less than a direct and personal attack containing insults. It contained no new ideas and was a short slander of the other debater.

Post 29 strikes me a short attempt to once again end the off topic discussion. It contained an un-needed blurb at the end which has the potential of further drawing out insults. But it was certainly another attempt to cut off the slurry of words.

Post 30 is a personal comment regarding another debaters probationary status.





This is what I read from the thread. I find some degree of fault with both sides. However, it is clear to me that flame bait and derogatory remarks were certainly predominantly from Biker and Easyrider. Cnorman should not have bothered responding to this flame bait with some of his own off topic remarks. I would imagine if post 29 had been the first one, the discussion would have been cut short before it went helter skelter and personal insults were thrown.

Post 28 is the most clear cut demonstration of personal insulting. I would love to hear the reasoning for this remark and how the poster feels that this remark was in line with the forum rules regarding civility and staying on topic. PM form would be appropriate if explanations are given.


In general I think that staying on topic is a MAJOR issue. It leads to many of the insults I read. It is an infraction which up till now have only resulted in one banning. I will be discussing with the other moderators to determine if more direct interventions and probations should be put in place for individuals who post off topic and with personal remarks rather than actual debating/discussion points.



This concludes my full analysis of this thread. I hope everyone can understand WHY rules are put in place and how much easier it is to just ignore the other party. If you feel that the person you are debating with is purposely ignoring your points, then I highly suggest you simply stop debating with that individual. Slinging personal remarks about the person or their debating will never be productive and will certainly bring down similar comments from the other side.

If one side asks you to stop wasting their time, and appropriate response in my opinion would be "I will certainly stop wasting your time." And then STOP discussion with that person. This ends the discussion without any room for personal comments or insults.

The temptation to "be right" or "have the last word" is always there. But it is never productive, and frankly makes the person look immature. This sort of "I MUST have the last word because I am right" attitude is better reserved for the elementary playground, not for a forum of intelligent philosophers and debaters.

[cnorman18]

Thanks for clarifying, Achilles. I will say mea culpa to the charge of following an off-topic remark into the woods (and perhaps the mud), but then "turn the other cheek" is not a tenet of my religion.

Besides: People who think they know everything are so annoying to those of us who actually do...

[McCulloch]

Please remember that this is not in one of the debating forums. This is in the Questions for ... forum.

Have you wanted to ask another member a question, but think other people would like to know also? Well, here is your place to do it.

This subforum is hidden from anonymous users so there is a bit of privacy to what is posted here. But, all members of course can read whatever is posted.

So, here's how it works...

Create a topic subject as "Questions for (insert member name here)". So, to ask a question for user Eve, the subject would be "Questions for Eve". If someone has already started one for a user, you can just post in that instead of creating a new one. If you do start a new one, send a PM to that user to notify her/him that it's been created.

In the body, ask your question(s) for that user. Avoid questions that are too personal in nature.

The user at her/his own discretion then decides to answer the question(s) or not. There is no obligation to answer anything.

The intent of this subforum is to allow for opportunities to make relationships here more personal and not just for everyone to communicate in a debate setting.

[Biker]

I read the JTS translation of the Tanakh (the OT, the Jewish Bible) in its Jewish Study Bible translation, along with an Orthodox Chumash with commentary, and a couple of other commentaries as well. The actual translation is pretty much the same as in Christian Bibles, but the order of the books and the numbering of the verses is sometimes different.

When reading the NT, I prefer the NIV, but I still have a certain fondness for the old Phillips translation. For majestic language, you still can't beat the KJV.

There are some translation differences, some which are used by the missionaries to try to convert Jews. For example, 'Like a lion' is translated as 'pierced' and things like that.

The good old 'Lucifer' translation is Isaiah is way out of context too.

That is true, but many Christian Bibles contain the correct translations now too, at least in the notes. "Young woman" is found, properly, instead of "virgin," in a famous passage, for instance. Jews who are familiar with their heritage and the Bible are seldom fooled. Of course, that's why missionaries target secular Jews and not religious Jews for their efforts.

Nope, we target both. No fear here.

If you want to debate "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 just provide your own position and we'll see how it goes. Just remember to include your more preferred Hebrew word for "virgin."

Goat brought it up. Why don't you challenge him?

I'm not interested.

You've proven many times that you're not interested in debate, only preaching.

You duck questions and ignore arguments, you profess to "disprove" your opponents' arguments by quoting unrelated Scriptures, you deliberately distort and misstate your opponents' positions, you switch positions in the middle of a debate, you indulge in snide, sneering disparagement of others' beliefs, personal insults and smears, and you have no respect for anyone's faith or beliefs but your own. You do not in general deal in reason or argument but in diatribe and doctrine.
Even when you are finally and definitively proven to be wrong (e.g., in your assertion that slavery in the Bible is always either sinful, a punishment from God, or voluntary), you refuse to admit it and keep arguing, no matter how tangential and pointless your arguments grow to be. You apparently think you are inerrant and know everything, and no argument can ever prove you wrong.

You are obviously aware of the actual meaning of the Hebrew word almah. I'm not really interested in seeing some bizarre bit of sophistry "proving" that it means something it doesn't mean, or that that whole passage means something it plainly doesn't, by your forcing other passages to mean things they don't, in a dance that never ends.

You believe what you believe, as is your right: but you also believe in forcing everyone else to believe what you believe, too--no matter whether it's by the law, by specious and dishonest argument, or by ridicule and insult. What you think you are accomplishing by that attitude and those tactics, other than giving Christians a bad name, has never been clear to me.

So, with all due respect, I think I'll decline. This was a casual conversation about different versions and translations. Now you want to come along and try to prove that the Jewish understanding of Scripture is inferior to your own, yet again. It's getting tiresome.

No thanks. I've heard your sermons and seen your arguments before. Go try to convert some other Jew.

Now: feel free to flag this post as abusive, to crow that I'm afraid to debate you because I know I'm wrong, or because I know you'll slap me silly, or whatever you like. I don't care. Everybody here knows your style, and mine, and they can make their own judgments. Feel free to confirm them.

Then, don't bring it up if you can't back it up!
This is a debate forum, if you don't, or are unable to debate your blind speculations, then don't make the conjecture!
It is Virgin!
Care to debate?

Biker

Sure, but not you.

I prefer to debate people who (a) understand the basic principles of courtesy and respect, (b) actually follow the rules of honest, rational and civil debate, and (c) have some actual idea of what they're talking about.

You fail on all three counts.

If you ever show that you're capable of these, I'll be happy to debate you. Till then, it would be ever so nice of you to put a sock in it.

You don't debate.
You, IMO, are an unbelieving, speculating, sophist, of disingenuous intent.
It still is Virgin!Biker

Exactly how have you managed to avoid being placed on probation for so long?

By speaking the truth in love, for so long!
Based on the NASB!
Post 26 the question still stands.
Post 28 is factual and a statement of opinion, offered in good humor and in keeping with the spirit of the previous posts!
You easily offended types need to stop taking yourself so seriously!


Biker

[cnorman18]

Okay, back on topic:

I forgot to mention: another version I really like is the Etz Chayim or "Tree of Life," the new Conservative Tanakh (Jewish Bible, or OT) with commentary. It was released a couple of years ago, and contains the results of all the latest scholarship and research. If anyone wants to get an idea of the modern Jewish interpretation of the Bible, that--or the JPS Jewish Study Bible--are good places to look. Both are excellent.

Even when I was a Christian minister, I used study Bibles, commentaries and other books to help me understand Scripture. I never knew any clargyman of any denomination that didn't.

The more you know about the Bible, the more you appreciate a good commentary, or better, more than one. There are always more layers of meaning, more cross-references to other passages in Scripture, always more to learn.

Anyone who thinks they can learn everything worth knowing by reading the Bible text on its own, without any assistance or guidance, has a much higher opinion of his or her intelligence and wisdom than was held by any of the great spiritual leaders of the past. It's either ignorant or arrogant, and I don't care if you've read it cover-to-cover 50 times, there are things you don't know..

Besides, you're missing a lot of fun: lots of really good insights and angles that you'd never think of yourself. I don't know why anyone would miss it.

[Goat]

Okay, back on topic:

I forgot to mention: another version I really like is the Etz Chayim or "Tree of Life," the new Conservative Tanakh (Jewish Bible, or OT) with commentary. It was released a couple of years ago, and contains the results of all the latest scholarship and research. If anyone wants to get an idea of the modern Jewish interpretation of the Bible, that--or the JPS Jewish Study Bible--are good places to look. Both are excellent.

How different is the commentary between the Etz Chayim and the JPS? I have the JPS, and find it very useful.

[cnorman18]

Okay, back on topic:

I forgot to mention: another version I really like is the Etz Chayim or "Tree of Life," the new Conservative Tanakh (Jewish Bible, or OT) with commentary. It was released a couple of years ago, and contains the results of all the latest scholarship and research. If anyone wants to get an idea of the modern Jewish interpretation of the Bible, that--or the JPS Jewish Study Bible--are good places to look. Both are excellent.

How different is the commentary between the Etz Chayim and the JPS? I have the JPS, and find it very useful.

The perspective is similar, but the actual comments are different Etz Chayim is a little more up-to-date, I think. I'm afraid to say more, because I just got it and haven't used it that much yet.

Three other essentials:

Richard Friedman's Commentary on the Torah, the first commentary from a single author in centuries; as one might expect, it's a bit idiosyncratic, but it has insights I've seen nowhere else. He makes no comment on the Documentary Hypothesis or any of that, but confines his comments to the text as we have it without speculation about its origins.

The Artscroll Chumash. expensive, but worth it to get the Orthodox perspective. The Song of Songs is horribly mangled, but the rest is very much worth reading.

The Everett Fox translation--The Five
Books of Moses for the Schocken Bible series. Absolutely indispensable. Fox manages to capture much of the punning and wordplay of the Hebrew as well as the rhythms and cadences and the sometimes shocking surprises that don't come through in most translations. If you don't read Hebrew, Fox is as close as you're going to get. The commentary is excellent, too, and far different from the others.

Have fun. If I could only afford one, I'd buy Fox first.

[cnorman18]

Double post. My apologies.

I like my own writing, but not that much.