The Holy Bible: Good, or Evil?

[Farnhamia]

Yes and no. If you look at the main points of the Bible, it's alright. You know, loving your neighbor, being a good Samaritan, helping others, etc.
But when you take it too far or use it to promote sexism, and all that other stuff OP mentioned, then not so much. It's over 2000 years old and has been translated so much, of course it'd going to be off. What really pisses me off is when people claim to be good, moral Christians, then go on doing hate speeches and the like. WTF? WWJD?
I think it needs to be updated. Like in the Old Testament it says that it's an abomination to: eat pork/shellfish, wear clothing made of mixed materials, and be in the prescence of a woman on her period. In our day and age, who HASN'T done at least one of those?

Who hasn't?

As for translations of the Bible, it's really only been translated into vernacular languages in the last 500 years or so. And even then, we have a very large number of manuscripts, especially of the New Testament, going back in some cases to the 2nd and 3rd centuries (I can't really say about the OT, not having studied the manuscript tradition). So I don't think modern versions are "off."

[Beldonia]

Yes and no. If you look at the main points of the Bible, it's alright. You know, loving your neighbor, being a good Samaritan, helping others, etc.
But when you take it too far or use it to promote sexism, and all that other stuff OP mentioned, then not so much. It's over 2000 years old and has been translated so much, of course it'd going to be off. What really pisses me off is when people claim to be good, moral Christians, then go on doing hate speeches and the like. WTF? WWJD?
I think it needs to be updated. Like in the Old Testament it says that it's an abomination to: eat pork/shellfish, wear clothing made of mixed materials, and be in the prescence of a woman on her period. In our day and age, who HASN'T done at least one of those?

Who hasn't?

As for translations of the Bible, it's really only been translated into vernacular languages in the last 500 years or so. And even then, we have a very large number of manuscripts, especially of the New Testament, going back in some cases to the 2nd and 3rd centuries (I can't really say about the OT, not having studied the manuscript tradition). So I don't think modern versions are "off."

How can you not love Nation States in school?

[Farnhamia]

Who hasn't?

As for translations of the Bible, it's really only been translated into vernacular languages in the last 500 years or so. And even then, we have a very large number of manuscripts, especially of the New Testament, going back in some cases to the 2nd and 3rd centuries (I can't really say about the OT, not having studied the manuscript tradition). So I don't think modern versions are "off."

How can you not love Nation States in school?

Huh?

[Beldonia]

How can you not love Nation States in school?

Huh?

I'm in school and playing Nation States. And that is why the American school system is failing.

[Farnhamia]

Huh?

I'm in school and playing Nation States. And that is why the American school system is failing.

I don't know about that but it could be one of the reasons your grades aren't everything they should be.

[Beldonia]

I'm in school and playing Nation States. And that is why the American school system is failing.

I don't know about that but it could be one of the reasons your grades aren't everything they should be.

I get straight A's.

[Farnhamia]

I don't know about that but it could be one of the reasons your grades aren't everything they should be.

I get straight A's.

And yet you're a creationist. I'm not sure which to doubt, your veracity or the standards at your school.

[Beldonia]

I get straight A's.

And yet you're a creationist. I'm not sure which to doubt, your veracity or the standards at your school.

I regurgitate the information that is taught to me. I don't necessarily agree with it.

[Guervoy Imperiya]

Well, the Bible itself isn't good at all from what I've heard.
However, all those dainty little sunday schools and churches have made it into a pleasant fairytale where you get to reach for the sky and whisper to a giant bearded man while secretly training to fight off the legions of daemons under Satan eventually.
So, choices are to become a Dungeons and Dragons worshipper or to become a closet gun-toting end-of-the-world conspirator.

[Ghanara]

I believe the Holy Bible is neither good nor evil. Rather, it is misunderstood and ignorant. All of the information in it is outdated in this day and age.

[Farnhamia]

I believe the Holy Bible is neither good nor evil. Rather, it is misunderstood and ignorant. All of the information in it is outdated in this day and age.

All the information is outdated? No. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is not outdated, nor is it ignorant. The Old Testament is a collection of myths and legends and poems and chronicles of the ancient Hebrews. The New Testament is a collection of the foundation documents of the Jewish break-away sect that accepted an itinerant teacher from Galilee as the Jewish Messiah.

@Guervoy Imperiya: You need to get out more.

[DaWoad]

I believe the Holy Bible is neither good nor evil. Rather, it is misunderstood and ignorant. All of the information in it is outdated in this day and age.

All the information is outdated? No. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is not outdated, nor is it ignorant. The Old Testament is a collection of myths and legends and poems and chronicles of the ancient Hebrews. The New Testament is a collection of the foundation documents of the Jewish break-away sect that accepted an itinerant teacher from Galilee as the Jewish Messiah.

@Guervoy Imperiya: You need to get out more.

It's a liitle outdated. For one thing the neighbour bit shouldn't be taken literally and the language needs a facelift.

[New Azura]

All the information is outdated? No. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is not outdated, nor is it ignorant. The Old Testament is a collection of myths and legends and poems and chronicles of the ancient Hebrews. The New Testament is a collection of the foundation documents of the Jewish break-away sect that accepted an itinerant teacher from Galilee as the Jewish Messiah.

@Guervoy Imperiya: You need to get out more.

It's a liitle outdated. For one thing the neighbour bit shouldn't be taken literally and the language needs a facelift.

One of the problems though in the newer translations (from say, King James to Contemporary Language or even NIV) is that certain passages begin to have their meanings altered from translation to translation. The language of one generation may be translated literally in contemporary versions, while the original source may have meant something different.

[Zustash Alath]

It's a book written 2000 years ago for a herding society.

If anything, it's outdated.

This^

I know I might be 25 pages late, but still.
Basically anything "Holy" is evil. Holy wars, holy land, holy bible.

[Farnhamia]

It's a liitle outdated. For one thing the neighbour bit shouldn't be taken literally and the language needs a facelift.

One of the problems though in the newer translations (from say, King James to Contemporary Language or even NIV) is that certain passages begin to have their meanings altered from translation to translation. The language of one generation may be translated literally in contemporary versions, while the original source may have meant something different.

Which passages? I think careful, competent scholarship can produce a faithful translation. There are a few versions, no doubt, that use inter-linear literal translations but those are, to me, anyway, more novelties than anything else.

[Reimu]

A book about a religion. Outdated but with a good message that generally inspires people to try to be good to others.

also inspires smug assholes to make polls about whether the book is good or evil (protip: it's the person reading it who is either of those two, and most people are neutral anyway)

[Galloism]

One of the problems though in the newer translations (from say, King James to Contemporary Language or even NIV) is that certain passages begin to have their meanings altered from translation to translation. The language of one generation may be translated literally in contemporary versions, while the original source may have meant something different.

Which passages? I think careful, competent scholarship can produce a faithful translation. There are a few versions, no doubt, that use inter-linear literal translations but those are, to me, anyway, more novelties than anything else.

I've got one where, each time there was not a direct translation of the concept provided (because that happens between languages), there are footnote references of what the original word was, how it was used, what concept it was trying to convey, and why those those the word or words they did in an attempt to make it as close to the original as possible.

Of course, it hasn't moved from the shelf in years... but in principle, that's the kind of translation that I would reference.

[Zustash Alath]

(most people are neutral anyway)

I disagree.

[Farnhamia]

Which passages? I think careful, competent scholarship can produce a faithful translation. There are a few versions, no doubt, that use inter-linear literal translations but those are, to me, anyway, more novelties than anything else.

I've got one where, each time there was not a direct translation of the concept provided (because that happens between languages), there are footnote references of what the original word was, how it was used, what concept it was trying to convey, and why those those the word or words they did in an attempt to make it as close to the original as possible.

Of course, it hasn't moved from the shelf in years... but in principle, that's the kind of translation that I would reference.

I quite agree, that's a decent edition of the book.

[Galloism]

I've got one where, each time there was not a direct translation of the concept provided (because that happens between languages), there are footnote references of what the original word was, how it was used, what concept it was trying to convey, and why those those the word or words they did in an attempt to make it as close to the original as possible.

Of course, it hasn't moved from the shelf in years... but in principle, that's the kind of translation that I would reference.

I quite agree, that's a decent edition of the book.

Quite, because with what limited amount I know about languages, I know that there is sometimes not a direct way to translate from A to B. A particular concept may not exist in a certain language, or, perhaps, a concept does not exist in a modern society as a standalone item that did exist as such in the society of the time.

Thus, explanations of certain passages are required to maintain the meaning from one language to the other, and from one time period to another.

Any Bible (or any book, for that matter) that doesn't do that, is actually doing a disservice to its readers.

[DaWoad]

A book about a religion. Outdated but with a good message that generally inspires people to try to be good to others.

also inspires smug assholes to make polls about whether the book is good or evil (protip: it's the person reading it who is either of those two, and most people are neutral anyway)

I wouldn't say most people are neutral, I'd say most people are general X with the ability to occasionally do Y.

[Farnhamia]

A book about a religion. Outdated but with a good message that generally inspires people to try to be good to others.

also inspires smug assholes to make polls about whether the book is good or evil (protip: it's the person reading it who is either of those two, and most people are neutral anyway)

I wouldn't say most people are neutral, I'd say most people are general X with the ability to occasionally do Y.

And some of us even do Z on occasion.

[DaWoad]

I wouldn't say most people are neutral, I'd say most people are general X with the ability to occasionally do Y.

And some of us even do Z on occasion.

Farn! We don't talk about Z in public! I thought we went over this!

[Central Slavia]

A book about a religion. Outdated but with a good message that generally inspires people to try to be good to others.

also inspires smug assholes to make polls about whether the book is good or evil (protip: it's the person reading it who is either of those two, and most people are neutral anyway)

Very wrong.
Religion can get good people to perform evil deeds.
Hint: Do you think that the crusaders in the middle ages, or *all of those* who performed pogroms on jews during the plague were just looking for an excuse to take others' property or lives?
Same with the foot soldiers who blow themselves up all over Israel - you think they'd do so if they weren't thinking they are doing a service to their faith and Allah will reward them?

[Coccygia]

Religion can get good people to perform evil deeds.
Hint: Do you think that the crusaders in the middle ages, or *all of those* who performed pogroms on jews during the plague were just looking for an excuse to take others' property or lives?
Same with the foot soldiers who blow themselves up all over Israel - you think they'd do so if they weren't thinking they are doing a service to their faith and Allah will reward them?

Actually the Crusaders were (according to some things I've read) just looking for an excuse to take others' property or lives; the idea of the Crusades was to get them doing it somewhere else than Europe, preferably to "heathens" (Muslims) and "heretics" (Orthodox Christians). Some people don't need any excuse to be evil.
Still, your basic point is, sadly, quite right.