HERE we have the Thunderbolt translation of the bible .
This is just curiosity now. Could some of you guys please read my still incomplete essay on JUDGING and tell us whether you think his exposition is closer to what the bible actually says? I’m not asking you to believe it now, only to give your impression of which is closer to what it says.
This is shameful misrepresentation - I’m not leaving out context that hurts my claim.
The quote in full:
*7 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?*
The clear command is don’t judge, and then the verse says why you don’t: you don’t have the power to do so because you are not above reproach yourself - as a result, you aren’t vested with any authority to judge. That, too, is the point of the mote-beam analogy - at no point will you ever not be without the beam in your eye, so don’t presume you have the right to lecture your brother about the mote in his.
But, most importantly, the command is unambiguous - don’t judge. As in, you are forbidden from judging. Which is not the same as judge sometimes, but use this standard or judge like crazy, you’re so much better than your brother - it means, in plain words, don’t judge.
Trying to fabricate context to suggest the command says the opposite of what it actually says solely to further a selfish end - to pridefully stand over people and condemn them - is inimical to Biblical fidelity, the one thing you ironically claim to adhere to more than any of us heathens.
Seriously?
The piece I linked more than handles your terrible treatment of this passage. The linked piece also refers to several other passages. What about them?
Good Lord, no it doesn’t. It starts off by claiming that the express phrase don’t judge means do judge, but by God’s standards. Don’t judge and do judge cannot be reconciled.
I’ve never seen anything like this - an admitted conservative Christian who brags he’s devoted to the plain language of the Bible goes about ignoring the plain meaning of words in a way that would make the (hated) postmodernist faint from the audacity.
So what does it mean to judge, exactly?
Please read the piece I linked. He has no idea what he’s talking about.
Great question, and probably the relevant question. It doesn’t mean to be opinion-free or nihilistic.
Makes sense, since I doubt the Bible advocates that we all just be a bunch of suckers waiting to get taken advantage of.
But, I also doubt that the Bible uses it in a way that is meant to endorse vociferous, almost gleeful, public condemnation of others.
Not sure about the latter, but will do on the former.
Where do you see that?
Also, these topics are not always reducible to twitterization either.
There’s different kinds of biblical judging and numerous areas where they are discussed. The piece I linked on the topic is in line with centuries of orthodox protestant scholarship.
If you are interested anonym, a more thorough treatment of the related topics centered around the 5th chapter of Paul’s letter to the saints at Corinth may be helpful. It’s long and I need to revise the part about the aorist subjunctive in verse 5, but the meaning wouldn’t change. Some of your questions will find answers there.
It took me forever to reformat the OP for posting here so I’m taking the liberty to link to them on my blog only because it’s a lot easier and the subject matter has already been dealt with. If anybody has anything they would like me to read, I am of course glad to do so.
This is what I’m asking, either you take it literally, or you don’t, and if you do not, which by repeating “IF” makes me think you don’t, why have you gotten to interpret the words of the bible, taking it literally in some areas and not so much in the others?
What does it mean to take the bible seriously? I assume you take it seriously, but probably not literally (unless I am wrong and you have a literal approach to all subjects based on the bible), what makes your seriousness better than another person’s?
To a limited extent? I’m fairly certain that there is an old testament and a new testament and from my limited understanding things changed fairly dramatically from fire and brimstone to a softer, gentler message (and while the message/truth may not have changed, the delivery seems to have.)
[quote=“Tiribulus, post:212, topic:230512”]
It took me forever to reformat the OP for posting here so I’m taking the liberty to link to them on my blog only because it’s a lot easier and the subject matter has already been dealt with.[/quote]
Nope. Long-standing forum policy doesn’t allow members to post links to their blogs. I had sent you an e-mail on Monday reminding you as well.
If you want to discuss the topic, it really is best to discuss it fresh. “I wrote a blog about it, go read” isn’t a great way to have a conversation, though that seems to be the original reason for starting this thread.
FWIW I asked Zeb a question, got an answer from Trib. Checked out of the thread shortly after.
So people aren’t allowed to link to external resources where a topic has been handled in order to have a conversation here anymore? I thought you meant as the topic of a post and do you really think my blog about historic reformation Christianity is in any way competition for this place? Seriously?
I promise you it wasn’t. The quality of dialog here was once pretty high. I haven’t been around in a long time. The purpose was to see if that was still the case (more or less). It doesn’t appear so.
Despade if you’re actually interested in answers, I’m easy to find. Links are against the rules now or I’d give you some, but I’m easy to find. This place is a waste of time anymore.
Posting style is quite similar. Tired of trying to figure out who all he might be though
[quote=“Tiribulus, post:216, topic:230512”]
So people aren’t allowed to link to external resources where a topic has been handled in order to have a conversation here anymore?[/quote]
Your original attempt at starting the thread was, literally, “I wrote a blog, go read it.” So, yeah, I don’t believe that’s how you start a conversation.
It has nothing to do with competition. As I explained in the e-mail, it’s to help prevent people from posting links that simply drive traffic to their site (especially sites that have other discussion forums and products for sale or donation pages. So… check and check). The policy has been in effect for many, many years, including back when you were posting regularly.
The forum has been doing just fine in your absence. If you’re not happy with the way it is, you’re welcome to leave again.
…I simply couldn’t resist this entirely fact based and historically accurate picture of Colucci wielding the Ban Hammer
Hmmmmmmmmm. Maybe I need to reconsider my original position in light of yall’s alarm bells going off.
