Fixing the scripture ...

[Terrywoodenpic]

I do not use the New Jerusalem Bible, As I am not of a Catholic persuasion, so have little interest as to what it says, or its faults.

But the couplet you quote makes no sense at all. either as a translation or as a Christian teaching.

It seems they never did see their Bibles for the use of the untutored,

Though Catholic scholars also helped in the production of the NRSV. Which is authorised for use by all the major Christian churches. (including the Roman Catholic)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Which translation do you prefer?

The NSRV offers:

• The face of the Lord is against evildoers, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth
• When the righteous cry for help, the Lord hears, and rescues them from their troubles.

This is very nice, but the second verse is more interpretation than translation. At least the KJV put the interpretive text in brackets.

 

[Shermana]

I've found the Douay Rheims to be least likely to modify the text for Doctrinal sake along with some unusual more-honest translations of verses (Such as Isaiah 9:6), along with Young's literal, though they're not exactly perfect.

 

[paarsurrey]

For instance; irrational, unsubstantiated, arbitrary, oppressive, unjust superstitions that have no place in the modern world.

There are no superstitions in Quran.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Which translation do you prefer?




The NSRV offers:

• The face of the Lord is against evildoers, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth
• When the righteous cry for help, the Lord hears, and rescues them from their troubles.

This is very nice, but the second verse is more interpretation than translation. At least the KJV put the interpretive text in brackets.

It is quite hard to make a choice. I come from an understanding of the KJV, which I naturally project on to the NRSV's offering. So I do not have a problem with it.

The NRSV's language is certainly easier for newcomers, and it clears up some obvious errors, that were not known by the authors of the KJV.
However the fact that it needed an "anglicised edition" to remove americanisms Opens avenues for later arguments about meanings for literalists .

I suspect we will have a new accommodation in future which will bring it more into line with modern understandings, "That God answers all who call upon him."
This would be more in line With the belief that Jesus came to "Save" sinners, and reflect the amount of time and effort he spent with the less select members of society. ( the couplet is talking about "God the Father" not Jesus the Son, who in the New Testament speaks for him.)

The "original " biblical writings seem to be near impossible to translate accurately, and they inevitably require some interpretation to make sense at all.

This has been one of the wonders of the Bible as it is able to mould it self to many new interpretations as times and needs change.

I often feel that both the Old and new testaments were written with this reinterpretation in mind. The more you think about what is written the more possibilities you find within it.

 

[paarsurrey]

The only way to fix the ancient scriptures, in my opinion is to fix it with Quran; without changing the script itself but understanding the scriptures correctly and making it in unison with Quran.

 

[McBell]

The only way to fix the ancient scriptures, in my opinion is to fix it with Quran; without changing the script itself but understanding the scriptures correctly and making it in unison with Quran.

This is a common problem that extremists have.
they choose one set of scripture as the be all end all of scripture and everything that does not agree with their own personal interpretation of their chosen end all be all scripture is wrong.

 

[gnostic]

The other way of fixing the OT Bible and NT Bible scriptures without changing/corrupting text of the scriptures , in my opinion, is to understand their meaning from the latest Word revealed from the one true attributive creator God; I mean from Quran.

You can't use the Quran to fix the bible because it is completely different scripture to the Hebrew scriptures (Tanakh or OT bible) or the Christian scriptures (NT Bible).

There is nothing to compare the Qur'an and bible, to make any such correction. Is like comparing lemon to a chicken. They are nothing alike, and you can't realistically tell anyone that the Quran is the most accurate, since the resemblance to the bible is very superficial.

Trying to fix or update the bible by using the Qur'an, would be like using the Book of Mormon or Egyptian Book of the Dead to fix the bible.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The only way to fix the ancient scriptures, in my opinion is to fix it with Quran; without changing the script itself but understanding the scriptures correctly and making it in unison with Quran.

The Quran is not Christian scripture. There are some refrences in common with Christianity and with Judaism, but they rarely come close to the originals.

It might serve the Quran better, to bring it in to line with the earlier Christian and Jewish scripture. The Quran may have changed less over time, but errors that are unchanged, remain errors.

 

[Shermana]

I do like the Quran for the fact that it seems to give support to certain Midrashic traditions among other things.

 

[paarsurrey]

I do like the Quran for the fact that it seems to give support to certain Midrashic traditions among other things.

Quran helps to understand all the ancient revealed scriptures in their originality; which is otherwise impossible to do, in my opinion.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Quran helps to understand all the ancient revealed scriptures in their originality; which is otherwise impossible to do, in my opinion.

There never was an "Original" Bible, All the various Bibles are collections of edited writings. Including Myths, histories, laws, parables, letters, and teachings.
Much of this was gathered from many authors, rather than revealed.
The content, wording and interpretations are not fixed.
Though more ancient than the Quran Bibles are still a work in progress.

The various Bibles serve a different function to the Quran.

Christianity does not have nor require an equivalent to the Quran..

 

[paarsurrey]

There never was an "Original" Bible, All the various Bibles are collections of edited writings. Including Myths, histories, laws, parables, letters, and teachings.
Much of this was gathered from many authors, rather than revealed.
The content, wording and interpretations are not fixed.
Though more ancient than the Quran Bibles are still a work in progress.

The various Bibles serve a different function to the Quran.

Christianity does not have nor require an equivalent to the Quran..

I agree with the points mentioned coloured in magenta; it is true for the NT Bible as well.

I never said that there was any original Bible.

Moses received Word of revelation from the one true attributive creator God; Jesus received also; in whatever original form it was; Quran confirms that part of it.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I agree with the points mentioned coloured in magenta; it is true for the NT Bible as well.

I never said that there was any original Bible.

Moses received Word of revelation from the one true attributive creator God; Jesus received also; in whatever original form it was; Quran confirms that part of it.

Moses probably wrote some of the books of the Old Testament.
Jesus wrote nothing.
God was never an Author of books.

 

[paarsurrey]

Moses probably wrote some of the books of the Old Testament.
Jesus wrote nothing.
God was never an Author of books.

Quran is authored by the one true attributive creator God; it claims unequivocally with brilliant reasons; and there is no other contender in this connection, as I understand.

 

[gnostic]

Quran is authored by the one true attributive creator God; it claims unequivocally with brilliant reasons; and there is no other contender in this connection, as I understand.

I may agree and disagree the contents of Hebrew-Christian scriptures. I may agree or disagree the interpretations of the texts or passages from Jews or Christians. I may understand the texts or passages, or even not understand them.

One thing I don't need, is the Qur'an to understand the Hebrew Tanakh or the Christian Bible.

Like I said before, the Qur'an is a completely different beast to the Jewish and Christian bibles.

And I agree with terrywoodenpic. There is no original "bible". The "bible", whether it be the Jewish Tanakh or the Christian OT/NT Bible, the word "bible" is actually a collection of individual writings (books, letters, etc).

I would agree with terrywoodenpic's 2nd post too: God never wrote any book or scripture, and that would include the bible and Qur'an.

You can't prove that God wrote anything.

What I find ridiculous childishly is the claim(s) that God is an author. If God is truly the author, or the angel Gabriel, then why didn't either one of them just pass the book on to Muhammad, rather than have Muhammad's disciples memorize what Muhammad relay to them and scribble them down. Why pass it on to someone who is SUPPOSEDLY illiterate? Why go through short stage of oral transmission (oral tradition from God to Gabriel to Muhammad to his disciples)?

To me it is outrageously silly. And even less believable than the authorship of each individual biblical text.

 

[paarsurrey]

I may agree and disagree the contents of Hebrew-Christian scriptures. I may agree or disagree the interpretations of the texts or passages from Jews or Christians. I may understand the texts or passages, or even not understand them.

One thing I don't need, is the Qur'an to understand the Hebrew Tanakh or the Christian Bible.

Like I said before, the Qur'an is a completely different beast to the Jewish and Christian bibles.

And I agree with terrywoodenpic. There is no original "bible". The "bible", whether it be the Jewish Tanakh or the Christian OT/NT Bible, the word "bible" is actually a collection of individual writings (books, letters, etc).

I would agree with terrywoodenpic's 2nd post too: God never wrote any book or scripture, and that would include the bible and Qur'an.

You can't prove that God wrote anything.

What I find ridiculous childishly is the claim(s) that God is an author. If God is truly the author, or the angel Gabriel, then why didn't either one of them just pass the book on to Muhammad, rather than have Muhammad's disciples memorize what Muhammad relay to them and scribble them down. Why pass it on to someone who is SUPPOSEDLY illiterate? Why go through short stage of oral transmission (oral tradition from God to Gabriel to Muhammad to his disciples)?

To me it is outrageously silly. And even less believable than the authorship of each individual biblical text.

I think my post was not intended personally for you or addressed to you personally; it was for everybody; nonetheless everybody is entitled to one's line of thinking with or without reasons and of course to defend the same.

Like I said no other revealed scriptures:

1. makes the claim that it is guardian on other revealed treasure-of-teachings or that
2. it confirms the truth in all other revealed scriptures
3. respects the messengers prophets sent to all the regions of the world and their truthful descent and the truthfulness of their revelations as sent on their messengers.
4. And only Quran provides brilliant reasons on all of this
5. And this is done to rightly eulogize their beloved spiritual leaders and the truth of their scriptures
6. Quran also reinstates the reason part of their scriptures lost in the debris of time by the errant clergy
7. And this restores the shine and luster of all the religions as they all have the same basic teachings being from one source of the one true attributive creator God.
8. This way religion is strengthened in the face of the current atheistic/agnostic/skeptic trends in the world.

This is my sincere opinion and others could believe as per their conscience.

Other points in your post would be answered separately, God-willing.

Thanks for your comments, however

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I think my post was not intended personally for you or addressed to you personally; it was for everybody; nonetheless everybody is entitled to one's line of thinking with or without reasons and of course to defend the same.

Like I said no other revealed scriptures:

1. makes the claim that it is guardian on other revealed treasure-of-teachings or that
2. it confirms the truth in all other revealed scriptures
3. respects the messengers prophets sent to all the regions of the world and their truthful descent and the truthfulness of their revelations as sent on their messengers.
4. And only Quran provides brilliant reasons on all of this
5. And this is done to rightly eulogize their beloved spiritual leaders and the truth of their scriptures
6. Quran also reinstates the reason part of their scriptures lost in the debris of time by the errant clergy
7. And this restores the shine and luster of all the religions as they all have the same basic teachings being from one source of the one true attributive creator God.
8. This way religion is strengthened in the face of the current atheistic/agnostic/skeptic trends in the world.

This is my sincere opinion and others could believe as per their conscience.

Other points in your post would be answered separately, God-willing.

Thanks for your comments, however

I don't doubt that you believe those things to be true, as do all Muslims.

However those of us who follow other faiths do not.
Plainly we do not believe the Quran to be the word of God, or we would be Muslims.

There is nothing "Lost" from the Bibles. what is in them was "a selection" from ancient Jewish and later Christian texts. Not all churches selected the same texts.
The Bible has alway been a living and changing collection of scriptures.

As the world and our needs and understandings change, so the earliest texts are revisited and retranslated to be understandable and relevant to the people of new age. They are read and understood in the language and idiom of each nation.

God's message is unchanging, but it needs to be reinterpreted to enlighten people who see the world in new ways and are living in new ways with new sciences inventions and social and economic circumstances.

The world moves on and God guides us all in new ways, he is not stuck in the past.

Religion is about today, it is not just history.

 

[gnostic]

I think my post was not intended personally for you or addressed to you personally; it was for everybody; nonetheless everybody is entitled to one's line of thinking with or without reasons and of course to defend the same.

Like I said no other revealed scriptures:

1. makes the claim that it is guardian on other revealed treasure-of-teachings or that
2. it confirms the truth in all other revealed scriptures
3. respects the messengers prophets sent to all the regions of the world and their truthful descent and the truthfulness of their revelations as sent on their messengers.
4. And only Quran provides brilliant reasons on all of this
5. And this is done to rightly eulogize their beloved spiritual leaders and the truth of their scriptures
6. Quran also reinstates the reason part of their scriptures lost in the debris of time by the errant clergy
7. And this restores the shine and luster of all the religions as they all have the same basic teachings being from one source of the one true attributive creator God.
8. This way religion is strengthened in the face of the current atheistic/agnostic/skeptic trends in the world.

This is my sincere opinion and others could believe as per their conscience.

Other points in your post would be answered separately, God-willing.

You may believe as you may about the Qur'an, but the Qur'an can't be used to correct the bible, since the Qur'an is completely different to both Jewish and Christian texts.

The only way the Qur'an can be used, if it can be compared to the bible, to show the errors. It doesn't.

For example, the Qur'an doesn't contain anything about what were written from the minor prophets, like Malachi, Hosea, Micah, etc.

And there are something that the Bible doesn't contain, but that are found in the Qur'an. A perfect example of this is the Qur'an's fable about King Solomon being able to speak, command or control ants, birds, jinns or the weathers; none of this is found in the Bible. Solomon only asked for God the wisdom to rule wisely, not to become the Qur'anic version of Doctor Dolittle.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This thread is about the emendation of scripture as part of the transmission process. Talk about the Qur'an simply polutes the discussion.