• Isoprenoid
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    Maybe this is how the bible was written, rewritten and evolved over time.

    Nope. But it is sometimes in how it is interpreted, and translated.

    We have biblical manuscripts that date back past 100 BC. Can’t rewrite something which we have original manuscripts of.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_manuscript

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      6 days ago

      You say that as if there wasn’t plenty of time before 100 BC for the stories to evolve.

      • zirconium886@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 days ago

        Or that translations that are still in circulation don’t translate the original manuscripts (cough cough KJV)

      • Isoprenoid
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        I wonder if those stories even matter, like they are from a culture so far removed from us (over 2 thousand years) that the lessons probably shouldn’t be hard interpreted.

        We wouldn’t like people to have differing opinions about stuff? Everyone should believe what we believe, think what we think. /s

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          I have no idea what point you’re trying to make, or what I wrote to provoke your angry tone.

          All I’m saying is that (for example) if Moses supposedly wrote the first five books of the Bible and he lived circa 1200-1500 BC (as per various estimates mentioned by Wikipedia), but the oldest surviving copy of those books is from 100 BC, that’s 1000+ years of potential change that we have no way of disproving.

          • Isoprenoid
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            angry tone.

            Sarcastic tone, you’re reading what I wrote in an angry voice. Try reading with a happy voice. 😉

            that’s 1000+ years of potential change that we have no way of disproving.

            What if that’s not the point?

            “Oh, but it’s not exactly what that person said!”

            So what? Taking sentences out of context is bad interpretation anyway, especially if we aren’t reading the original language with the original cultural context (again, which was over 2 thousand years ago).

            You’re arguing for the letter of the law, I’m arguing for the spirit.