Word games

[Zzyzx]

.
Rather than debate issues many Theists play word games by using esoteric definitions and by stretching definitions. In current threads attempts are made to say that golf is a religion and that Atheists are Theists . Others stretch the definition of “faith� to apply equally to religious faith and to “faith� that trash will be picked up on schedule (saying “everyone has faith�) – a form of equivocation (the use of equivocal or ambiguous expressions, especially in order to mislead or hedge)

Quite regularly there are discussions of what biblical words “really mean� (as though Bible translators and editors are incompetent and the local expert knows better).

I observe that when one defends a strong position with evidence to support their statements there is no need for word games. However, those defending weak, unsupported positions often use “creative� tactics to give the impression of having a valid argument.

Are word games and similar tactics necessary to defend supernatural beliefs?

[oldbadger]

Notice it is the Apologists who criticize translators – and offer their own “improved� version (that happens to fit whatever argument they are attempting to make).

1. Geza Vermes is no apologist. If you read his books you will see.
2. The stories and reports were passed down by oral tradition before they were written, mostly in Greek. So there is no point in criticising translators of Greek-other languages.

You've got this wrong.

When opponents quote the exact words of the Bible as it is presented in English, Apologists often respond with “don't take it literally�, “that isn't what the original writers intended�, or “what it really means is . . . “ – thus trashing their own literature.

That's funny, because most HJ students and scholars that I have debated with are not Christians, not apologists. That might be hard for you to grasp........ it's no good treating HJ historians like theists....... you can't win like that.

I do not disagree that those “improved� amateur versions are uninformed rubbish.

Which HJ scholar are you calling amateur? They are mostly professors.
You would benefit from reading some.

If is rather naïve and foolish to conclude “could not bring yourself to answer�, or “running away� when a post does not receive a reply (or receive a reply quickly in some cases).

Then please answer: how can a translator be an authority about how Oral-Tradition and Hyperbole adjusted the tales about Jesus before they were ever written down? I look forward to your answer about this, because translators can not have had anything to do with the reports passed between Palestinian peasants, most who would have been illiterate.

[Peds nurse]

[Replying to post 41 by oldbadger]


Moderator Comment

Hello OB!! I do hope you are well! Valid points, are undermined by inserting insulting remarks that indicate someone doesn't grasp something. I understand that debating CAN be frustrating, but remarks such as these, not only add nothing to debate, but lead to warnings, probations, and even banning from the forum. Please refrain from using such remarks. Be kind, it goes a lot further in debate.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Zzyzx]

.

Notice it is the Apologists who criticize translators – and offer their own “improved� version (that happens to fit whatever argument they are attempting to make).

1. Geza Vermes is no apologist. If you read his books you will see.

I do not debate Vermes but DO debate Apologists here.

2. The stories and reports were passed down by oral tradition before they were written, mostly in Greek. So there is no point in criticising translators of Greek-other languages.

I do not criticize Bible translators and do not disagree that Bible stories were from oral tradition (legends, fables, fabrications, rumors, or whatever people may have said).

However, I do criticize Apologists HERE in debate, amateurs, who insist that their translations “explain what the words and stories mean� better than the professional translators.

You've got this wrong.

Opinion noted.

When opponents quote the exact words of the Bible as it is presented in English, Apologists often respond with “don't take it literally�, “that isn't what the original writers intended�, or “what it really means is . . . “ – thus trashing their own literature.

That's funny, because most HJ students and scholars that I have debated with are not Christians, not apologists.

Let's try to focus on debate HERE.

That might be hard for you to grasp........

Incivility noted.

it's no good treating HJ historians like theists....... you can't win like that.

I have no interest in “winning� – but am more than willing to help others “lose�

I do not disagree that those “improved� amateur versions are uninformed rubbish.

Which HJ scholar are you calling amateur? They are mostly professors.

Again, I am not debating people elsewhere – but am debating here in this Forum.

You would benefit from reading some.

Incivility and condescending attitude noted.

If is rather naïve and foolish to conclude “could not bring yourself to answer�, or “running away� when a post does not receive a reply (or receive a reply quickly in some cases).

Then please answer: how can a translator be an authority about how Oral-Tradition and Hyperbole adjusted the tales about Jesus before they were ever written down?

I do not pretend to know such things and make no statements to that effect. Do you?

I look forward to your answer about this, because translators can not have had anything to do with the reports passed between Palestinian peasants, most who would have been illiterate.

Okay. Agree.

Not only can translators have anything to do with or have knowledge of the oral tradition, folklore, legends, myths of illiterate peasants that preceded gospel writings decades or generations later – but neither can anyone else.

However, many pretend to know about the words of Jesus as though to-the-word accurate even though such words were subject to all the potential for error in oral retellings, translation difficulties, and potential revision by transcriptionists.

[1213]

Is the "original meaning of the word" unknown to Bible translators and editors? If they are likely to know the language why do they so often make mistakes in the Bibles they produce?

Is the person offering the "original meaning" fluent in the language and qualified as a translator?

Original meaning can be seen by the context. It is not necessary to understand all words perfectly, if you can get the point by what the writer is saying in the whole context.

[Zzyzx]

.

Original meaning can be seen by the context. It is not necessary to understand all words perfectly, if you can get the point by what the writer is saying in the whole context.

If two or more sincere Bible-believing literate Christians see the "original meaning" as completely different, which "got the point that the writer was saying in the whole context"? The one that agrees with you. Right?

Do such differences of opinion help explain why there are tens of thousands of different denominations within Christianity -- each declaring they are right?

[oldbadger]

I do not pretend knowledge of the multiple languages through which the Bible has been translated OR knowledge of the identity of translators. Do you?

Sure I know the identity of some important translators, just like Professor Vermes, and I have read them, as well as Professors concerned with Jesus the man. Nobody could understand the NT era issues and communication techniques of that time unless they read the professionals. I guess that some atheists just aren't going to be interested in that subject matter.

I have not read any books about translation by translators.

That's fair enough. Thanks for your honesty.

However, in graduate school nearly fifty years ago I successfully demonstrated proficiency in translating two languages. That gave me some appreciation for difficulties involved in translation.

OK...... so like me you're an amateur and if interested in this particular subject mater you would need to read the pros. That's fair enough. I wouldn't knock that.

Thus, professional Bible translators must take such things into consideration based upon their knowledge of the languages involved, the culture, and possibly the agenda of the writer. They presumably do a competent job in translation. Correct?

No..... Translators translate what is put in front of them, whilst reading special instructions from the client. There are many examples, such as the removal of Barabbas's first name from most English bibles. You need to a more of professional detective to investigate all this.

I question the legitimacy of the amateur opinions – which often have the appearance of manipulating the words to fit their argument.

Well of course you do. Like them Christians who use word games, atheists can as well. Fair enough! What's good for the goose, etc...... and so any opinion not liked could easily be termed 'amateur' because folks see the word as 'not trustworthy' in some cultures.
But in my fields of investigation (Professional Investigation)I have caught too many Pro's adjusting their 'findings' for cash to be influenced by that Word-Game.

Notice it is the Apologists who criticize translators – and offer their own “improved� version (that happens to fit whatever argument they are attempting to make).

Ha! That Word-Game won't wash on me.... I do not support the Christian Faith, and you won't find any sentence of mine that supports beyond Jesus-the-man..... but many atheists can't even accept tha Jesus just lived as a man....... need to stamp it all out..... with Word-Games like using Apologist towards non-Christians.

When opponents quote the exact words of the Bible as it is presented in English, Apologists often respond with “don't take it literally�, “that isn't what the original writers intended�, or “what it really means is . . . “ – thus trashing their own literature.

No...... see it this way. The only way that opponents of Christianity can trash it utterly is to make sure that no possible alteration occurs, because then they can fix everything into the miraculous which is easier to attack. It's just opponent Word-Games. That's all it is.

[oldbadger]

[Replying to post 41 by oldbadger]

Moderator Comment

Hello OB!! I do hope you are well! Valid points, are undermined by inserting insulting remarks that indicate someone doesn't grasp something. I understand that debating CAN be frustrating, but remarks such as these, not only add nothing to debate, but lead to warnings, probations, and even banning from the forum. Please refrain from using such remarks. Be kind, it goes a lot further in debate.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

Please.... I'm sorry about that.
I won't suggest to anybody again that they might not understand something.
I will behave.....

[oldbadger]

Notice it is the Apologists who criticize translators – and offer their own “improved� version (that happens to fit whatever argument they are attempting to make).

Hang on......... just a sec...... to call a student of Historic Jesus who is not a supporter of Christianity is a bit of a word-game, really.
Yeah...... I think that's a word-game.

However, I do criticize Apologists HERE in debate, amateurs, who insist that their translations “explain what the words and stories mean� better than the professional translators.

That's a word game, imo. You know hat many amateurs are very learned about their subjects. You know that a person who believes that Jesus was a man, just that, and not a Christ, is not an apologist.
Word-Games!

Let's try to focus on debate HERE.

Sorry..... Yes.
And the thread is about Word-Games used by some debaters on both sides of debates, imo.
I've got that........ the debate is Word-Games.

I do not disagree that those “improved� amateur versions are uninformed rubbish.

There you go again....... if a person doesn't earn money in the area of a subject then anything they offer is 'not good'.
I think that's a word game.

....... is rather naïve and foolish .......................

Wow!
I would not call anybody 'naive' or 'foolish'........
Jesus said 'Don't call anybody a fool'.
Do you need a citation for that?

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 47 by oldbadger]


The amateurs to which I refer have been identified as those debating HERE who manipulate and play word games correcting the work of (specifically) professionals who translate and edit Bibles in common use.

I do not pretend knowledge of the multiple languages through which the Bible has been translated OR knowledge of the identity of translators. Do you?

Sure I know the identity of some important translators, just like Professor Vermes, and I have read them, as well as Professors concerned with Jesus the man.

Can you identify the translators responsible for producing the Bible through various languages into English?

Nobody could understand the NT era issues and communication techniques of that time unless they read the professionals.

Presumably professional Bible translators are aware of that fact.

I guess that some atheists just aren't going to be interested in that subject matter.

Is this to suggest that “Atheists� who debate here are less inclined to be interested than are Apologists (who debate here)?

However, in graduate school nearly fifty years ago I successfully demonstrated proficiency in translating two languages. That gave me some appreciation for difficulties involved in translation.

OK...... so like me you're an amateur and if interested in this particular subject mater you would need to read the pros. That's fair enough. I wouldn't knock that.

Exactly. None of us here are likely qualified to claim professional status regarding translation (or theology).

Therefore, I read the work of professional translators – those who translated the Bible into English. Although they may have made errors, I regard them as more qualified than the amateurs HERE who “correct� common-use Bibles to say “that word really means . . . “

Thus, professional Bible translators must take such things into consideration based upon their knowledge of the languages involved, the culture, and possibly the agenda of the writer. They presumably do a competent job in translation. Correct?

No..... Translators translate what is put in front of them, whilst reading special instructions from the client. There are many examples, such as the removal of Barabbas's first name from most English bibles. You need to a more of professional detective to investigate all this.

Is this to claim, suggest, or acknowledge that Bible translators followed instructions to translate in certain ways (that might favor a given point of view)?

If so, I do not disagree.

I question the legitimacy of the amateur opinions – which often have the appearance of manipulating the words to fit their argument.

Well of course you do. Like them Christians who use word games, atheists can as well. Fair enough! What's good for the goose, etc...... and so any opinion not liked could easily be termed 'amateur' because folks see the word as 'not trustworthy' in some cultures.
But in my fields of investigation (Professional Investigation)I have caught too many Pro's adjusting their 'findings' for cash to be influenced by that Word-Game.

Does this include investigation of the findings of Bible translators. If not, it is of no significance in this debate.

Notice it is the Apologists who criticize translators – and offer their own “improved� version (that happens to fit whatever argument they are attempting to make).

Ha! That Word-Game won't wash on me.... I do not support the Christian Faith,

That comment is specifically aimed at Apologists. If one is NOT an Apologist they are not included.

and you won't find any sentence of mine that supports beyond Jesus-the-man.....

We are in agreement regarding Jesus-as-man – and many Deists and Non-Theists agree.

but many atheists can't even accept tha Jesus just lived as a man.......

Yes, some Atheists doubt that Jesus as described in Bible tales actually lived and/or that the Jesus character is a composite of several wannabe messiahs (that were evidently not uncommon in the era).

need to stamp it all out.....

Attitudes vary in that regard. Some prefer that religion in general have the same influence in society as hobbies such as golf, fishing, car racing, etc – individual interests rather than factors which influence politics.

with Word-Games like using Apologist towards non-Christians.

A person need not be Christian to be an Apologist (defined as “a person who defends or supports something (such as a religion, cause, or organization) that is being criticized or attacked by other people� http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apologist

When opponents quote the exact words of the Bible as it is presented in English, Apologists often respond with “don't take it literally�, “that isn't what the original writers intended�, or “what it really means is . . . “ – thus trashing their own literature.

No...... see it this way.

We disagree. When people within Christianity fight among themselves over “what the Bible means / says� and when some maintain that the Bible doesn't mean what it says, THEY are trashing their own literature.

The only way that opponents of Christianity can trash it utterly is to make sure that no possible alteration occurs,

Correction: There are MANY ways that opponents of Christianity can attack the Bible – as evidenced by threads here.

Do opponents of Christianity have the power to ensure that no alteration occurs in the Bible?

Of course, an opponent CAN legitimately hold Apologists to what the literature they defend actually says – then watch them attempt to “explain� why it does not mean what it clearly says.

because then they can fix everything into the miraculous which is easier to attack.

It is Bible writers who “fix everything into the miraculous� rather than opponents. It is Christian debaters who insist that the “miraculous� occurred – not their opponents.

Opponents have no need to make anything into “more easily attacked� – the literature and dogma of Christianity are vulnerable to attack from multiple directions (as evident in these debates).

It's just opponent Word-Games. That's all it is.

Is it a “word game� to note that the Bible contains MANY claims of the miraculous?

If the “miraculous� claims and stories (that cannot be supported by extra-biblical sources) are removed from the Bible, what is left on which to base a religion?

[oldbadger]

The amateurs to which I refer have been identified as those debating HERE who manipulate and play word games correcting the work of (specifically) professionals who translate and edit Bibles in common use.

Still hanging on to that, are you...?
I wonder which expert you warm to? Which translation is the correct one?
Well, they're mostly all professional.......... but not all.
Some of the best translations were by those who just did the work for love.
I'm sure that you could think of some as well, but If you don't know you could always ask for an example?

However, your opinion is noted, and dismissed, for reasons already stated.

Presumably professional Bible translators are aware of that fact.

You surely are clinging on to all those professional-translators for dear life!
But of course this is just a word-game, because we know that messages passed from person to person can alter before anything is written, and even then bits can get added or removed, and we have EVIDENCE for this, which, I have to say, you might be avoiding........ i?

Is this to suggest that “Atheists� who debate here are less inclined to be interested than are Apologists (who debate here)?

....... I'm just suggesting that humans can be subjective according to any agendas or missions that they might have. I've always been interested in human tendencies, professionally, of course.

Exactly. None of us here are likely qualified to claim professional status regarding translation (or theology).

.... Ha ha.... .. love it! Professionals, professionals, professionals..... you only want to listen to or read the professionals...... is that right?
But you've got a problem there, I think. It's not that many unpaid translators have done amazing translation jobs, but that the professionals, all those experts, have come up with differing results!
So may I ask........ which expert translation do you prefer to cling to? I might want to discover why you dismissed the other professionals!
All these Word-Games!

Is this to claim, suggest, or acknowledge that Bible translators followed instructions to translate in certain ways (that might favor a given point of view)?

If so, I do not disagree.

At last..........

I question the legitimacy of the amateur opinions – which often have the appearance of manipulating the words to fit their argument.

Ha ha! A Well known expert-witness, a handwriting expert who wrote the training manual on HW I.D. was recently caught out, adjusting his findings according to whether the Prosecution or the Defence was paying him. You seem to trust certain groups of people above others...... I do not. I have an objective view of all. I neither follow blindly, nor dismiss out-of-hand.

Does this include investigation of the findings of Bible translators. If not, it is of no significance in this debate.

Yes.... If you haven't researched this then I could give examples. I've already offered to help you out here.

That comment is specifically aimed at Apologists. If one is NOT an Apologist they are not included.

Opinion noted.......... and not supported. Humans with any bias or mission will be tempted to subject all to their adjusted viewpoints, I think.

A person need not be Christian to be an Apologist (defined as “a person who defends or supports something (such as a religion, cause, or organization) that is being criticized or attacked by other people�

So an Apologist defends something.
.....ummm...... What exactly do you think I am defending?
I'm simply debating that Word-Games are common to both Christian defenders and Atheist opponents.
A bit like the pot calling the kettle black.

If the “miraculous� claims and stories (that cannot be supported by extra-biblical sources) are removed from the Bible, what is left on which to base a religion?

Why don't you ask a Christian?
But you dismiss any reports from the bible, you have said before that without extra-biblical sources nothing has value. If you don't want to accept anything written in the bible then that is up to you.

But I see Word-Games being used by opponents of Christianity, and will make mention every time I see them from now on.
I see Word-Games here, in this thread.

Which Professional Translation did you like best?
Whichever it is, then you are dismissing all those other Professionals.
You, an amateur, dismissing professionals!