On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/2/2023 11:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 1/2/2023 12:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 4:20:23 PM UTC-8,
> >> timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 12:04:22 PM UTC-5,
> >>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> John does that continually. He doesn't seem to know that
> >>>> you only need to read the Bible yourself just for what
> >>>> it is and not for what you want to "prove" with it. But
> >>>> in the end he will know it in the most personal sort of
> >>>> way.
> >>> I will finish your statement in the way you intended, but
> >>> more explicitly.
> >>>
> >>> "he will know it in the most personal way because he is
> >>> going to be tortured in hell for all eternity and that
> >>> fills me with glee, " said Tom, or would have if he'd
> >>> finished his sentence.
> >>>
> >>> You are entitled to your position but it makes me cringe,
> >>> and does not make your version of religion seem inviting.
> >>
> >> Tim, what you chose to believe is your choice In John 14,
> >> Jesus said to His disciples, "I am the way and the truth
> >> and the life. No one comes to the Father except through
> >> me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as
> >> well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.â€
> >> And that means that you ignore that at your own peril.
> >> Inventing words to put in my mouth when you have never
> >> read the Bible does you no justice.
> >
> > So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and
> > inconsistencies in the four gospels? Especially the
> > differences between John and the three earlier synoptic
> > gospels?
> >
> And after that assignment, start in on reconciling
> contradictions within the various works of Karl Marx,
> founder of another religion.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Frank is an absolute expert at translating Ancient Greek and Ancient Latin and hence can positively tell you that there are differences in the absolute meaning of the gospels.

On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 9:44:06 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/2/2023 11:07 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 5:40:54 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 1/1/2023 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 01 Jan 2023 19:46:29 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 06:36:43 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> But which bible? There are something like 60 versions in the English
> >>>>> language alone.
> >>>>
> >>>> I didn't count them but it looks like more than 60:
> >>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations>
> >>>
> >>> O.K.... I didn't count them either so lets say, "A whole bunch!"
> >>>
> >>> Out of curiosity is the entire Torah the same in all versions? Or are
> >>> there different versions or interpretations of?
> >>>
> >> More consistent than most at least.
> >>
> >> Rigorously transcribed by hand such that a one-letter copy
> >> error causes the entire piece to be destroyed and a new one
> >> started which is why a Torah is so incredibly valuable. Few
> >> human exploits are done under as rigorous a regime:
> >>
> >> https://aish.com/48969731/
> >>
> >> Jack Welch made his name with 'six-sigma' QC. Torah is at
> >> another level!
> > The Bible has many books and the variations due to including excluding those that religious leaders have worried may confuse people in the New Testament do not change the meaning of the Bible in any way.
> >
> Torah is one thing. An unique thing among human works actually.
>
> The various iterations versions and compilations of the
> Christian bibles are quite another:
>
> https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/dating-the-oldest-new-testament-christian-manuscripts/
>
> Texas Governor Miriam 'Ma' Ferguson opined, "If English was
> good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for Texas.' You
> don't want to make that same mistake, right?
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

There was a comment from the Nuns I was taught by that there were some 11 additional books in the New Testament that were left out either due to repetition or being so difficult to transcribe into Latin (and then into English) could be too hard to understand so the Vatican from whence the New Testament came, decided to not include them.

On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 4:09:47 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> There was a comment from the Nuns I was taught by that there were some 11 additional books in the New Testament that were left out either due to repetition or being so difficult to transcribe into Latin (and then into English) could be too hard to understand so the Vatican from whence the New Testament came, decided to not include them.

AFAIK, nobody thinks the Vatican is "from whence the New Testament came." Most of it was originally
written in Greek.

Have you read much about the history and analysis of the New Testament since you were in high school?

There's information out there that your nuns might have decided was too hard for kids to understand.
There's information out there that the nuns themselves probably didn't understand. Some people
take this stuff very seriously, enough so that they devote their lives to studying it. There certainly
has been progress in knowledge since you sat in front of a classroom teacher.

- Frank Krygowski

On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:09:37 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/2/2023 11:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> > On 1/2/2023 12:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> >> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 4:20:23 PM UTC-8,
>> >> timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 12:04:22 PM UTC-5,
>> >>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>>> John does that continually. He doesn't seem to know that
>> >>>> you only need to read the Bible yourself just for what
>> >>>> it is and not for what you want to "prove" with it. But
>> >>>> in the end he will know it in the most personal sort of
>> >>>> way.
>> >>> I will finish your statement in the way you intended, but
>> >>> more explicitly.
>> >>>
>> >>> "he will know it in the most personal way because he is
>> >>> going to be tortured in hell for all eternity and that
>> >>> fills me with glee, " said Tom, or would have if he'd
>> >>> finished his sentence.
>> >>>
>> >>> You are entitled to your position but it makes me cringe,
>> >>> and does not make your version of religion seem inviting.
>> >>
>> >> Tim, what you chose to believe is your choice In John 14,
>> >> Jesus said to His disciples, "I am the way and the truth
>> >> and the life. No one comes to the Father except through
>> >> me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as
>> >> well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.â€
>> >> And that means that you ignore that at your own peril.
>> >> Inventing words to put in my mouth when you have never
>> >> read the Bible does you no justice.
>> >
>> > So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and
>> > inconsistencies in the four gospels? Especially the
>> > differences between John and the three earlier synoptic
>> > gospels?
>> >
>> And after that assignment, start in on reconciling
>> contradictions within the various works of Karl Marx,
>> founder of another religion.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

>Frank is an absolute expert at translating Ancient Greek and Ancient Latin and hence can positively tell you that there are differences in the absolute meaning of the gospels.

Well Tommy, I don' know whether Frank can translate Greek or not, but
I do know that the four gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, were not
written by those who names were used and the earliest was written
between 60 and 100 years after Christ died.

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, referred to as the synoptic
Gospels because they include many of the same stories,
stand in contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct.
If three Gospels all tell essentially the same thing and one is
different then which was correct?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:09:45 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 9:44:06 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/2/2023 11:07 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> > On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 5:40:54 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> >> On 1/1/2023 10:51 PM, John B. wrote:
>> >>> On Sun, 01 Jan 2023 19:46:29 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 06:36:43 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> But which bible? There are something like 60 versions in the English
>> >>>>> language alone.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I didn't count them but it looks like more than 60:
>> >>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations>
>> >>>
>> >>> O.K.... I didn't count them either so lets say, "A whole bunch!"
>> >>>
>> >>> Out of curiosity is the entire Torah the same in all versions? Or are
>> >>> there different versions or interpretations of?
>> >>>
>> >> More consistent than most at least.
>> >>
>> >> Rigorously transcribed by hand such that a one-letter copy
>> >> error causes the entire piece to be destroyed and a new one
>> >> started which is why a Torah is so incredibly valuable. Few
>> >> human exploits are done under as rigorous a regime:
>> >>
>> >> https://aish.com/48969731/
>> >>
>> >> Jack Welch made his name with 'six-sigma' QC. Torah is at
>> >> another level!
>> > The Bible has many books and the variations due to including excluding those that religious leaders have worried may confuse people in the New Testament do not change the meaning of the Bible in any way.
>> >
>> Torah is one thing. An unique thing among human works actually.
>>
>> The various iterations versions and compilations of the
>> Christian bibles are quite another:
>>
>> https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/dating-the-oldest-new-testament-christian-manuscripts/
>>
>> Texas Governor Miriam 'Ma' Ferguson opined, "If English was
>> good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for Texas.' You
>> don't want to make that same mistake, right?
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
>There was a comment from the Nuns I was taught by that there were some 11 additional books in the New Testament that were left out either due to repetition or being so difficult to transcribe into Latin (and then into English) could be too hard to understand so the Vatican from whence the New Testament came, decided to not include them.

There were certainly religious writing that were not included in the
"Bible" and the number varies depending on who is writing the article,
see https://simple-faith.net/books-left-out-of-the-bible/

The Council of Hippo, held in north Africa in AD 393, a group of
church leaders recognized a list of books that they believed to be
scripture. Later, the Council of Carthage affirmed that decision in AD
397.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 11:51:37 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Out of curiosity is the entire Torah the same in all versions? Or are
>there different versions or interpretations of?

Andrew already provided an accurate answer. I'll add a little detail.

The Sefer Torah is copied by scribes, by hand, with a quill pen, as
close to an exact copy of the original Torah. Sefar means "book".
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefer_Torah>
The process is rigid and complicated.
"Process of copying the Old Testament by Jewish Scribes"
<https://scottmanning.com/content/process-of-copying-the-old-testament-by-jewish-scribes/>

<https://stamscribes.com/commission-new-torah-scroll/>

The destruction of a Torah scroll, if any mistakes are found, is not a
simple process. Some types of mistakes are tolerated. The rule of
thumb is up to 3 mistakes which do not affect the meaning (such as
word spaces and accents) are tolerated:
<https://outorah.org/p/5442/>
If perfection ware strictly enforced, I suspect that there would not
be any sane Torah scribes remaining.

New scrolls are $30,000 to $100,000. The parchment alone is about
$8,000. More detail:
<http://www.alltorahscrolls.com/new-torahs.htm>
"The Torah has 304,805 letters 245 columns and 60 sections of
parchment. A SOFER WRITES AROUND 1 TO 2 COLUMNS A DAY! When
completed, the Torah sections are computer-checked for spelling errors
and then sewn together."

Used Torah scrolls on eBay:
<https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=sefer+torah&_sop=16>

I once walked into a temple do deal with a rabbinical court issue on
behalf of a family member in Israel. In a side room was a scribe
carefully copying a scroll. There were signs demanding distance,
silence, and no distractions. I watched for about 30 minutes. He
never stopped, maintained a constant pace, and concentrated on the
task with considerable intensity.

Note that such perfection is only expected from Torahs used in the
temple for ritual purposes. There are printed and bound Torahs in
book form for mundane purposes such as Torah study, holiday rituals
outside of the temple, annotation, and academic purposes.

There are also version of the Torah in different languages. For
example, in English:
<https://reformjudaism.org/learning/torah-study/english-translations-torah-portions>
Obviously, there are variations in the translations. There are also
several character styles.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 18:04:09 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 11:51:37 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Out of curiosity is the entire Torah the same in all versions? Or are
>>there different versions or interpretations of?
>
>Andrew already provided an accurate answer. I'll add a little detail.
>
>The Sefer Torah is copied by scribes, by hand, with a quill pen, as
>close to an exact copy of the original Torah. Sefar means "book".
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefer_Torah>
>The process is rigid and complicated.
>"Process of copying the Old Testament by Jewish Scribes"
><https://scottmanning.com/content/process-of-copying-the-old-testament-by-jewish-scribes/>
>
><https://stamscribes.com/commission-new-torah-scroll/>
>
>The destruction of a Torah scroll, if any mistakes are found, is not a
>simple process. Some types of mistakes are tolerated. The rule of
>thumb is up to 3 mistakes which do not affect the meaning (such as
>word spaces and accents) are tolerated:
><https://outorah.org/p/5442/>
>If perfection ware strictly enforced, I suspect that there would not
>be any sane Torah scribes remaining.
>
>New scrolls are $30,000 to $100,000. The parchment alone is about
>$8,000. More detail:
><http://www.alltorahscrolls.com/new-torahs.htm>
>"The Torah has 304,805 letters 245 columns and 60 sections of
>parchment. A SOFER WRITES AROUND 1 TO 2 COLUMNS A DAY! When
>completed, the Torah sections are computer-checked for spelling errors
>and then sewn together."
>
>Used Torah scrolls on eBay:
><https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=sefer+torah&_sop=16>
>
>I once walked into a temple do deal with a rabbinical court issue on
>behalf of a family member in Israel. In a side room was a scribe
>carefully copying a scroll. There were signs demanding distance,
>silence, and no distractions. I watched for about 30 minutes. He
>never stopped, maintained a constant pace, and concentrated on the
>task with considerable intensity.
>
>Note that such perfection is only expected from Torahs used in the
>temple for ritual purposes. There are printed and bound Torahs in
>book form for mundane purposes such as Torah study, holiday rituals
>outside of the temple, annotation, and academic purposes.
>
>There are also version of the Torah in different languages. For
>example, in English:
><https://reformjudaism.org/learning/torah-study/english-translations-torah-portions>
>Obviously, there are variations in the translations. There are also
>several character styles.

When you say "temple" does this imply that each Synagogue has a hand
written copy of the Torah?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 10:06:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>When you say "temple" does this imply that each Synagogue has a hand
>written copy of the Torah?

I should have written synagogue instead of temple. As the terms are
applied today, a temple is a sacred place where worshipers of any
religion may worship, while a synagogue is specific to where Jews go
to worship. The meanings have become muddled over the centuries. I
tend to use temple because it's easier to spell. In the US, the
official names all start with "Temple", not synagogue, because the
building is used for other activities besides worship. I believe
that's also to indicate that anyone is welcome.

This might help:
"Difference Between Temple and Synagogue" (Aug 29, 2011)
<https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-temple-and-vs-synagogue/>

Sorry, I don't know if a Torah is required for a synagogue and I
didn't have any luck Googling for an answer. I suspect it is
required. There are other forms of the Torah which I believe could be
used if a Sefer Torah is unavailable, such as when the local tyrant
tries to confiscate it:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chumash_(Judaism)>
Note that most US temples have more than one Sefer Torah, which during
some occasions are literally paraded around the congregation.

For special occasions, usually outside of the temple, it is possible
to rent a Sefer Torah and a suitable ark (cabinet for storing the
Torah when not in use):
<https://www.google.com/search?q=torah+rental>

I'll let you know if I find a definitive answer.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 19:44:46 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 10:06:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>When you say "temple" does this imply that each Synagogue has a hand
>>written copy of the Torah?
>
>I should have written synagogue instead of temple. As the terms are
>applied today, a temple is a sacred place where worshipers of any
>religion may worship, while a synagogue is specific to where Jews go
>to worship. The meanings have become muddled over the centuries. I
>tend to use temple because it's easier to spell. In the US, the
>official names all start with "Temple", not synagogue, because the
>building is used for other activities besides worship. I believe
>that's also to indicate that anyone is welcome.
>
>This might help:
>"Difference Between Temple and Synagogue" (Aug 29, 2011)
><https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-temple-and-vs-synagogue/>
>
>Sorry, I don't know if a Torah is required for a synagogue and I
>didn't have any luck Googling for an answer. I suspect it is
>required. There are other forms of the Torah which I believe could be
>used if a Sefer Torah is unavailable, such as when the local tyrant
>tries to confiscate it:
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chumash_(Judaism)>
>Note that most US temples have more than one Sefer Torah, which during
>some occasions are literally paraded around the congregation.
>
>For special occasions, usually outside of the temple, it is possible
>to rent a Sefer Torah and a suitable ark (cabinet for storing the
>Torah when not in use):
><https://www.google.com/search?q=torah+rental>
>
>I'll let you know if I find a definitive answer.

Your "rental reference" refers to Bar and Bat Mitzvah ceremonies so I
assume that either the Synagogue, which seems to be the common term in
the U.S., must have the document or is it common to rent one?
--
Cheers,

John B.

with <3cr6rhdm75uefi58ae4had963l33pi0ml6@4ax.com> John B wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:09:37 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/2/2023 11:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 1/2/2023 12:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 4:20:23 PM UTC-8,
>>>>> timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 12:04:22 PM UTC-5,
>>>>>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:

*SKIP*
>>>>> Tim, what you chose to believe is your choice In John 14, Jesus
>>>>> said to His disciples, "I am the way and the truth and the life.
>>>>> No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know
>>>>> me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him
>>>>> and have seen him.†And that means that you ignore that at
>>>>> your own peril. Inventing words to put in my mouth when you have
>>>>> never read the Bible does you no justice.
>>>> So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and
>>>> inconsistencies in the four gospels? Especially the differences
>>>> between John and the three earlier synoptic gospels?
>>> And after that assignment, start in on reconciling contradictions
>>> within the various works of Karl Marx, founder of another religion.
>>Frank is an absolute expert at translating Ancient Greek and Ancient
>>Latin and hence can positively tell you that there are differences in
>>the absolute meaning of the gospels.

> Well Tommy, I don' know whether Frank can translate Greek or not, but
> I do know that the four gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, were not
> written by those who names were used and the earliest was written
> between 60 and 100 years after Christ died.

(Disclaimer, not even close to be scholar, just another wikipedia
reader.) Correction, "gospels were probably written between AD 66 and
110" would be "35 and 80 years after Chirst died". Thus, for one..two
generations works in question have been an oral tradition.

> The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, referred to as the synoptic
> Gospels because they include many of the same stories, stand in
> contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct. If three Gospels
> all tell essentially the same thing and one is different then which
> was correct?

To put it into perspective, which Hansel and Gretel is correct? This is
closest to list of hansel-and-gretels I've found (wikipedia has realy
failed me on this one):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Films_based_on_Hansel_and_Gretel

p.s. My favored is 'Hoodwinked Too! Hoods vs. Evil', just in case.

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 09:12:32 +0000, Eric Pozharski
<whynot@pozharski.name> wrote:

>with <3cr6rhdm75uefi58ae4had963l33pi0ml6@4ax.com> John B wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:09:37 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 1/2/2023 11:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 1/2/2023 12:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 4:20:23 PM UTC-8,
>>>>>> timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 12:04:22 PM UTC-5,
>>>>>>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>*SKIP*
>>>>>> Tim, what you chose to believe is your choice In John 14, Jesus
>>>>>> said to His disciples, "I am the way and the truth and the life.
>>>>>> No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know
>>>>>> me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him
>>>>>> and have seen him.â? And that means that you ignore that at
>>>>>> your own peril. Inventing words to put in my mouth when you have
>>>>>> never read the Bible does you no justice.
>>>>> So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and
>>>>> inconsistencies in the four gospels? Especially the differences
>>>>> between John and the three earlier synoptic gospels?
>>>> And after that assignment, start in on reconciling contradictions
>>>> within the various works of Karl Marx, founder of another religion.
>>>Frank is an absolute expert at translating Ancient Greek and Ancient
>>>Latin and hence can positively tell you that there are differences in
>>>the absolute meaning of the gospels.
>
>> Well Tommy, I don' know whether Frank can translate Greek or not, but
>> I do know that the four gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, were not
>> written by those who names were used and the earliest was written
>> between 60 and 100 years after Christ died.
>
>(Disclaimer, not even close to be scholar, just another wikipedia
>reader.) Correction, "gospels were probably written between AD 66 and
>110" would be "35 and 80 years after Chirst died". Thus, for one..two
>generations works in question have been an oral tradition.
>

Yes, that is correct. although in mitigation nobody actually knows
when Christ was born :-)

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 17:46:04 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 09:12:32 +0000, Eric Pozharski
><whynot@pozharski.name> wrote:
>
>>with <3cr6rhdm75uefi58ae4had963l33pi0ml6@4ax.com> John B wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:09:37 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
>>> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 1/2/2023 11:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/2/2023 12:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 4:20:23 PM UTC-8,
>>>>>>> timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 12:04:22 PM UTC-5,
>>>>>>>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>*SKIP*
>>>>>>> Tim, what you chose to believe is your choice In John 14, Jesus
>>>>>>> said to His disciples, "I am the way and the truth and the life.
>>>>>>> No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know
>>>>>>> me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him
>>>>>>> and have seen him.â? And that means that you ignore that at
>>>>>>> your own peril. Inventing words to put in my mouth when you have
>>>>>>> never read the Bible does you no justice.
>>>>>> So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and
>>>>>> inconsistencies in the four gospels? Especially the differences
>>>>>> between John and the three earlier synoptic gospels?
>>>>> And after that assignment, start in on reconciling contradictions
>>>>> within the various works of Karl Marx, founder of another religion.
>>>>Frank is an absolute expert at translating Ancient Greek and Ancient
>>>>Latin and hence can positively tell you that there are differences in
>>>>the absolute meaning of the gospels.
>>
>>> Well Tommy, I don' know whether Frank can translate Greek or not, but
>>> I do know that the four gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, were not
>>> written by those who names were used and the earliest was written
>>> between 60 and 100 years after Christ died.
>>
>>(Disclaimer, not even close to be scholar, just another wikipedia
>>reader.) Correction, "gospels were probably written between AD 66 and
>>110" would be "35 and 80 years after Chirst died". Thus, for one..two
>>generations works in question have been an oral tradition.
>>
>
>Yes, that is correct. although in mitigation nobody actually knows
>when Christ was born :-)

Embellishment has always been a problem for serious historians.
Arguments over the stories about historical figures are seldom
resolved. One of the things I believe to be "true fact" is that there
is much we humans do not know.

On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 12:46:40 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and inconsistencies in
> the four gospels? Especially the differences between John and the three
> earlier synoptic gospels?
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

Just a little nitpick. There are not really "the four gospels." There are four modern canonical gospels.

There are around 20 more still existing, many found in the Nag Hammadi scrolls. Elaine Pagel's The Gnostic Gospels is a good source. I have read them all. They are interesting reading and offer some insight into the culture and beliefs of the early Christian community. It's also obvious why most don't fit well with our modern outlook and didn't become canonical.

The exception of course is the Gospel of Thomas. During the early church there were five accepted gospels, not four; the other 20 or so were probably all lesser known. (The four being Matthew, Mark, Luke, Thomas, and John.) There are scholars that believe John was actually written as a response to Thomas, disagreeing with it, and having read both that position makes sense to me.

Total left turn: my personal opinion is you really only need one book, James. That one explains how we are to live very succinctly.

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 8:12:01 AM UTC-5, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 12:46:40 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and inconsistencies in
> > the four gospels? Especially the differences between John and the three
> > earlier synoptic gospels?
> >
> > --
> > - Frank Krygowski
> Just a little nitpick. There are not really "the four gospels." There are four modern canonical gospels.
>
> There are around 20 more still existing, many found in the Nag Hammadi scrolls. Elaine Pagel's The Gnostic Gospels is a good source. I have read them all. They are interesting reading and offer some insight into the culture and beliefs of the early Christian community. It's also obvious why most don't fit well with our modern outlook and didn't become canonical.
>
> The exception of course is the Gospel of Thomas. During the early church there were five accepted gospels, not four; the other 20 or so were probably all lesser known. (The four being Matthew, Mark, Luke, Thomas, and John.) There are scholars that believe John was actually written as a response to Thomas, disagreeing with it, and having read both that position makes sense to me.
>
> Total left turn: my personal opinion is you really only need one book, James. That one explains how we are to live very succinctly.

I often heard criticisms that Catholicism should be more appropriately named Paulinism. Tangentially, read Live from Golgotha by Gore Vidal - interesting take on Paul, and even some fun digs at Mary Baker Eddy.

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 2:33:16 AM UTC-8, Eric Pozharski wrote:
> with <3cr6rhdm75uefi58a...@4ax.com> John B wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 13:09:37 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> >>> On 1/2/2023 11:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>> On 1/2/2023 12:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 4:20:23 PM UTC-8,
> >>>>> timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 12:04:22 PM UTC-5,
> >>>>>> cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> *SKIP*
> >>>>> Tim, what you chose to believe is your choice In John 14, Jesus
> >>>>> said to His disciples, "I am the way and the truth and the life.
> >>>>> No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know
> >>>>> me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him
> >>>>> and have seen him.†And that means that you ignore that at
> >>>>> your own peril. Inventing words to put in my mouth when you have
> >>>>> never read the Bible does you no justice.
> >>>> So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and
> >>>> inconsistencies in the four gospels? Especially the differences
> >>>> between John and the three earlier synoptic gospels?
> >>> And after that assignment, start in on reconciling contradictions
> >>> within the various works of Karl Marx, founder of another religion.
> >>Frank is an absolute expert at translating Ancient Greek and Ancient
> >>Latin and hence can positively tell you that there are differences in
> >>the absolute meaning of the gospels.
>
> > Well Tommy, I don' know whether Frank can translate Greek or not, but
> > I do know that the four gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, were not
> > written by those who names were used and the earliest was written
> > between 60 and 100 years after Christ died.
> (Disclaimer, not even close to be scholar, just another wikipedia
> reader.) Correction, "gospels were probably written between AD 66 and
> 110" would be "35 and 80 years after Chirst died". Thus, for one..two
> generations works in question have been an oral tradition.
> > The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, referred to as the synoptic
> > Gospels because they include many of the same stories, stand in
> > contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct. If three Gospels
> > all tell essentially the same thing and one is different then which
> > was correct?
> To put it into perspective, which Hansel and Gretel is correct? This is
> closest to list of hansel-and-gretels I've found (wikipedia has realy
> failed me on this one):
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Films_based_on_Hansel_and_Gretel
>
> p.s. My favored is 'Hoodwinked Too! Hoods vs. Evil', just in case.
>
> --
> Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
> Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

John never bothered to read the Bible. He is not a Christian and only uses Google to look up things because he likes to look like an authority so that he can treat you badly. He has absolutely no understanding of oral tradition or of how accurate down to even the pronunciation it is. 80 years or 160 years was insufficient for the words of the saints to be misunderstood and the translations of the Greek to Latin introduced far more errors than the oral tradition.

John has the habit of talking about things he hasn't an inkling of knowledge of.

On 1/2/2023 4:09 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/2/2023 11:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and
>>> inconsistencies in the four gospels? Especially the
>>> differences between John and the three earlier synoptic
>>> gospels?
>>>
>> And after that assignment, start in on reconciling
>> contradictions within the various works of Karl Marx,
>> founder of another religion.
>> --
> Frank is an absolute expert at translating Ancient Greek and Ancient Latin and hence can positively tell you that there are differences in the absolute meaning of the gospels.

I never claimed to be an expert at those languages. One does not need to
be such an expert to understand the Gospels' discrepancies.

One does have to keep learning, though, which requires a willingness to
learn. You've never shown much willingness to learn.

But back to my question, please. What ARE your thoughts on the
differences and conflicts in those Gospels? (Surely you don't need me to
provide examples, right?)

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/3/2023 8:11 AM, Tim R wrote:
> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 12:46:40 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> So Tom, what are your thoughts on the differences and inconsistencies in
>> the four gospels? Especially the differences between John and the three
>> earlier synoptic gospels?
>>
>> --
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
> Just a little nitpick. There are not really "the four gospels." There are four modern canonical

I'll accept that.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/3/2023 8:22 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I often heard criticisms that Catholicism should be more appropriately named Paulinism.

And I've read allusions to "the Pauline heresy."

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/3/2023 11:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/3/2023 8:22 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> I often heard criticisms that Catholicism should be more appropriately
>> named Paulinism.
>
> And I've read allusions to "the Pauline heresy."

I should make clear that I'm not arguing for any particular point of
view. Instead I'm trying to point out that right from the start of
Christianity there were multiple points of view, and the resulting
discussions and disputes have reigned for thousands of years.

In my view, anyone who thinks they know all there is to know is simply
not thinking.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 10:45:56 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> John never bothered to read the Bible. He is not a Christian and only uses Google to look up things because he likes to look like an authority so that he can treat you badly. He has absolutely no understanding of oral tradition or of how accurate down to even the pronunciation it is. 80 years or 160 years was insufficient for the words of the saints to be misunderstood and the translations of the Greek to Latin introduced far more errors than the oral tradition.
>

Ah, the translation of Greek to Latin.

Why not just retranslate the originals?

Because.............................................. we don't have any originals.

Ooops.

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 9:10:56 AM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 10:45:56 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > John never bothered to read the Bible. He is not a Christian and only uses Google to look up things because he likes to look like an authority so that he can treat you badly. He has absolutely no understanding of oral tradition or of how accurate down to even the pronunciation it is. 80 years or 160 years was insufficient for the words of the saints to be misunderstood and the translations of the Greek to Latin introduced far more errors than the oral tradition.
> >
> Ah, the translation of Greek to Latin.
>
> Why not just retranslate the originals?
>
> Because.............................................. we don't have any originals.
>
> Ooops.

Yes we do and if you want to see them you can go to the Vatican. Christianity isn't some ancient religion that no one knows about. Just like I was talking about oral tradition, they used people who could remember the gospels of the saints word for word down to the exact pronunciations of the words which were originally in Judeo dialects. These were told word for word to Greek scholars who committed them to the written language. The stupid five here are not religious and the crap they say isn't worth bothering with. It is like my brother using several lines of the bible to "prove" that the Earth is flat.

Re-Translate? Do you suppose they don't have scholars doing that all the time? Tell me how they can effectively translate a dead language?

Maybe more importantly - why are you commenting on these when you don't know or understand any of these things? Why do you believe that you can think of things that the world's greatest minds have not? Granted that there is always the chance that you could stumble on something others have missed, but first you have to know ABOUT the subject and you don't even know that the Greek transliterations still exist!

On 1/3/2023 1:16 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 9:10:56 AM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Ah, the translation of Greek to Latin.
>>
>> Why not just retranslate the originals?
>>
>> Because.............................................. we don't have any originals.
>>
>> Ooops.
>
> Yes we do and if you want to see them you can go to the Vatican.

Tom, you are so thoroughly ignorant, and so perfectly confident in your
ignorance.

SMH

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 13:16:19 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, 02 Jan 2023 19:44:46 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
><jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 03 Jan 2023 10:06:08 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>When you say "temple" does this imply that each Synagogue has a hand
>>>written copy of the Torah?
>>
>>I should have written synagogue instead of temple. As the terms are
>>applied today, a temple is a sacred place where worshipers of any
>>religion may worship, while a synagogue is specific to where Jews go
>>to worship. The meanings have become muddled over the centuries. I
>>tend to use temple because it's easier to spell. In the US, the
>>official names all start with "Temple", not synagogue, because the
>>building is used for other activities besides worship. I believe
>>that's also to indicate that anyone is welcome.
>>
>>This might help:
>>"Difference Between Temple and Synagogue" (Aug 29, 2011)
>><https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-temple-and-vs-synagogue/>
>>
>>Sorry, I don't know if a Torah is required for a synagogue and I
>>didn't have any luck Googling for an answer. I suspect it is
>>required. There are other forms of the Torah which I believe could be
>>used if a Sefer Torah is unavailable, such as when the local tyrant
>>tries to confiscate it:
>><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chumash_(Judaism)>
>>Note that most US temples have more than one Sefer Torah, which during
>>some occasions are literally paraded around the congregation.
>>
>>For special occasions, usually outside of the temple, it is possible
>>to rent a Sefer Torah and a suitable ark (cabinet for storing the
>>Torah when not in use):
>><https://www.google.com/search?q=torah+rental>
>>
>>I'll let you know if I find a definitive answer.

>Your "rental reference" refers to Bar and Bat Mitzvah ceremonies so I
>assume that either the Synagogue, which seems to be the common term in
>the U.S., must have the document or is it common to rent one?

My bar mitzvah in 1961 was done at the local temple as a group of
about 13 year old brats. We had a fair size crowd. Of course, a
Sefer Torah was involved.

More recently, the number of 13 year old brats has increased to the
point where it's becoming common to rent a hall and everything
required. Even back in the 1960's, my congregation would rent a local
theater for high holiday (Yom Kippur) services to deal with the
overflow. Today, it seems to me that there are more private services
done in peoples homes and small rented halls than in potentially
crowded temples. I haven't been involved in organizing one of these,
but as I understand it, the temple usually the necessary items and
people or they can be rented somewhere. That includes the necessary
Sefer Torah. I don't know how common this practice might be.

"The Ultimate DIY Bar Mitzvah Guide"
<https://www.kveller.com/the-ultimate-diy-bar-mitzvah-guide/>

I didn't know about having a 2nd Bar Mitzvah at age 83:
<https://reformjudaism.org/blog/83-new-13-why-have-second-bar-mitzvah>
"Psalm 90:10, which says that 70 years is the expected lifespan of
most humans. Reaching age 70, then, can be considered a new start and
therefore, age 83 would be the equivalent to reaching b’nai mitzvah
age again."

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 1:50:43 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/3/2023 1:16 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 9:10:56 AM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> Ah, the translation of Greek to Latin.
> >>
> >> Why not just retranslate the originals?
> >>
> >> Because.............................................. we don't have any originals.
> >>
> >> Ooops.
> >
> > Yes we do and if you want to see them you can go to the Vatican.
> Tom, you are so thoroughly ignorant, and so perfectly confident in your
> ignorance.
>
> SMH
>
So much material there...

On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 1:16:22 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 9:10:56 AM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 10:45:56 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > John never bothered to read the Bible. He is not a Christian and only uses Google to look up things because he likes to look like an authority so that he can treat you badly. He has absolutely no understanding of oral tradition or of how accurate down to even the pronunciation it is. 80 years or 160 years was insufficient for the words of the saints to be misunderstood and the translations of the Greek to Latin introduced far more errors than the oral tradition.
> > >
> > Ah, the translation of Greek to Latin.
> >
> > Why not just retranslate the originals?
> >
> > Because.............................................. we don't have any originals.
> >
> > Ooops.
> if you want to see them you can go to the Vatican.

lol....tommy thinks original new testament gospels are on display at the Vatican.
As usual, tom is wrong.

There are no "original" texts. The Vatican holds quite number of new testament fragments. The earleist fragment they have is from ~225 a.d. The oldest _complete_ version dates from the 400's. There are no scholars of any credibility who think any "original" transcriptions still exist. [1]

> they used people who could remember the gospels of the saints word for word down to the exact pronunciations of the words

The most optimistic view we have holds that the surviving examples were faithfully reproduced from the originals. Most biblical scholars concur that changing interpretations at best give a _reasonably_ accurate transcription from the original such that the original _intent_ is understood. Patheos notes "The fact that the original gospel manuscripts have not survived to this day, combined with the fact that for centuries the text was passed on through a careful but imperfect process of copying, makes us wonder whether we can trust that the Greek text we have today looks anything like what the authors originally wrote down."[2] Patheos as a heavily biased source answers that question as an unequivocal "yes".

Tommy also seems to be operating under some misconception that the gospels were transcribed from oral tradition. I guess he never bothered to do any real research into bible origins [3]

> which were originally in Judeo dialects. These were told word for word to Greek scholars who committed them to the written language.

Except that the 'original' (as they can be) texts were written in Koine Greek - Judean dialects were Hebrew and Aramaic (Jesus was Aramaic). So now we have the first challenge - translating from the Aramaic spoken language to Koine Greek. - let alone then translating to Latin in later centuries. But that's moot, because tommy is still assuming oral tradition here - which he is wrong about.

The Gospels of Luke, Mathew, and Mark were written as first hand accounts by luke, Matthew and Mark (some say Peter had significant influence on Mark).. John wrote his significantly after, with a great deal of historical context.

> The stupid five here are not religious

Of course tommy also thinks we all want to see the US completely destroyed and that we want a nuclear holocaust - He's a short hop away from full qanon thinking that the democratic party is a front for cannibalistic pedophiles..

> Tell me how they can effectively translate a dead language?

1 - the earliest new testament texts are written in Koine Greek, which is still spoken today in Greek Orthodox and Greek Catholic services
2- Dead languages are translated all the time.

> Maybe more importantly - why are you commenting on these when you don't know or understand any of these things?

Tommy criticizing others for "not knowing or understanding"....precious....

[1]https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2016/09/fifty-manuscripts-at-vatican-library.html

[2]https://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/series/can-we-know-what-the-original-gospel-manuscripts-really-said/

[3] https://www.alabasterco.com/blogs/education/who-wrote-the-four-gospels