Given that so much of the bible is subject to a single words meaning... like "accompanied," isn't it subject to huge assumptions and misinterpretations given that it is translated over centuries? aside: I honestly wonder what Christ would think regarding what has become of his legacy? Don't you think that way too much attention is paid to him and not his teachings? His teachings hold sway with me but everything from the crucifixion on reek of man made churchdom. Have you ever heard of the Jeffersonian Bible? Below is a description, but basically Thomas Jefferson took the New Testament and removed all of the parts with miracles, magic etc and stuck just to the teachings of Christ. -It's worth checking out. I wish it were more widely adopted amongst Christians and that the crucifixion and resurrection weren't a part of it all. Done with his official work for the day, Thomas Jefferson sat in the new presidential mansion in Washington in 1803 and opened his Bible--not to pray, but to cut. He scoured the text for Jesus' greatest teachings, sliced out his favorite portions, and glued them into an empty volume. He called it "The Philosophy of Jesus." That book was lost to history.
In 1819, he started over and created a new version called "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth," commonly referred to now as the Jefferson Bible. This volume was kept largely secret and passed among Jefferson's relatives until 1895, when it was discovered by the librarian at the Smithsonian. In 1904, it was published by Congress.
I didn't actually read the rest of your comment until just now. I like the historical Jesus hypothesis, which I think basically says he was a revolutionary Jew who was made into a symbol/martyr after his death. So he'd be confused, if he existed. But I need to read more.aside: I honestly wonder what Christ would think regarding what has become of his legacy?
How'd you like learning Latin? It's the only language I have genuine interest in studying but the closest thing my school offers is French, because nobody signed up for Latin and the course dropped. I might go for Latin in college.
Loved it in high school, never took it in college. It's very different, from what I've heard. When I learned it we had an excess of time, so we read all the great authors and poets. In college you speed through the first two mini-textbooks in one semester and unless you take a weird amount of electives (that may or may not even exist at your school) you probably won't get to a focused reading class. Also: I highly doubt there is anything like a conversational Latin class at any university you are likely to attend. It sometimes grates to have spent years learning a language and not really be able to speak it. I can (or used to be able to) read, write, decline, pronounce and even compose in a limited fashion, but I can't put sentences together on the fly. You just don't learn that. Sign up for French, I always wanted to speak that one.
Hm. I'll think about it, I also want to make as much use of the time I've put into French as I can, switching to Latin (if I can't take them alongside each other in college) could be a decisive waste of all my time with French. I mean either way, what's the point if I'm not going to learn to apply it by, you know, applying it. Communicating with others in real-world scenarios, otherwise it's useless.
The next one in the series has another great quote (of a quote):“The best way for conservative churches to produce ‘liberal’ biblical scholars is to keep encouraging young people to read the Bible.”