Why is it that the religious people who preach on the trains tend to be ill-educated?

[conuly]

Especially when it comes to their religious texts. Now this one was swearing that the Bible said that "Jesus would come back in 2,000 years. Not exactly 2,000, of course...." It says that in the Bible? I thought all it said that Jesus would return "within this generation". I understand that if you want to take the Bible anywhere near literally you have to make "this generation" mean some other generation than the one he was speaking to, which is possible - but I don't see how you can get 2,000 years from that.

And that raises a question - is that 2,000 years from the time of his birth, or his death? Because if it's his death, and we're using the conventional reckoning, then I figure I've got another 25 years or so before I need to worry about this sort of thing. Plenty of time.

Of course, I'm not a Biblical scholar. I almost certainly am missing something - but it's a smaller something than this guy (and no, I don't want answers - I just want the words that will SHUT THESE PEOPLE UP on the train so I can read my damn book for a change).

I think he may've been running a more sophisticated scam, though - he had a woman sitting, nodding, amening, calling him a "man of god" while professing not to know him. When's the last time you saw somebody converted by a street preacher? And he did attempt to collect money several times....

Comments

[rachelkachel]

Blah. People have been predicting Christ's imminent return ever since his death, and it specifically says (Matthew 24:36) that nobody will know when it is until it happens. Apparently even Jesus doesn't know, however that works...

And about "this generation" - there may be other places it's mentioned, but a few verses earlier it say "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened" and a footnote says "or race". So maybe it's more metaphorical than a literal generation.

[conuly]

Which footnote? Which edition of the Bible are you using?

[rachelkachel]

NIV.

[conuly]

This, of course, was a ploy - I can't distinguish between different Bibles. D'oh!

All I have is what Religious Tolerance tells me. Hm. I wonder where I can find out more information....

[rachelkachel]

That site seems to agree with what I know of the differences. NIV is generally accepted to be a very good translation - they looked at many different manuscripts and got as close to the orignal sources as they could.

I like KJV for some things because it's so poetic, though :) I'm more familiar with the Christmas story with its wording, and of course the Lord's Prayer.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

There's too much commentary-disguised-as-translation in the NIV. The editors had a particular world view and theology, and it informed how they rewrote the bible.

[conuly]

Better link...

[rachelkachel]

Oh, the Good News Bible... I hate that one. We had it for Sunday School and the wording is really clunky, and it had these stupid practically stick-figure illustrations.

I don't know about many of the others, though I think we have at least one NRSV at home. NIV is pretty much standard at my church. Occasionally someone will decide to spice things up with The Message, and it kind of creeps me out to hear things like "the disciples promised to stick with Jesus through thick and thin."

Ha, sorry for spamming your journal :P You just got onto a subject I know something about and don't mind discussing.

[conuly]

No, I'm happy for it. I know a bunch of random bible quotes, mostly those that look really bad to those brands of street preachers who insist that God is love (which is why he is willing to let tons of people go to hell, in their view...?), but other than that, not so much. And it's really an imposing subject.

[madmug.livejournal.com]

We use the Good News Bible at my school, blargh, I had no idea it was considered such a craptastic translation.

Though it doesn't really surprise me, a lot of it's bleedin' confusing.

I just had fun telling the guys in my RE class to read page 21, which has the story of the two girls who got pregnant by their father. That put Miss Young on a hot plate, teehee!

[rachelkachel]

I don't know if it's "considered" that - I just personally hate it :)

Let's see, page 21 - Genesis, obviously... ah, of course. That Lot...

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I've used that verse to reason that "until every single last believer dies off, and the knowledge is erased, SOMEONE will expect Jesus, so he won't appear."

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

Maybe he was just "preaching to the choir" as far as that lady was concerned?

[conuly]

I think it was a scam - she was supposed to soften us up to give him money, something like that.

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

Hmm... I guess I don't have enough experience with "train preachers".

[mhari.livejournal.com]

I almost certainly am missing something - but it's a smaller something than this guy

I dunno, screws come pretty small. :D

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

I just want the words that will SHUT THESE PEOPLE UP on the train

HAH!

You find those words, you copyright 'em; you'll get rich fast.

[conuly]

I think I'd do better to just build my house in the woods :)

[hopefulnebula]

(and no, I don't want answers - I just want the words that will SHUT THESE PEOPLE UP on the train so I can read my damn book for a change)

Would show tunes work?

[conuly]

Been there, commented, considered singing "John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt", but then decided against it. I'm a wuss.

[rho]

Well, different bits of the bible clearly use different timescales in different places. For instance, we know that the first of the creation stories says that the entire history of the universe up until the creation of mankind took about a week. With our conventional time, that's a ratio of somewhere around about 700,000,000,000 to 1, with biblical time taking longer than normal time.

On the other hand, we know that Methuselah lived to be almost 1000 years old. Even at the most optimistic estimate for the lifespan of a long lived person, that has biblical time running about ten times faster than normal time.

So if we assume a generation to be 20 years, then that 20 years of bible time could take anywhere between 2 years and 14,000,000,000,000 years. As such, I feel that I'm not going to lose sleep over the possibility of him showing up within the next few years.

[madmug.livejournal.com]

I think 2,000 years actually comes from the fact it's 2000-ish now and it is a round number and people can rave about it.

Anyway, the years aren't counted from Christ's actual birth, most scolars agree He was probably born about 3 or 4 BC and there is no year 0.

If they're judgemental to others, you can always use Luke 6:37-8

"Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

In fact, Luke 6:37-42 is all good stuff on not judging.

[push-the-limits.livejournal.com]

So is Matthew 7:1.

[conuly]

What's the one about praying in a closet?

[rachelkachel]

Blah. People have been predicting Christ's imminent return ever since his death, and it specifically says (Matthew 24:36) that nobody will know when it is until it happens. Apparently even Jesus doesn't know, however that works...

And about "this generation" - there may be other places it's mentioned, but a few verses earlier it say "this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened" and a footnote says "or race". So maybe it's more metaphorical than a literal generation.

[conuly]

Which footnote? Which edition of the Bible are you using?

[rachelkachel]

NIV.

[conuly]

This, of course, was a ploy - I can't distinguish between different Bibles. D'oh!

All I have is what Religious Tolerance tells me. Hm. I wonder where I can find out more information....

[rachelkachel]

That site seems to agree with what I know of the differences. NIV is generally accepted to be a very good translation - they looked at many different manuscripts and got as close to the orignal sources as they could.

I like KJV for some things because it's so poetic, though :) I'm more familiar with the Christmas story with its wording, and of course the Lord's Prayer.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

There's too much commentary-disguised-as-translation in the NIV. The editors had a particular world view and theology, and it informed how they rewrote the bible.

[conuly]

Better link...

[rachelkachel]

Oh, the Good News Bible... I hate that one. We had it for Sunday School and the wording is really clunky, and it had these stupid practically stick-figure illustrations.

I don't know about many of the others, though I think we have at least one NRSV at home. NIV is pretty much standard at my church. Occasionally someone will decide to spice things up with The Message, and it kind of creeps me out to hear things like "the disciples promised to stick with Jesus through thick and thin."

Ha, sorry for spamming your journal :P You just got onto a subject I know something about and don't mind discussing.

[conuly]

No, I'm happy for it. I know a bunch of random bible quotes, mostly those that look really bad to those brands of street preachers who insist that God is love (which is why he is willing to let tons of people go to hell, in their view...?), but other than that, not so much. And it's really an imposing subject.

[madmug.livejournal.com]

We use the Good News Bible at my school, blargh, I had no idea it was considered such a craptastic translation.

Though it doesn't really surprise me, a lot of it's bleedin' confusing.

I just had fun telling the guys in my RE class to read page 21, which has the story of the two girls who got pregnant by their father. That put Miss Young on a hot plate, teehee!

[rachelkachel]

I don't know if it's "considered" that - I just personally hate it :)

Let's see, page 21 - Genesis, obviously... ah, of course. That Lot...

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I've used that verse to reason that "until every single last believer dies off, and the knowledge is erased, SOMEONE will expect Jesus, so he won't appear."

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

Maybe he was just "preaching to the choir" as far as that lady was concerned?

[conuly]

I think it was a scam - she was supposed to soften us up to give him money, something like that.

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

Hmm... I guess I don't have enough experience with "train preachers".

[mhari.livejournal.com]

I almost certainly am missing something - but it's a smaller something than this guy

I dunno, screws come pretty small. :D

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

I just want the words that will SHUT THESE PEOPLE UP on the train

HAH!

You find those words, you copyright 'em; you'll get rich fast.

[conuly]

I think I'd do better to just build my house in the woods :)

[hopefulnebula]

(and no, I don't want answers - I just want the words that will SHUT THESE PEOPLE UP on the train so I can read my damn book for a change)

Would show tunes work?

[conuly]

Been there, commented, considered singing "John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt", but then decided against it. I'm a wuss.

[rho]

Well, different bits of the bible clearly use different timescales in different places. For instance, we know that the first of the creation stories says that the entire history of the universe up until the creation of mankind took about a week. With our conventional time, that's a ratio of somewhere around about 700,000,000,000 to 1, with biblical time taking longer than normal time.

On the other hand, we know that Methuselah lived to be almost 1000 years old. Even at the most optimistic estimate for the lifespan of a long lived person, that has biblical time running about ten times faster than normal time.

So if we assume a generation to be 20 years, then that 20 years of bible time could take anywhere between 2 years and 14,000,000,000,000 years. As such, I feel that I'm not going to lose sleep over the possibility of him showing up within the next few years.

[madmug.livejournal.com]

I think 2,000 years actually comes from the fact it's 2000-ish now and it is a round number and people can rave about it.

Anyway, the years aren't counted from Christ's actual birth, most scolars agree He was probably born about 3 or 4 BC and there is no year 0.

If they're judgemental to others, you can always use Luke 6:37-8

"Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

In fact, Luke 6:37-42 is all good stuff on not judging.

[push-the-limits.livejournal.com]

So is Matthew 7:1.

[conuly]

What's the one about praying in a closet?