Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2014 9:35:12 GMT -5
Just listened to Buddha at the Gas Pump convo between Francis Bennet and Adyashanti re: the latter's book "The Resurrection of Jesus." I recommend it:
I've never read the New Testament and only pieces of the Old. Does anyone have recommendations for accurate and accessible translation/versions of the New Testament?
|
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 4, 2014 9:53:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 4, 2014 11:50:03 GMT -5
Yes, the NIV and also the New English Bible versions are pretty good, but be sure to read "The Gospel of Thomas" which is part of the Nag Hammadi library. It will give you a sense of what was probably suppressed by the early church fathers. It is far more mystical than the standard canon. Also read "Zealot" because that will help fill in some other blanks regarding the probable historical truth. Thomas Jefferson created his own version of the NT by clipping out only the words that were reportedly spoken by Jesus.
We know very little about Jesus. By contrast we know a great deal about the Buddha. Jesus got executed after three years of teaching (most of which was delivered to relatively unsophisticated folks), but the Buddha taught for forty-four years and he was lucky to have had a disciple who had a photo-aural memory and remembered thousands of the Buddha's teachings, sermons, and conversations, which were written down after his death. He also had a large number of disciples who followed his advice and became enlightened. I've been told that the entire Buddhist canon is eleven times larger than the entire Bible.
|
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 4, 2014 13:44:14 GMT -5
ZD, what was the name of his disciple with the photo-aural memory...from all I've read so far, I wouldn't know who that might be, which is kinda odd. I'd really like to know who that was -- I figure I should recognize the name.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 4, 2014 14:30:21 GMT -5
ZD, what was the name of his disciple with the photo-aural memory...from all I've read so far, I wouldn't know who that might be, which is kinda odd. I'd really like to know who that was -- I figure I should recognize the name. I think it was Ananda, but he had so many disciples that I'm not 100% sure. I remember reading somewhere that after the Buddha's death all of his enlightened disciples got together to decide how to proceed (sort of like the Council of Nicea? for Christians) and to gather a written record of the teachings. At that time Ananda was not enlightened, but the others decided to include him in the meeting because he had been with the Buddha for so many years and because of his amazing memory. Reportedly he later became enlightened. |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 4, 2014 14:33:44 GMT -5
Yep, that fellow is mentioned a lot in my book. I guess I'll have to skip to the end to see if it says anything about who it was. Thanks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2014 14:58:39 GMT -5
Yes, the NIV and also the New English Bible versions are pretty good, but be sure to read "The Gospel of Thomas" which is part of the Nag Hammadi library. It will give you a sense of what was probably suppressed by the early church fathers. It is far more mystical than the standard canon. Also read "Zealot" because that will help fill in some other blanks regarding the probable historical truth. Thomas Jefferson created his own version of the NT by clipping out only the words that were reportedly spoken by Jesus. We know very little about Jesus. By contrast we know a great deal about the Buddha. Jesus got executed after three years of teaching (most of which was delivered to relatively unsophisticated folks), but the Buddha taught for forty-four years and he was lucky to have had a disciple who had a photo-aural memory and remembered thousands of the Buddha's teachings, sermons, and conversations, which were written down after his death. He also had a large number of disciples who followed his advice and became enlightened. I've been told that the entire Buddhist canon is eleven times larger than the entire Bible. cool I think we have the NEB at home. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 4, 2014 18:55:36 GMT -5
ZD, what was the name of his disciple with the photo-aural memory...from all I've read so far, I wouldn't know who that might be, which is kinda odd. I'd really like to know who that was -- I figure I should recognize the name. I think it was Ananda, but he had so many disciples that I'm not 100% sure. I remember reading somewhere that after the Buddha's death all of his enlightened disciples got together to decide how to proceed (sort of like the Council of Nicea? for Christians) and to gather a written record of the teachings. At that time Ananda was not enlightened, but the others decided to include him in the meeting because he had been with the Buddha for so many years and because of his amazing memory. Reportedly he later became enlightened. Yea, I'm pretty sure it was Ananda. As far as a NT, I grew up with the Revised Standard Version ( not the New Revised Standard Version). This was a gift from my parents, it seems a fortunate accident as I later found out it is highly recommended. For most of my adult life I used the New American Standard Version (NASB). I really liked it because it had extensive chain references. However, I later found out it is more of a literal translation than a translation of meaning, for the most part. A few years ago I looked for a Bible that's supposed to be the best overall translation. I looked at many descriptions. I decided upon the English Standard Version (ESV), a 2001 translation, an adaptation of the Revised Standard Version. That would be my recommendation. I would recommend a red letter version so as to be easy to pick out the words of Jesus. However, that is a little expensive in the ESV$40.00 (as far as I can tell). There is a new 2011 version that has extensive cross references, $20.00. What would probably suit you (?), Amazon has for $1.99, and ESV Economy New Testament. However......... I've known about The Pesh!tta (blasted filter) for many years. The Penutsta is the NT in Aramaic. Jesus spoke Aramaic. I personally believe the original NT was written in Aramaic and then translated into Greek. The Penutsta has been traced back to the first century, so the question is, was the Penutsta translated from the Greek or vice versa? This guy named Andrew Gabriel Roth has done extensive research, he believes the Aramaic came before the Greek. He has written a couple of books on this subject and shows by numerous examples why the Aramaic had to come first (mostly using idioms, why you could get from the Aramaic to Greek but you can't get from Greek to Aramaic. IOW, if the Greek was translated into the Aramaic, The Pesh!tta would be more Greek-sounding, it's not). It is pretty-much established that this is the case with Matthew, anyway, as scholars have long known about a Hebrew Matthew. There are several different version of the Aramaic NT out there. This year I finally decided to get one, researched, and it came down to the version by Andrew Gabriel Roth. It's called the Aramaic English New Testament, first edition 2008, 5th Edition 2012. paperback $40.00, HB $60.00 (Amazon). .........You probably don't want to put that much money into a NT, and the names are in Aramaic, that might take some getting used to (Jesus is Y'shua). .......... If you go to a Good Will or Salvation Army you're going to find a cheap NT. A used bookstore will probably have numerous inexpensive versions (but not an Aramaic NT, that would be pure luck). Jesus is still my #1 dude.....he's awesome  . ...........Happy reading.......Oh.......zd also wrote a book on Jesus.........  ......... I'm sure it's still available....... sdp |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 4, 2014 19:34:48 GMT -5
Oh......since we are here, has anyone ever heard the theory that Shakespeare was the primary translator of the Kings James Version of the Bible (the dates correspond, the KJV came out in 1610).
If you go to Psalms 46, count 46 words and you end on shake. If you go to the end of the chapter and count from back to front (leave out the last word the Hebrew notation Selah), you end up on the word spear. It is thus speculated that Shakespeare left his signature.
|
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 4, 2014 19:48:54 GMT -5
Oh......since we are here, has anyone ever heard the theory that Shakespeare was the primary translator of the Kings James Version of the Bible (the dates correspond, the KJV came out in 1610). If you go to Psalms 46, count 46 words and you end on shake. If you go to the end of the chapter and count from back to front (leave out the last word the Hebrew notation Selah), you end up on the word spear. It is thus speculated that Shakespeare left his signature. That vaguely rings a bell about Shakespeare and the Bible. I grew up with my own KJV which I still have, but it's in tatters.  ZD wrote a book about Jesus? Now, that I would be interested in. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 4, 2014 22:25:53 GMT -5
Oh......since we are here, has anyone ever heard the theory that Shakespeare was the primary translator of the Kings James Version of the Bible (the dates correspond, the KJV came out in 1610). If you go to Psalms 46, count 46 words and you end on shake. If you go to the end of the chapter and count from back to front (leave out the last word the Hebrew notation Selah), you end up on the word spear. It is thus speculated that Shakespeare left his signature. That vaguely rings a bell about Shakespeare and the Bible. I grew up with my own KJV which I still have, but it's in tatters. ZD wrote a book about Jesus? Now, that I would be interested in. Well, the book (A Path to Christ-Consciousness, Non-Conceptual Awareness Practice as a Doorway to the Infinite) was based on newspaper articles that appeared over a ten year period on the religion page of my local newspaper. I wrote it for Christians (cause that's who composed my local community), but it was strictly non-duality 101 translated into Christian terminology. Nobody got it although many people told me that they loved the articles. Ha ha. People would come up to me and say, "I love reading your articles, but I never understand them." That used to crack me up, but I tried to keep a straight face. They were probably resonating with what was underneath the words, but it never got to the conscious level. Ha ha. Isn't life a hoot? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2014 13:50:22 GMT -5
hi,
I would say KJV, there are some reason for that,
Actually, all paul epistles are written around 50 AD, and Mark was written around 70 AD,and Matthew,Luke,Acts were written in 80 AD, and John was written in 90-120 AD and many of the books were written after that, the problem here is, the books written later centuries were distorted from the original message of Bible, especially the later version are not describing Jesus as son of God but God. But Bible clearly talks that God is one and he is invisible and Jesus is son of God by birth(Luke 1 : 35) and he was made Lord and Christ after the resurrection (Psalm 110 : 1 and Acts 2 : 36). But most of the translator like NIV translate the Bible by having the idea of Jesus is God, so their translation is not true. But KJV version remains true to the Original Greek version most probably. So Read King James Version that would be a better one. OT was written in Hebrew and NT was written in Greek though Jesus spoken language was Aramaic, So this translation creates various problem consequently various denomination. But we need to correctly read the bible so we need a rightly translated one, which is KJV.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 7, 2014 18:35:57 GMT -5
FWIW, no one knows how well ANY version of the NT corresponds to what happened during Jesus' lifetime. It's all conjecture. Also, if one has studied language deconstruction and understands the translational difficulties, the problems of interpretation are vastly magnified. Which phrases are metaphorical and which phrases were intended to be literal? No one knows. Throw in the usual embellishments associated with all religious history, and the whole translation/interpretation thingy becomes majorly problematic. The KJV contains errors, contradictions, and all sorts of other language/interpretive issues that one would expect of a document compiled from multiple sources over many years many years after the time of the events themselves and then selectively chosen to be part of a canon by people with big axes to grind. My suggestion? Take all versions of the NT with a heavy dose of salt, then look within and discover the truths that may or may not have been understood by the peeps who sanctioned the canon. Better yet, throw all religious books (and all religious "authorities") away and find out for yourself what's going on. Why settle for second-hand when first-hand is available?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 17:41:39 GMT -5
Just listened to Buddha at the Gas Pump convo between Francis Bennet and Adyashanti re: the latter's book "The Resurrection of Jesus." I recommend it: I've never read the New Testament and only pieces of the Old. Does anyone have recommendations for accurate and accessible translation/versions of the New Testament? Hello maxdprophet, much love. Thank you for the video. It speaks to me about the reconciliation between the glory of God and the suffering of man as a spiritual seeker. The outcome being Bliss. |
|
. ...........Happy reading.......Oh.......zd also wrote a book on Jesus......... 
......... I'm sure it's still available.......
