|
As for Pike's "Lost in Translation" view, frankly, I've always felt it was obvious in a much more simplistic fashion. This is not a slam against Christianity, it is simply the views and opinions of myself as the poster of this reply.
a) Language changes. The meaning of the same word or phrase in the same language over time has different value. Eighgty years ago, something being cool, in English, meant simply and strictly that it was chilled or colder than room temperature. Sure, it's a lame example but it's the first one that popped into my head.
b) With changing language, interpretation and translation become more difficult. Transcripts translated from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English are going to have some meaning transposed. It's virtually impossible that this would not happen.
c) Even today if a Jewish scholar were to attempt to translate original Hebrew scripture into modern English, the true meaning of some of the concepts would be lost and the English would still stray from the true original meaning.
The end result of the above assumptions is that in today's scripture, what is thought of as the true word of God is well... not. Christians as a much more modern religion than many others fails to take real history into account for a lot of things and assumes that the book they hold so dear is in fact infallible. Can someone explain the opposing viewpoint? How God's hand guides those who translate the book into perfection?
|