Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (28351)	1/17/1999 12:24:00 PM
From: nihil	Respond to of 108807

Bob, You don't find it surprising that God didn't choose Hebrew - the language of the covenant - or Latin, the language of the universal state of the day as the medium or vehicle of the new testament? I do. There were many widely used languages at the time and everything was SHOUTING -- mostly all caps. Looking at the enterprise as a business, the whole thing was handled abominably. 1. Publications: it took them decades to get good documents out. Matthew, f.i. originally appeared in Aramaic, and then was translated to Greek. Printing was terribly expensive, and the gospels frequently are not in accord. Unlike OT documents in Hebrew and Aramaic, the copying was terrible. OT copying was the best in literary history. 2. Doctrinal uniformity -- anyone apparently, was allowed to write and preach. No licensing or certification was used (except to protect foot soles) Until Constantine took over and imposed councils on the church, things just flop this way and that way. After Constantine took over, they flapped that way and this way -- which most agreed was much better. Lack of uniformity was terrible for the church militant and a lot of attention had to be spent on making the uniforms just so.