Which Paradigm?

Grumpy Bear · July 11, 2018

On ‎6‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 1:04 AM, CadillacLuke24 said:

How accurate are the different versions? I've heard some are more than others.

Before I went to school I spoke words I’d learned from those around me. Parents mostly. I couldn’t read them. I couldn’t write them but I knew them and I knew their meanings.

I would latter learn the alphabet. Learn to arrange letters into those words and words into sentences. Compose a paragraph, Tell a story or record a history. I would have to expand my vocabulary and learn the meanings of the new words I spoke or wrote to progress to more complex expressions.

To do this I needed to learn composition, punctuation and grammar. I would have to learn the rules of the language. I would have to learn some of its history and understand its fluidity. I would have to trust my teachers, regardless of their motives to the degree that purpose was served.

If I cared to do so for a second or third language; it would be rinse and repeat. If I cared to translate from one language to another I would need to understand the differences in grammar and meanings of words well enough to duplicate a thought or series of thoughts accurately to the degree those two languages permitted such thoughtful exchange. If I could do that I would be like Steven T. Byington, a language expert foremost in his field. I’m not; so I’m going to have to trust some people to do it for me and trust God to keep it pure enough to allow me to understand what he said in the languages we no longer speak but were delivered in. I trust him like that. It should be a cakewalk after creating a Universe don't you think?

Words in translation need to accurately translate a thought more importantly than a word for word exchange which in many languages is literally impossible.

When discussing Christianity the bases of sensibility is in the fabric of an agreed foundation and its rules. Those rules and that fabric are consecrate in the Bible.

Every translation is a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy….he KJV is no exception. We don’t read Koine Greek or Ancient Hebrew (both dead languages) or even Aramaic. Translation in to another language is going to be problematic even for experts in the field. That is sensible, rational, reasonable

1 Corinthians 10:25 KJV reads: Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake

1 Corinthians 10:25 NWT reads: Eat whatever is sold in a meat market, making no inquiry because of your conscience,

This comparison should be effective in showing that translating into a ‘dead tongue’ (language) would be as fruitful as studying your Bible in Ewé if you don’t speak Ewé. Well, I nor anyone I know speaks nor understands fluently Shakespeare. While I use the KJV on occasion for the purpose of study; the language of the NWT or Byington’s for that matter is quite current and updated as our English language devolves.

God doesn’t make mistakes, Men do. When I find a problem with a translation I compare until the truth reviles itself by removing any seeming contradictions or bias from the translators influences or his politics. You can't find an answer your not looking for.

When a person wishes to read, write and understand English he learns to alphabet and the rules of composition, speech and grammar. I have no idea what a person wants that attacks the origin of that languages alphabet or attempts to discredit it by any other means. That lacks sense-able-ness.

I have a great interest in knowing what the Bible contains.

I have no interest in debating things such as its source. I know it’s source.

2 Timothy 3:16 NWT All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight,* for disciplining in righteousness,

That’s what I’m interested in. That's what's sensible. Hope that answers your question Luke.

Edited July 11, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

swathdiver · July 13, 2018

The King James Bible is a faithful translation of the Masoretic Text and the line of manuscripts that came out of the church at Antioch. There are many thousands of fragments and copies and are in near perfect agreement with one another. Conversely, there is only one copy of the Sinaiticus Text and it has no chain of custody before the 1840s. It does not agree with the Masoretic Text nor the line of manuscripts from the church at Antioch. Modern translations based on the Sinaiticus are missing many tens of thousands of words, upwards of sixty thousand words and they do not agree with one another. God is not the author of confusion.

There are those that belittle God's Word preserved in the English and say it's too hard to read and understand and yet they learned to walk, talk, ride a bicycle, do math, read and write, pass a driving test and so on.

God promised to preserve His Word. So where is it? The New Testament Church is an executive body. It has no authority to add to or take away from the scriptures or the commandments therein. Indeed, the Lord has placed a curse upon those who attempt to corrupt His Word:

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." - Revelations 22:18-19

The King James and New World Translation are not in agreement with one another. Their have been several editions of the KJV but no revisions. On the other hand, the latest revision to the NWT has 13% fewer words than previously.

Marty, this is your post and I shall not comment any further in it.

Grumpy Bear · July 16, 2018

Stating a thing as a 'fact' is proof of nothing but ones personal convictions.

Stating a thing that's a lie as a fact is something else altogether.

That's one Paradigm. And the other would be........

Grumpy Bear · July 25, 2018

One fella likes 6.2 liter blown CCSB's on 37" AT tires. 7" lifts. Lightbars, headache racks. 500 lb. bumpers with a Titanic capable winch pulling through 4.88 gears and drives aggressively 80/85 mph everywhere he goes with the AC on and the AMP's cracking his skull so he doesn't hear the roar of his muffler delete being drown by his tires. He believes 10W40 is for 'real' trucks as well as 140 in the diffs. He gets 8 mpg and is constantly in a state of repairing this or that.

Second fella likes RCSB V-6 on -1 size tires slightly lowered. Lightest fluids his heat management will allow and still provide acceptable drive line life. Rarely runs ether AC or radio except Cub's games. Drives at or under the speed limit. Is fanatical about how he maintains his tires and alignments and keeps what he can inside the trucks envelope. Leggy gears and moderate driving choices and he gets 27 mpg. Can't remember the last time he replaced anything but a light bulb.

Know what these two fellas have in common?

They are getting the direct results of the physics, mathematics and chemistries they choose to employ.

Know what these two fellas differences are?

The physics, mathematics and chemistries they choose to employ.

That's one Paradigm. And the other would be........

KARNUT · July 25, 2018

One fella likes 6.2 liter blown CCSB's on 37" AT tires. 7" lifts. Lightbars, headache racks. 500 lb. bumpers with a Titanic capable winch pulling through 4.88 gears and drives aggressively 80/85 mph everywhere he goes with the AC on and the AMP's cracking his skull so he doesn't hear the roar of his muffler delete being drown by his tires. He believes 10W40 is for 'real' trucks as well as 140 in the diffs. He gets 8 mpg and is constantly in a state of repairing this or that.

Second fella likes RCSB V-6 on -1 size tires slightly lowered. Lightest fluids his heat management will allow and still provide acceptable drive line life. Rarely runs ether AC or radio except Cub's games. Drives at or under the speed limit. Is fanatical about how he maintains his tires and alignments and keeps what he can inside the trucks envelope. Leggy gears and moderate driving choices and he gets 27 mpg. Can't remember the last time he replaced anything but a light bulb.

Know what these two fellas have in common?

They are getting the direct results of the physics, mathematics and chemistries they choose to employ.

Know what these two fellas differences are?

The physics, mathematics and chemistries they choose to employ.

That's one Paradigm. And the other would be........

You know what else they have in common? Their rides are their pride and joy. To some extent I’m the other guy.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grumpy Bear · July 25, 2018

1 hour ago, KARNUT said:

You know what else they have in common? Their rides are their pride and joy. To some extent I’m the other guy.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are absolutely correct. Well played.

An example of a perfectly civil and thoughtful response. It can be done. Thank you.

Edited July 25, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

Grumpy Bear · July 31, 2018

Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the much older lady that she should bring her own grocery bags, because plastic bags are not good for the environment.

The woman apologized to the young girl and explained, "We didn't have this 'green thing' back in my earlier days."

The young clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations."

The older lady said our generation didn't have the "green thing" in its day. Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled. But we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day. Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags that we reused for numerous things. Most memorable besides household garbage bags was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our school books. This was to ensure that public property (the books provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribbling. Then we were able to personalize our books on the brown paper bags.

We walked up stairs because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.

But she was right. We didn't have the "green thing" in our day. Back then we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy-gobbling machine burning up 220 volts. Wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.

But that young lady is right; we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day. Back then we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blade in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service in the family's $45,000 SUV or van, which cost what a whole house did before the "green thing." We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger joint. But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the "green thing" back then?

We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to tic us off. Especially from a tattooed, multiple pierced dummy who can't make change without the cash register telling them how much.

Don't regret growing old....it is a privilege denied to many!

Edited July 31, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

Grumpy Bear · October 27, 2018

I would love to ask the question, “What is more important to consumers, Technology or quality?” The question cannot be asked.

How about asking, “What is more important at the time of sale to the customer, a things value or a things worth?” Can’t pull the trigger on that one either.

You would have to have an audience that can differentiate between value and worth; between tech and quality. For today’s crowd asking questions like these is like asking the color blind to choose between blue and green.

When I was in school we were taught to design a thing to last and be ergonomically friendly. Today’s bunch have been taught to design to last ‘just long enough’ and be visually pleasing.

We were taught to refine a device over its product cycle as ever cleaver users uncovered its flaws. Today there is no need as the thinking is tech advances so fast that product cycles are no longer long enough to warrant such refinement.

If the current consumers understood this they would understand the difference between value and worth, tech and quality. They would use the advancement in tech to refine instead of replace, to advance instead of obsolete. To conserve instead of gluttonously consume. To build rather than destroy.

Worrying about air quality of your car’s emissions while processing billions of tons of raw materials in toilet paper fashion to ever shorter product cycles is laughable; or any consumer product for that matter.

Sounds like another popular thought dad would have beat me for. “We can spend ourselves out of debit”! Sounds like a tail looking for a dog to wag.

That's one Paradigm. And the other would be........

KARNUT · October 27, 2018

I’m not a conspiracy theorist, I don’t think anyway. As long as I can help it, no vehicle that can track me, no TV that’s smart, no little box in my house that I talk to. I was into vehicles that we’re technically advanced. I noticed two things. One was they were the first things to act up. Two they took my attention from the road. When buying my last automobile the less technical it got the cheaper it became. If you pay attention to driving you don’t need lane departure, automatic braking, adaptive cruise etc. My wife’s fancy technology advanced car stays in town. My base model car goes on trips with no distractions. When it comes down to it the comfort level is the same.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grumpy Bear · November 6, 2018

Value without Worth. Maybe to someone whose rich enough to not ask, "what kind of mileage does that thing get?" I've never been that guy even when I was. If a thing hasn't any worth to me it hasn't any value. Wouldn't take it if it were free.

A Kelly Book or NADA book is a reflection of the broad sense of worth people place on a thing. Most often by private auction at the dealer level. It's fetch value the image of it's perceived worth. Big word "perception".

Local Chevy dealer just took on Buick and is flooded with NEW 2017 Lacrosse models from other dealers all marked down about 20K from MSRP. Even now auction prices are sagging as newer year models arrive devaluing the car without putting a dent in it's worth to the right buyer.

Sales guy and I talk while Pepper is getting her power steering flashed. Tell him I have a nice 2009 Lacrosse with VERY low miles on her in VERY nice shape. He takes that to mean I'm interested in a trade for his reduced 17's. So I ask him what will a 17 give me my 09 already does not except becoming 25K more in debit?

Latest tech he responds. You mean like connectivity? Yep he nods. That is one high $$$$ touch screen and his eye pops. Is it more comfortable? No. Is it more economical? Hardly. Will the extra 100 hp make my 70 mph speed any faster? No. Will I get the girl in the add? Nope. Make me rich? Nada...feed me? WT*

$25,000 adds absolutely nothing to my worth but adds a bunch to my cost. Bad trade Dumb Bear.

Grumpy Bear · December 22, 2018

You’re told there is a new Corvette with your name on it sitting in your driveway.

You ask for proof. Does proof decide reality?

Reality is independent of proof but faith in that statement is not independent of reality. It demands proof!

“Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld.”—Hebrews 11:1.

What is your great, great, great, grandfather on your father’s mothers side’s name? Most will not know yet no one can deny he existed. The fact that you are is an evident demonstration, proof, assurance he existed. Reality doesn’t not require proof. Faith does and yet reality doesn’t care about your faith one way nor the other. God does.

You got out of bed and placed your feet on the floor this morning; stood up and things you gave no conscience consideration, considered you carefully and faithfully.

Gravity held you and the air you breath to earth.

You are the perfect distance from the sun to allow life.

Every day we are considered by countless demonstrations of a thoughtful purpose and intelligent design.

God never intended that we place our faith in him or his purposes blindly nor ignorantly. He is more than willing to supply the proofs… Fact is he does every day; your willingness isn’t required. Your attention is.

That’s one paradigm, and the another would be…….

Edited December 22, 2018 by Grumpy Bear

CadillacLuke24 · December 31, 2018

Referring back to the Green Thing post (about recycling), it's sad to see how the current generation views my habits. Age-wise I'm a millenial, but through habits and my Dad's guiding hand I would at least fit into his generation.

Case in point, I like diet soda, and I usually buy it in cans cause that's the cheapest. Partly from force of habit, but mainly on principle, I religiously collect aluminum cans. Sure, I don't get much, but it's more than nothing, and aluminum makes some sweet stuff, like engine blocks and polished wheels. All my coworkers, especially the young females, find it absolutely comical that I "waste" time on such a "trivial" task. Even the farm girl on the floor who I would have thought shared my mindset, laughed at my attempts. The more I think on it I'm glad she was taken when I got to her.

I asked one of the dense ones if, all of the sudden, $3 appeared in the trash (about what I get per can collection). She said she wouldn't bother. IT'S $3! LEGAL TENDER! FREE FREAKING MONEY! Nope.

People do not appreciate the small things anymore, understand the effort to undertake something, nor feel they should have to work for anything. What is wrong with this world?

KARNUT · December 31, 2018

One of the easiest things an adult can do is make coffee. They even come with timers, it’s ready when you want it. You can buy containers that keeps coffee all day. The fact that Starbucks thrives shows how wasteful and lazy people are.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

diyer2 · December 31, 2018

Most of the younger generation just do not have respect for the value of money or the will it takes to earn it.

Grumpy Bear · January 1, 2019

19 hours ago, KARNUT said:

One of the easiest things an adult can do is make coffee. They even come with timers, it’s ready when you want it. You can buy containers that keeps coffee all day. The fact that Starbucks thrives shows how wasteful and lazy people are.

Buy my beans. French Press and it takes 10 minutes top to bottom and cost me about $0.19 a cup and if I do say is better than ANY chain or coffee bar. The price of Starbucks cheapest will make about 26 cups of my best. So yea, they toss money like garbage. Guess you can do that if your first full time jobs as a married person paid better than the $1.50/hr I made getting started...eh???

18 hours ago, diyer2 said:

Most of the younger generation just do not have respect for the value of money or the will it takes to earn it.

Three jobs when I got married at 18. Two full time and a part time. I worked 16 to 20 hours a day six days a week so I could walk to the grocery for two 1/6th bushel paper bags and a box of 410 shot shells for hunting and pay the rent. I owned nothing and still was a quarter in the hole each week for the first two years. Been on my own since I was 16 and never looked back.

They can tell me how cheap a 70 K truck is when they've had a drafty falling over Model A garage above the 40th parallel with no heat for your first home and eaten from a Pizza joint DUMPSTER for a few months chased with Kool-Aid without sugar. I was really good pizza. Sicilian, Neno Bothers. Remember when I walked in and bought my first fresh pie with my own money. Heaven.

So yea I have a clue about value and worth that won't be shared by those that followed the Boomers.

Somehow I think you Dyier2 has a clue.

Edited January 1, 2019 by Grumpy Bear