Riker

@DLosc true! but at least the majority of people who refer to themselves as christian on a census probably fall under close enough, if not the majority of people who attend church regularly

(this is not a moral judgement on which is accurate)

which mirrors the jewish ideals of adhering to the bible vs. the christian ideals of "whatever it's close enough" :p

whereas you, as an orthodox jew, notice immediately that it's a departure from the bible and remark on it

as a christian if somebody told me the bible summarized to "love god and love your neighbors" I'd be like yeah that checks out, even though it's absolutely a vast oversimplification

@Adám I think the other difference with christianity is actually shown here, amusingly enough

ah, i've heard of that in a different context- more of a set of beliefs about the end times

@Adám the big j-man, we call him /s

yeah I've just never encountered anybody who would espouse anything that conserative lol

idk about eastern orthodox or something though

@Seggan conservatives of what? the more strict textual catholics and protestants for SURE don't believe that

my personal belief, and I know I'm not alone though I'm not sure i'ts a majority belief, is that the bible itself is more of god's word filtered through enough humans that it's not to be taken as literal in most cases

yeah, and from a christian perspective we see it as something that changes with the times /shrug

@Adám :) that's a very good question and that's very dependent on personal beliefs, and to a large extent the beliefs of the pastor at whatever church you went to as a kid

and it's an extension of the general idea of taking the bible as more of a guideline than a set of rules

@DLosc I think it comes from the general lack of old testament traditions christians follow

only as a statement in the abstract about not being a christian only on sunday mornings

@DLosc yeah I think I've heard that too but never really interpreted or heard it interpreted literally :p

as far as I know, the bible only says you should attempt to live a god fearing live, and there's no particular reason it has to be via any particular means. i know a couple pentecostals who very rarely read the bible but typically spend an hour or two in prayer daily

I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong, I just disagree lol - you don't have to silence yourself because some fuck on the internet has a slightly different take

I mean, would they be better served reading the bible more often? probably? but there's no biblical injunction to read the bible daily that I'm aware of, only to consider it

@Seggan is it? I don't really see anything explicitly wrong with it

@Adám ah, got it

the majority of ones I know in america (mostly protestant) don't read the bible very regularly on their own outside of sunday school, outside listening to it on sundays

I agree with DLosc - I think saying "most christians" vastly overstates the amount of knowledge many christians have about their own religion

"love of your neighbor" as a noun vs. "love your neighbor" as an verb/order

@Adám huh, so it changes from a concept to an injunction?

i hadn't joined TNB for long enough i'd forgotten you're the only person i've ever interacted with who uses interrobangs regularly

so I was mentally writing it and thinking more of "treat those around you as you'd treat a fellow sibling in christ"

it was strongly paraphrased from "love your neighbor" and the fact that christians typically regard each other as brothers & sisters

it wasn't mean to be a quote and I know it's off :) i just wanted to not get a witty response along the lines of "not sexually" or something like that

@Adám oh, that's a much cleaner reading than I got out of it. neat

huh, looks like god splits the fire into adam and then woman is created from taking fire and adding part of god. interesting and probably overthinking it

@Adám huh, so man and women are different subsets of fire+god stuck together

so its typically not called apocrypha just apocryphal

apocrypha is the term for anything apocryphal, whihc could be extended to include things like the book of mormon or something. the deuterocanon is the specific ones that're apocrypha if you're a plain christian but canonical if you're a catholic

apocrypha is a general term but yeah

protocanon = the og jewish ones iirc

:62896061 deuterocanonical = catholics et al say it's the bible, protestants think it's not

@UnrelatedString yeah, i think the original texts are very similar if not identical, but placed in different orders and there's extra inclusions. not even counting the christian prophet extra books or w/e

nobody's got an issue with "love your neighbor as a brother" or "it was 40 shekels per bushel" but many of the ones that are hot topic issues today are funny translation errors

sure but i'd argue the meaningful differences are often the funkily translated ones

i pasted a lame google translate to experiment - and I do notice the אדם that's so similar, and when I translate it back it does get a little confused (even accounting for how bad google translate is with many languages)

@Adám ah, fun!

@DLosc "even some sects have divergent versions of the bibe, isn't there a canonical ur-bible at which you can compare against, that those sects have split off from?"

and furthermore, some christians disagree with parts of the bible, either believing them to be mistranslations or irrelevant to the current day (see things like many of the jewish traditions in the christian old testament that we don't follow, like kosher rules, as popular examples)

you're not wrong in principle, but many many modern christians don't actually refer back to the bible on any level other than NIV or whatever the most popular/convenient translation is at hand

@UnrelatedString lmfao that's assuming a lot about the homogeneity and actual stock many christians nowadays put in the good lord's book

(unless I'm missing something)