Yes, I'm actually asking for it at this point

[Nekroz]

If it is full of practical knowledge and Legit wisdom, then you don't need the book of proverbs.

Simply transcribe said practical knowledge and Legit Wisdom out of proverbs, convert it into normal english and remove the 'Thou Shall' and other such anachronistic terms, and discuss the concept itself.

The need to discuss "The Book Of Proverbs" implies that you are going to make a claim to authority.
"It is written in here, ergo it is Practical knowledge and Legit Wisdom"

No.

Truth and Wisdom does not require anyone to ever say, "BECAUSE I SAID SO". Because if you are claiming something is 'correct' by pointing at where it was written down, it is just a variation of "BECAUSE I SAID SO" or "BECAUSE GOD SAYS SO" or "BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAID SO" or "BECAUSE FAUCI SAID SO" or "BECAUSE BIDEN SAYS SO" or... ad Infinitum.

I find the bible to be a very useful tool. When I am writing and have writer's block, I just flip it open to any page and I can usually find something to get the story rolling again while claiming to be all brainy because I'm making references to the bible. Revelations is just NEET. Do I believe in the supernatural? Well, being a cloud of Spite and Eyes, it might come across as hypocritical that I state, "no", but to be honest, I don't believe in magic.

And No, I don't want to get into a debate about it, not because you might convince me otherwise (I'd love that, BTW. I think a world with magic would be so much better then one without), but because it is far more likely I will crush your faith. Because I've done that. I'm good at it. I also REGRET doing it. I find most people who have faith are usually good people and are good people BECAUSE of their faith.

It has been my experience that people who have lost faith in more traditional religions don't become atheists. They become followers of Cults of one form or another. In fact, I would go so far as to say I am VERY DISAPPOINTED in my fellow atheists. Most of them become 'atheists' in name only, and instead embrace 'socialism' or some other sort of replacement for religion. Instead of pursing truth, they just come up with another list of 'the way i feel things work' and wind up even more nutty than they ever were as a bible thumper.

The Bible Thumper at least has a few thousand years of proven success, as far as managing society goes. When I talk to Atheists, Erisians, or any other so-called follower of truth, they rarely are concerned with actual truth. If you are someone who is concerned with Truth, over all, you go with the truth, even when it SUCKS. Even when it tells you something you hate.

The Discordians used to be quite fun, until they went woke. Then they became as Greyfaced as the people they claimed to be fighting. Comedy is about speaking truth to power, and quickly becomes the enemy of the intolerant. But they want to think they are the 'good guys', so other humorous movements become 'Facist' and "Full of Nazis'. You'd think Eris and Kek would work wonderfully together, but the truth is, the imaginary Religion of Discord is just as close minded as any bunch of fanatics, in fact, worse.

Christianity at least tries to push its followers to be kind.

But I'm wandering off topic.

My point is, I welcome discussion of any "practical knowledge and legit wisdom". However, reading this thread, I cannot help you but notice you have made several quotes, but... no discussion. I don't care for quotes. I find them dull. if you want to talk about the concept and what it MEANS, well, go right ahead.

But I don't think you want to do that. I mean, when I did my research into making a supercut of the various necronomicons floating about the internet, I found entire websites devoted to discussing every single LINE of Simon's Version of the Necronomicon. The Doctor Dee Version had a few web pages about it. The version where they constantly referenced HP Lovecraft's work, or the one where they actually dug up Babylonian Historical Data to try and connect the real world to these works of fiction was absolutely astounding.

What work have you done?

Where is your history of the quote you want to discuss? Where did it originate? Were there any other cultures who may have used this quote in the past? What was the original language it was written in? The 4th century saw a huge 'Rewriting' of the bible. Did the quote originally appear in any of the apocryphal texts? Did your quote exist before the King James version and if so, was it identical, or if not, what changed?

A SINGLE WORD CAN CHANGE EVERYTHING.

Originally the bible wasn't in english. Are there alternate versions of the quote in question? If we translate it to say, French or Spanish, then into English, how is it different?

Every word in the quote has meaning, but some might have multiple meanings. Words change over time, has the meaning changed over time?

Originally we had Werman, Woman, Human, and just MAN. Because Werman for male has fallen out of use, every time you see the word "Man" in any work that pre-dates the industrial revolution, it doesn't mean what most modern people think it means. We have to consider every time we see the world MAN who wrote it, WHEN it was written, WHERE it was written, and What LANGUAGE it was written in.

That. Is. Just. One. WORD.

So be honest with me:

Do you want to discuss a document over two thousand years old and actually do a deep dive into the thoughts, ideas, concepts, and memetic nature of that document?
Or are you just trying to preach at me about God?

Judging by how you have been handling the thread so far, I think it's the later. I could be wrong, but I really don't think you are as into the etymology of proverbs as I would be. I find the study of memetics to be an absolutely facinating subject and it is reflected in my stories. In fact, I would say memetics and etymology are CORE to all my stories, as my books are ultimately an exploration of concepts.

I don't think you are here to discuss concepts. I think you are here to discuss faith. If that is the case, please take that elsewhere as it serves little purpose here in a forum for, about, and to help writing/authors.

If I am wrong, then by all means, begin your etymological thesis about the "practical knowledge and legit wisdom" of proverbs.
One At A Time, Please.

I'm surprised this thread is still going.

And I moreso wanted to talk about the book of proverbs to other Christians. Like just to discuss about it in somewhat uncertain terms.
And talking about faith is always on my agenda.

I highly doubt you could get me to stop believing in christ though.

Also your right, etymology was not what I had in mind when posting this, but I would gladly like to learn more about it.

(Magic is not real. The Bible never says so.)

 

[Tremaglif]

The religion of the Aztecs encouraged priests to cut the hearts of innocents, so I dislike it. I could go further, but I don't want to be banned for breaking rules.

Sometimes I love Aztecs because it has no significant number of believers in this world. Which means it's a guarantee of 99,99% that I'll not be lynched if I said I dislike it. I suppose I want to see the religions I dislike to also get Aztecs'ed.

To not OOT from the thread, I looked up Book of Proverbs, here the verse I like:

Proverbs 31:8 -
Open your mouth for those with no voice,

for the cause of all the dispossessed.

I'm an atheist, so most of the words related to God in Proverbs easily went over my head. Also, I must confess I have done not enough of helping other people, but I see the importance of this verse. Especially love the "for those with no voice," bit. Because it's applicable more than only about the poor and needy.

In this world, I see so many people being deprived of their rights just because of they're only being themselves. Of course, every time we say 'people should be free to do whatever they want', then we'll always get something with: 'then are you saying murderers should be free to murder everyone else?', etc. I adhere solely to this maxim: "Anything, anyone, that doesn't harm other deserve to be allowed." No matter if your religion say no, or if your religion told you to kill people like me, that doesn't matter. If I got dick and I liked to eat(not literally) dick, doesn't mean I deserve to be thrown out of a tall building. Just because I believe in some obscure denomination, doesn't mean you're allowed to discriminate me, because oh, your so called majority do the majority wants. The logic is right, because I am a believer of democracy myself, but everything must be screened through my maxim first.

You see, those with no voice, are being unjustly suppressed by people just because their traditions and religions say so. Some people would disagree with me about who deserve to be called as 'those with no voice'. Like, my examples paragraph above, there are not few who believe those people are so sick and misguided, that it's in their right to suppress those voices, after all, if their wicked practices were allowed, then the believers would become misguided. This is what's generally known as slippery slope. I don't need to explain this, because I consider some significant religions in the earth believe in The Slippery Slope God, so of course those believers would not just understand it, they practice it.

All the sins committed from humans' attempts to create a just world out of an ideology, they have done so much, many those become voiceless because of them. They are allowed to increase the amount of the voiceless just because it's their tradition or belief. You see, many people want freedom to oppress other, because it's a necessary tool to create an ideal world according to their religion/ideology. But we shouldn't do that. Our freedom, it's actually, and always, more than that. If you see someone joy, even if your elder/god say it's wrong, consider what they have done to achieve that joy. Did they hurt you? Did they hurt your elder/god's feeling? If the latter, let them. If your religion/ideology said it's morally wrong to let them do that, then I'm sorry, the proverb has become "close the mouths of those with voices."

As in Gus Fring meme, "You use your freedom to oppress other, I use my freedom to stop you from oppressing other, we're not the same."

No, legalizing same-sex marriage or letting people adhere to their obscure denomination doesn't oppress you. What did they do? Fucking stop you from doing your holy hetero sex? Disturbing you from practicing your most right religion in the whole world?

This is why "Open your mouth for those with no voice," will stay relevant no matter what.

To end my gibberish: I love Aztecs. Why? Because I dislike it.

 

[melchi]

Originally the bible wasn't in english. Are there alternate versions of the quote in question? If we translate it to say, French or Spanish, then into English, how is it different?

Every word in the quote has meaning, but some might have multiple meanings. Words change over time, has the meaning changed over time?

Originally we had Werman, Woman, Human, and just MAN. Because Werman for male has fallen out of use, every time you see the word "Man" in any work that pre-dates the industrial revolution, it doesn't mean what most modern people think it means. We have to consider every time we see the world MAN who wrote it, WHEN it was written, WHERE it was written, and What LANGUAGE it was written in.

That. Is. Just. One. WORD.

So be honest with me:

Do you want to discuss a document over two thousand years old and actually do a deep dive into the thoughts, ideas, concepts, and memetic nature of that document?
Or are you just trying to preach at me about God?

Judging by how you have been handling the thread so far, I think it's the later. I could be wrong, but I really don't think you are as into the etymology of proverbs as I would be. I find the study of memetics to be an absolutely facinating subject and it is reflected in my stories. In fact, I would say memetics and etymology are CORE to all my stories, as my books are ultimately an exploration of concepts.

I don't think you are here to discuss concepts. I think you are here to discuss faith. If that is the case, please take that elsewhere as it serves little purpose here in a forum for, about, and to help writing/authors.

If I am wrong, then by all means, begin your etymological thesis about the "practical knowledge and legit wisdom" of proverbs.
One At A Time, Please.

One has to be an ancient language scholar to really get into the nitty gritty of 2000+ year old texts. Proverbs for example is written in ancient Hebrew. Some things don't translate well to English. Like for example, I think in greek they have something called a 'perfect tense' which I have heard explained a few times but don't really get it.

There are also some poetry formats in the Bible that an english speaker wouldn't notice unless someone pointed it out to them. As with all writings understanding the culture of the original audience is important for comprehention.

 

[T.K._Paradox]

Yep another classic Scribble Hub thread, people either joking, actually responding to the thread, or writing condescending messages approximately the length of a Harry Potter book.

As to address the thread myself I believe their is great wisdom written within Proverbs, unfortunately I can't really go into further detail because of the rules set out by Tony.

And as to address Nekroz himself, I admire your will. And am genuinely surprised you haven't been sent to the shadow realm yet, by the mods.

 

[Nekroz]

Yep another classic Scribble Hub thread, people either joking, actually responding to the thread, or writing condescending messages approximately the length of a Harry Potter book.

As to address the thread myself I believe their is great wisdom written within Proverbs, unfortunately I can't really go into further detail because of the rules set out by Tony.

And as to address Nekroz himself, I admire your will. And am genuinely surprised you haven't been sent to the shadow realm yet, by the mods.

I know right! I was honestly expecting to get banned at this point.

Sometimes I love Aztecs because it has no significant number of believers in this world. Which means it's a guarantee of 99,99% that I'll not be lynched if I said I dislike it. I suppose I want to see the religions I dislike to also get Aztecs'ed.

To not OOT from the thread, I looked up Book of Proverbs, here the verse I like:

I'm an atheist, so most of the words related to God in Proverbs easily went over my head. Also, I must confess I have done not enough of helping other people, but I see the importance of this verse. Especially love the "for those with no voice," bit. Because it's applicable more than only about the poor and needy.

In this world, I see so many people being deprived of their rights just because of they're only being themselves. Of course, every time we say 'people should be free to do whatever they want', then we'll always get something with: 'then are you saying murderers should be free to murder everyone else?', etc. I adhere solely to this maxim: "Anything, anyone, that doesn't harm other deserve to be allowed." No matter if your religion say no, or if your religion told you to kill people like me, that doesn't matter. If I got dick and I liked to eat(not literally) dick, doesn't mean I deserve to be thrown out of a tall building. Just because I believe in some obscure denomination, doesn't mean you're allowed to discriminate me, because oh, your so called majority do the majority wants. The logic is right, because I am a believer of democracy myself, but everything must be screened through my maxim first.

You see, those with no voice, are being unjustly suppressed by people just because their traditions and religions say so. Some people would disagree with me about who deserve to be called as 'those with no voice'. Like, my examples paragraph above, there are not few who believe those people are so sick and misguided, that it's in their right to suppress those voices, after all, if their wicked practices were allowed, then the believers would become misguided. This is what's generally known as slippery slope. I don't need to explain this, because I consider some significant religions in the earth believe in The Slippery Slope God, so of course those believers would not just understand it, they practice it.

All the sins committed from humans' attempts to create a just world out of an ideology, they have done so much, many those become voiceless because of them. They are allowed to increase the amount of the voiceless just because it's their tradition or belief. You see, many people want freedom to oppress other, because it's a necessary tool to create an ideal world according to their religion/ideology. But we shouldn't do that. Our freedom, it's actually, and always, more than that. If you see someone joy, even if your elder/god say it's wrong, consider what they have done to achieve that joy. Did they hurt you? Did they hurt your elder/god's feeling? If the latter, let them. If your religion/ideology said it's morally wrong to let them do that, then I'm sorry, the proverb has become "close the mouths of those with voices."

As in Gus Fring meme, "You use your freedom to oppress other, I use my freedom to stop you from oppressing other, we're not the same."

No, legalizing same-sex marriage or letting people adhere to their obscure denomination doesn't oppress you. What did they do? Fucking stop you from doing your holy hetero sex? Disturbing you from practicing your most right religion in the whole world?

This is why "Open your mouth for those with no voice," will stay relevant no matter what.

To end my gibberish: I love Aztecs. Why? Because I dislike it.

I'm going to vaguely reply to your post. (It's kinda big and I'm not going to comprehensively respond to all of it.)

But, yeah, Christians aren't supposed to go around condemning people. Jesus didn't come to condemn the world but to save it. (Not the actual planet.) That's why the gospel is called the good news. That's why it's written that we should always rejoice. Whether you believe or not, God intended for Christians to make the lives of people around them brighter.

So, whoever you are random internet person, Hi I'd like to ask how are you doing and is there anything I could help you with. (As long as it within the bounds of my ability to do so.)

 

[Deleted member 54065]

Well, I'm not going to condemn you, nor stop you from going around to those who want to hear you. But as a non-proselytizing Christian, I'd rather show my 'Christianity' thru my actions than my words. And clearly, going by the direct approach (like outright sharing it) would only invite ridicule (many here are atheists, some Buddhist and Muslims), and is counter-productive.

Yes, I'm aware of Christians welcoming persecutions for their faith and beliefs, but, just be mindful of the Forum rules (rule 11).

Other than those, we're all welcome to post stuff here.

 

[Nekroz]

Well, I'm not going to condemn you, nor stop you from going around to those who want to hear you. But as a non-proselytizing Christian, I'd rather show my 'Christianity' thru my actions than my words. And clearly, going by the direct approach (like outright sharing it) would only invite ridicule (many here are atheists, some Buddhist and Muslims), and is counter-productive.

Yes, I'm aware of Christians welcoming persecutions for their faith and beliefs, but, just be mindful of the Forum rules (rule 11).
View attachment 16466

Other than those, we're all welcome to post stuff here.

Proverbs: 18:12 Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.
James: 3:5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!

 

[Kidd_Wadsworth]

Okay, if religion was allowed...can I suggest that we each promote our work by making fun of some well known public figure. I'm think Trump, Musk, the woman who was PM for like 3 days in the UK. Really, there are so many good choices these days. Here, I'll start...

Hey Donald, wanna trade? I'll get invested by the box-toting DOJ and you can be hunted by a dragon.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

No, legalizing same-sex marriage or letting people adhere to their obscure denomination doesn't oppress you. What did they do? Fucking stop you from doing your holy hetero sex? Disturbing you from practicing your most right religion in the whole world?

The main fear is instances like the Colorado baker and being sued perpetually for refusing to bake a cake.

The idea that government can dictate what religion is okay and what can be sued for “bigotry” is the main fear of legalizing same sex marriage and well, it’s happened already.

Granted there are religious extremists, there are also LGBTQ extremists. Same thing with forcing specific medical professionals to do “medical procedures” that go against their religion.

For the most part though, I agree people should have freedom to do whatever they want so long as they don’t harm others.

 

[ElijahRyne]

The main fear is instances like the Colorado baker and being sued perpetually for refusing to bake a cake.

The idea that government can dictate what religion is okay and what can be sued for “bigotry” is the main fear of legalizing same sex marriage and well, it’s happened already.

Granted there are religious extremists, there are also LGBTQ extremists. Same thing with forcing specific medical professionals to do “medical procedures” that go against their religion.

For the most part though, I agree people should have freedom to do whatever they want so long as they don’t harm others.

The main issue is that some people think being asked to do something is the same as being forced to. As well as thinking that they are being ’killed in the streets’ by a tyrannical government, when an areligious government does something said religion doesn’t agree with. Although, I doubt most people like that actually know that they are overreacting, mostly because 3rd party actors have been agitating them for personal gain. I mean, one of the best points in time to make a profit is when exploiting someone when they feel backed in the corner. So the fact that things like this happen is typical.
Mostly, I am just surprised that people don’t read their religious book, when they exist, and rely on other people to tell them what it says and what that passage means. No matter the context, I am pretty sure that that is a conflict of interest, that will inevitably be exploited for personal gain.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

The main issue is that some people think being asked to do something is the same as being forced to. As well as thinking that they are being ’killed in the streets’ by a tyrannical government, when an areligious government does something said religion doesn’t agree with.

Non-religious people also do that. It’s just human nature to overreact.

 

[ElijahRyne]

Non-religious people also do that. It’s just human nature to overreact.

Exactly, but typically it is harder to convince them. Mostly because it is easy for 3rd parties have access to the beliefs of religious groups, while it is hard to find a unified set of beliefs for a group that doesn’t have them. What isn’t hard though, is a 3rd party convincing non-religious people that the acts of violence that were agitated by said 3rd party will eventually be targeted towards them. I believe the same can be said for those who are extremely loyal to a political party, it is easy for 3rd parties to exploit them for personal gain because they know what said party believes.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

Exactly, but typically it is harder to convince them. Mostly because it is easy for 3rd parties have access to the beliefs of religious groups, while it is hard to find a unified set of beliefs for a group that doesn’t have them. What isn’t hard though, is a 3rd party convincing non-religious people that the acts of violence that were agitated by said 3rd party will eventually be targeted towards them. I believe the same can be said for those who are extremely loyal to a political party, it is easy for 3rd parties to exploit them for personal gain because they know what said party believes.

I kind of see political parties as the modern religions to be honest. -_- Hate that it’s come to this but there are so many political fanatics.

In the past it was religious wars, today it’s political war.

 

[ElijahRyne]

I kind of see political parties as the modern religions to be honest. -_- Hate that it’s come to this but there are so many political fanatics.

In the past it was religious wars, today it’s political war.

I somewhat agree, although I would not call it a modern religion. In most, if not all, religions you have a sense of community, which can be missing from political movements. As well as the fact that some political movements are fundamentally against telling those who follow them what they must do. Nevertheless, fanatics will be fanatics, and fanatics are good at convincing ordinary believers to follow and become more fanatic.

It is easy for a political party to co-opt a religion and vise versa, in those cases I will call those parties a new religion.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

I somewhat agree, although I would not call it a modern religion. In most, if not all, religions you have a sense of community, which can be missing from political movements. As well as the fact that some political movements are fundamentally against telling those who follow them what they must do. Nevertheless, fanatics will be fanatics, and fanatics are good at convincing ordinary believers to follow and become more fanatic.

It is easy for a political party to co-opt a religion and vise versa, in those cases I will call those parties a new religion.

From what I’ve read about Catholic and Papel societies in the past I’m not sure many of them had a sense of community beyond the neighborhoods or villages they lived in.

These days however, going to a political rally is kind of a religious event. There are parallel economies of competing business that support one side or the other (although more lopsided due to large corporations going in one direction) and increasingly they are using the government to shut up those who believe or support differently.

 

[ElijahRyne]

From what I’ve read about Catholic and Papel societies in the past I’m not sure many of them had a sense of community beyond the neighborhoods or villages they lived in.

These days however, going to a political rally is kind of a religious event. There are parallel economies of competing business that support one side or the other (although more lopsided due to large corporations going in one direction) and increasingly they are using the government to shut up those who believe or support differently.

To an extent, but how often do you go to a rally compared to church. Although, I do agree though that most parties in the world are funded by corporations, in the case of the USA, though, the same corporations fund both major parties. While followers of each party fund the said parallel economies.

As for historical Catholic societies, the alienation of believers was probably the fuel that started the Protestant Reformation.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

To an extent, but how often do you go to a rally compared to church. Although, I do agree though that most parties in the world are funded by corporations, in the case of the USA, though, the same corporations fund both major parties. While followers of each party fund the said parallel economies.

As for historical Catholic societies, the alienation of believers was probably the fuel that started the Protestant Reformation.

Depends on the season, but nowadays most are attended too virtually. And it happens quite often.

I'll have to disagree about the corporations funding both major parties in the USA. While there are funds going to both, the split up of donations by those who work at the corporation usually make it obvious which side they support and which messages they push. One side is definitely more religious than the other at this point (although both sides do have their fanatics).

Regardless, there's no winning for the common person. Most of what takes place is beyond what any of us individually can do anything about unless we are rich enough to buy one of those large corporations and start exposing everything, but even then there are too many players who will work against it to make sure their fanatical followers won't believe what's revealed.

Hence why I see modern politics as sort of the new developing inquisition.