Yes, congratulations to Ms Manfredi for passing whatever test she had to do.
They must have been very tricky tests as I never realised just how many versions there are of the good book, otherwise known as the one true bible, to choose from.
I put Manfredi’s quotes from Hebrews into Google to check them out and there are dozens of versions all with slightly different translations of the “original” words written 2000 years ago.
Manfredi’s “Let mutual love continue” becomes “Let love of the brethren continue”, “Keep on loving each other as brothers and sisters” or “Let love of your fellow believers continue” in just three other offerings. Not quite the same all humanity encompassing words she uses.
It must be bad enough trying to make sense of some of the nonsense in just the one version that your particular church says you should use without having to decide which one you like best out of all the others.
That’s a brilliant point, Paul. I’ve just had a quick look myself, and I would say that all except one (very modern) translation contains the word “brothers”. It’s also worth noting that it is extracted from the Letter to the Hebrews, which (like all the New Testament letters) is written from one extremely small sect to members of that same sect in some other place.
It would seem abundantly clear that the meaning of this passage is: that mutual support within the fledgling Christian community should be maintained. At the time these letters were written, Christianity was a persecuted sect, largely underground. Offering each other mutual support is a huge part of maintaining sanity under such circumstances, but it implies nothing outside of that sect. The same principle would apply between two nihilist cells, or between two terrorist groups. I am sure that, for example, the PLO and the Red Army Faction had a similar stance.
The sheer dishonesty of this sort of argument should be pointed out. Manfredi’s opinion is 100% her own, but she can only support it by twisting the words of the bible into something it clearly never meant.
All too true (and Steve’s insightful comments as well). It is astonishing that the books of the New Testament are among the most translated and reproduced of all time, yet there is no clear consensus about who wrote them, when or where, or even why. Hebrews may well be one of the earlier ones, perhaps around 60CE, at least 15 (and maybe as much as 70) years earlier than the first Gospel. The earliest NT manuscripts are fragments from the late second century, and even they differ from the stuff that’s in today’s Bibles. And that’s before we get into the many varying translations
The (eventually) Rev Jane’s theme of forgiveness is a favourite of Christian preachers. It enables them to take the moral high ground and tell the rest of us what attitude we ought to take. I must say that if I was a Ukrainian whose family had been tortured and killed by Putin’s orcs I would find it pretty hard either to forget or to forgive.
Platitude of the Day 
Yes, congratulations to Ms Manfredi for passing whatever test she had to do.
They must have been very tricky tests as I never realised just how many versions there are of the good book, otherwise known as the one true bible, to choose from.
I put Manfredi’s quotes from Hebrews into Google to check them out and there are dozens of versions all with slightly different translations of the “original” words written 2000 years ago.
Manfredi’s “Let mutual love continue” becomes “Let love of the brethren continue”, “Keep on loving each other as brothers and sisters” or “Let love of your fellow believers continue” in just three other offerings. Not quite the same all humanity encompassing words she uses.
It must be bad enough trying to make sense of some of the nonsense in just the one version that your particular church says you should use without having to decide which one you like best out of all the others.
LikeLike
That’s a brilliant point, Paul. I’ve just had a quick look myself, and I would say that all except one (very modern) translation contains the word “brothers”. It’s also worth noting that it is extracted from the Letter to the Hebrews, which (like all the New Testament letters) is written from one extremely small sect to members of that same sect in some other place.
It would seem abundantly clear that the meaning of this passage is: that mutual support within the fledgling Christian community should be maintained. At the time these letters were written, Christianity was a persecuted sect, largely underground. Offering each other mutual support is a huge part of maintaining sanity under such circumstances, but it implies nothing outside of that sect. The same principle would apply between two nihilist cells, or between two terrorist groups. I am sure that, for example, the PLO and the Red Army Faction had a similar stance.
The sheer dishonesty of this sort of argument should be pointed out. Manfredi’s opinion is 100% her own, but she can only support it by twisting the words of the bible into something it clearly never meant.
LikeLike
All too true (and Steve’s insightful comments as well). It is astonishing that the books of the New Testament are among the most translated and reproduced of all time, yet there is no clear consensus about who wrote them, when or where, or even why. Hebrews may well be one of the earlier ones, perhaps around 60CE, at least 15 (and maybe as much as 70) years earlier than the first Gospel. The earliest NT manuscripts are fragments from the late second century, and even they differ from the stuff that’s in today’s Bibles. And that’s before we get into the many varying translations
The (eventually) Rev Jane’s theme of forgiveness is a favourite of Christian preachers. It enables them to take the moral high ground and tell the rest of us what attitude we ought to take. I must say that if I was a Ukrainian whose family had been tortured and killed by Putin’s orcs I would find it pretty hard either to forget or to forgive.
LikeLike