Okay, is it just me or is every major historical figure either considered gay or on drugs the time he was alive? I mean I've recently heard from somebody that Hitler was on heroine. Or King James was homosexual, does that mean the bible has no credibility anymore? Why does it matter? Are we going to take away all African American rights just because Martin Luther King enjoyed puffing it once in a while? I think we should leave history how it is and not try to speculate on these kinds of things.
... why would King James being homosexual be a reason to take away the credibility of the King James version of the Bible?
Or, indeed, any version based on it?
Why on earth should the sexual inclinations of the financial backer of a particular version bear any relation to the quality of the output of a group of translators?
In fact, even if he was personally translating the bible, why should his sexual inclinations bear any relation to the eventual output?
You answer me that, and I'll see if I can answer your questions.
Quote from: Rakala on March 22, 2008, 11:53:07 AM
Okay, is it just me or is every major historical figure either considered gay or on drugs the time he was alive? I mean I've recently heard from somebody that Hitler was on heroine. Or King James was homosexual, does that mean the bible has no credibility anymore? Why does it matter? Are we going to take away all African American rights just because Martin Luther King enjoyed puffing it once in a while? I think we should leave history how it is and not try to speculate on these kinds of things.
eh? wha?
someone is telling you stories, seriously. When someone makes a ridiculous statement like that, ask tehm for a source, because they're making it up, or thier source is. If they can show you a credible source(ie: papers by real historians) then there's a possibility that it's true.
And the bible is just as credible as it's always been. (note that the King James Bible is generally considered one of the least accurate translations, though more recent editions are suppposed to have gotten better about accuracy.)
Quote from: Reese Tora on March 22, 2008, 01:56:03 PM
And the bible is just as credible as it's always been.
Ahh, a discussion for another day...
i think the point is more that anyone deserving to be remembered by history was weird or unusual enough for those around them to think they were a freakjob- if they werent, we would not remember them
So why would you feel so threatend by the theroy that a few figures of note might not have been as shiney as you thought?
A king could have many lovers in his day, the fact that some may have taken a man or two to bed shouldn't seem that odd.
It's simply a fact of chance that looking through all the historical figures in the world it's a fact that some would happen to be gay, or have used drugs or done something else that might have been seen as unusual.
sociatial presures of the time, may have forced them to hide it, and the sociatal presures of the historieans would have caused them to sweep such evidance under the rug in favor of affirming the established veiw of a subject.
Rich people in slave-owning times owned slaves :erk
My only problem with these alterations to historical figures is that many times the so-called evidence is extremely sketchy and doesn't usually hold up upon analysis. It's more often useless conjecture by people who'd like to have a historical figure to hold up as a bastion for their cause.
For me to believe it, you'd better be able to prove it.
Quote from: Alondro on March 23, 2008, 03:50:11 PM
My only problem with these alterations to historical figures is that many times the so-called evidence is extremely sketchy and doesn't usually hold up upon analysis. It's more often useless conjecture by people who'd like to have a historical figure to hold up as a bastion for their cause.
For me to believe it, you'd better be able to prove it.
What your asking for isn't possible
Since presures of the day would have forced these sort of things behind the scenes rarely would they risk having anything that could be concrete proof thet they flaunted social mores just lieing around. However some things that have been found while they could be considered flimsy tend to show these historical people in a new light.
and not every one who makes these sort of claims has any sort of agenda in mind
How many engineers or inventors who accomplished incredible things have turned out to be closet homosexuals? The guy who cracked the Enigma cypher in WW2 comes to mind.
Personally, I'd say if it turns out King James was gay, that just increases the validity of his translation. As for my stance on homosexuality itself... I'll get demonized if I voice it.(By both sides, actually.)
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on March 22, 2008, 01:25:02 PM
Why on earth should the sexual inclinations of the financial backer of a particular version bear any relation to the quality of the output of a group of translators?
Playing the devil's advocate, here, but he could have leaned on the translators to omit any strong views against homosexuality. Threats to pull funding, that sort of thing.
Quote from: Reese Tora on March 22, 2008, 01:56:03 PM
And the bible is just as credible as it's always been.
Tactfully said, sir! Couldn't have put it better myself.
Again, I will mention that following that train of thought too far would lead the discussion down a path I don't think we need on this forum. Religion topics tend to get... mean, and we don't want that, no do we. ;)
Quote from: Rakala on March 22, 2008, 11:53:07 AM
I mean I've recently heard from somebody that Hitler was on heroine.
Actually, it was found that Hitler was on a whole cocktail of drugs... all prescribed by his personal physician.
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on March 24, 2008, 10:02:58 AM
Quote from: Rakala on March 22, 2008, 11:53:07 AM
I mean I've recently heard from somebody that Hitler was on heroine.
Actually, it was found that Hitler was on a whole cocktail of drugs... all prescribed by his personal physician.
Who from what I've heard was a bit of a nut job... He had one drug he proscribed hitler that he made from the fecese of hungarian peasents
That's a good one. Really clears the sinuses.
Quote from: thegayhare on March 24, 2008, 11:28:18 AM
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on March 24, 2008, 10:02:58 AM
Quote from: Rakala on March 22, 2008, 11:53:07 AM
I mean I've recently heard from somebody that Hitler was on heroine.
Actually, it was found that Hitler was on a whole cocktail of drugs... all prescribed by his personal physician.
Who from what I've heard was a bit of a nut job... He had one drug he proscribed hitler that he made from the fecese of hungarian peasents
Which would be considered normal in the Middle Ages... :B
Seriously, look up some of the crap they gave people... some of it literally WAS crap! :yuck
PS: My religion is teh awesomest, cuz I said so. :P
Quote from: thegayhare on March 23, 2008, 04:43:32 PM
Quote from: Alondro on March 23, 2008, 03:50:11 PM
My only problem with these alterations to historical figures is that many times the so-called evidence is extremely sketchy and doesn't usually hold up upon analysis. It's more often useless conjecture by people who'd like to have a historical figure to hold up as a bastion for their cause.
For me to believe it, you'd better be able to prove it.
What your asking for isn't possible
Since presures of the day would have forced these sort of things behind the scenes rarely would they risk having anything that could be concrete proof thet they flaunted social mores just lieing around. However some things that have been found while they could be considered flimsy tend to show these historical people in a new light.
and not every one who makes these sort of claims has any sort of agenda in mind
So basically we should believe proofs without evidence because there is no evidence? I don't understand.
Quote from: Alondro on March 24, 2008, 04:43:33 PM
Quote from: thegayhare on March 24, 2008, 11:28:18 AM
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on March 24, 2008, 10:02:58 AM
Quote from: Rakala on March 22, 2008, 11:53:07 AM
I mean I've recently heard from somebody that Hitler was on heroine.
Actually, it was found that Hitler was on a whole cocktail of drugs... all prescribed by his personal physician.
Who from what I've heard was a bit of a nut job... He had one drug he proscribed hitler that he made from the fecese of hungarian peasents
Which would be considered normal in the Middle Ages... :B
Seriously, look up some of the crap they gave people... some of it literally WAS crap! :yuck
PS: My religion is teh awesomest, cuz I said so. :P
Wait... so now we're considering the 40's to be the middle ages?
time flies
Arg, I was saying that it was like the crazy stuff they used to prescribe in the Middle Ages. :P
But yes, the 1940's are the new Middle Ages. Anything older than me is ancient. :B
And it's GOOD to believe things without any proof! How else would "The Da Vinci Code" become popular? ;)
Quote from: BillBuckner on March 24, 2008, 04:44:46 PM
So basically we should believe proofs without evidence because there is no evidence? I don't understand.
No I'm saying don't expect to find some sort of concreate proof, It's not like the tomas jefferson fathering a child with a slave that could be proven geneticly.
Circumstantal evidance of the times though can shed light on some things even though they won't be irrufutable.
The rumors of Lincoln come from his relationship with Joshua Speed (they shared a bed for a number of years), his dislike of women (dispite the fact that he did get married it was well known at the time it wasn't a happy marriage) and the officer who shared his tent and cot through the cival war, Recently it's been said that Joshua Speed's recently discovered journal affirms there relation ship. But the journal has never been verrified and It should be I think.
Also the private letters of James Buchanon to his long time compainion when the other was apionted ambassidor, seem to hint at a romantic relationship.
Still I know this isn't irrifutable proof but it shouldn't be simply disregarded as a group with an agenda trying to rewrite history
If there's one thing that living in England proved to me it's that history is full of queens.
I thought everyone in England was teh gey.
You know, after the Beatles broke up they had to find something else to get into... like each other... :stupid
England is one unpleasant country. Awful people.
Quote from: rabid_fox on March 31, 2008, 10:44:19 PM
England is one unpleasant country. Awful people.
With bad teeth...
Except Tapewolf. he's cool cuz he's one of us!
One of us! One of us...
Woozle waazle woozle wazzle...
One of us! One of us!
Quote from: rabid_fox on March 31, 2008, 10:44:19 PM
England is one unpleasant country. Awful people.
All the cool people were arrested and sent to Australia. :V
Quote from: rabid_fox on March 31, 2008, 10:44:19 PM
England is one unpleasant country. Awful people.
I'd have to agree. I've certainly found it mostly so.
On the other hand, there's a heck of a lot of people here from elsewhere...
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parcel_of_Rogues)