Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bible API

bible-api.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 308 posts

Re: Bible API

#291

Post by hajile »

cheaprentalyeti wrote: post #165
skissane wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean, I agree it's dumb. I just don't see why it's not "Christian". Christians are what Christians do. But American evangelical Protestants are a small minority of global Christianity. Catholics and Orthodox take a different approach, one which emphasises the binding role of church Tradition in interpreting the Bible, an idea which Protestants reject.

On the one hand, I think the Catholic approach is more correct than the Protestant one, but I think if the papacy hadn't been so authoritarian during the MIddle Ages and the period leading up to the Reformation that the Protestants wouldn't have felt the need to be able to argue scripture inch by inch by inch.

The real debate stems from information control. The Catholic church forbade the translation of the Bible from Latin into the local language (contrary to popular opinion, the majority of people could read even though spelling was not standardized). What happens when those people finally get a copy of the Bible based on the textus receptus and it has Jesus saying the Scripture is immutable and more important than tradition? What happens when they see clear and obvious contradictions between what He said and what their church was doing?

When Luther nailed the famous arguments on the church door (in common German so everyone could read them), he wasn't wanting to start up a new church. He was just pointing out the ridiculousness of buying forgiveness and the insane corruption and tradition over Scripture that had caused it. Instead of fixing the problems, the Catholic church doubled down and claimed the right to supersede even Jesus Himself. When they couldn't justify with words, they went straight to force.

Also keep in mind that the Catholic church was a political machine first and foremost. The Jesuit order in particular was so political that countries actually pushed the Pope so hard he issued Dominus ac Redemptor to completely suppress the entire order. It was rescinded 41 years later, but due to the internal political power of the Jesuit General, the cardinals refused to elect a Jesuit pope. Politically, the election of the first Jesuit pope in 2013 (199 years after the suppression was rescinded) hallmarked a very large political victory and unification of the Catholic church.

With that in mind, the Protestant Reformation, while primarily religious, was also political in nature.

Re: Bible API

#292

Post by tsegratis »

ars wrote: post #259
bjourne wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I understand what you mean? Jesus was known as a rabbi and well-versed in the Scriptures. I don't think he was misconstruing the text he was citing. Here he is contrasting his view of justice ("turn the other cheek") to the legal norms of the time under which feuds and exacting revenge were commonplace. My main point is that Jesus was probably not the first one to use this form of argumentation. He likely im…

The meaning for the "eye for an eye" verse is well known, it's talking about proportionality in justice. It's a pretty strange choice to use when talking about "turn the other cheek". > to the legal norms of the time under which feuds and exacting revenge were commonplace. But that's exactly what "eye for an eye" attempts to stop. It's instructing people to seek appropriate justice, and not just attack people who hur…

Dear lovely @ars, thankyou for your comment. I agree it is strange. Context:

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.

--

So I think Jesus is agreeing with your comments. Interestingly verse quotations are prefaced with something like "It is written". Yet here 'hate your enemy' is not a biblical verse, and it is prefaced with "You have heard that it was said" -- Jesus was speaking to a crowd here, and contrasting what they had heard, with what his message

One of the implications is he is saying proportionality of justice is a start, but is not nearly enough. For instance, he ends:

If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect

--

> But they only spoke this way to other Rabbis

He extremely strongly disagreed with the Rabbis. See Matthew 5 for context

Re: Bible API

#293

Post by hajile »

taborj wrote: post #289
tekknik wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyrights didn’t exist when most were written (not many people use NIV versions) so what are you on about?

> (not many people use NIV versions) [citation needed] NIV is always on the list of most popular bible versions, and is in heavy usage. KJV is by far the most popular, but NIV is still very popular.

I'd also add that the very popular New King James Version (NKJV) is both copyrighted and uses different source material from the KJV which means that differences in wording are not just old to new English, but also differences in meaning.

Re: Bible API

#294

Post by zornado »

Protip: Add Cloudflare (CDN) to provide caching and https for the api. Makes it faster, reduces traffic on the endpoints, and makes them secure.

Also try to host it as a lambda function.

Re: Bible API

#295

Post by taborj »

hajile wrote: post #293
taborj wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (not many people use NIV versions) [citation needed] NIV is always on the list of most popular bible versions, and is in heavy usage. KJV is by far the most popular, but NIV is still very popular.

I'd also add that the very popular New King James Version (NKJV) is both copyrighted and uses different source material from the KJV which means that differences in wording are not just old to new English, but also differences in meaning.

Good point, and I didn't know that about NKJV. Very interesting.

Re: Bible API

#296

Post by hajile »

wcarey wrote: post #74
sb057 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem (which Shakespeare also has[1]) is that there are numerous versions of the texts in their original languages, with no particularly definitive or even consistent editions of the Old Testament in Hebrew or the New Testament in Greek AFAIK. Not to mention, the original Mosaic writings have been completely lost to time, having been written in Ugaritic and not Hebrew. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_te…

The gold standard for the Greek text of the New Testament is the critical edition ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novum_Testamentum_Graece ) published by Nestle-Aland.

Gold Standard? Hardly. It is barely more than a regurgitation of the older Wescott-Horte manuscript.

They decided to use the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, and Codex Alexandrinus. These are of very questionable origin and the presence of forgeries like Tobit in the Siniaticus throw them into serious doubt (and that's before looking at the poor quality of the copy, erasures/replacements, etc).

Another point of contention is the dating. In the 3rd and 4th centuries, the Church of Rome was at open war with other Christian factions over both doctrine and the Bishop of Rome's desire to coalesce political power. They seem to support the Bishop of Rome's claim to power rather well (as well as supporting their side of the doctrinal dispute).

While they may be the oldest Bibles with that much intact, they are hardly the oldest manuscript in general and the Textus Receptus seems to agree much better with the body of work (something like 95+% of all found texts agree with the Textus Receptus). These works were known and rejected by Protestant translators because of their dubious origin and low quality.

I agree with holding it as a translation of interest, but it is hardly a gold standard of anything.

Re: Bible API

#297

Post by gchamonlive »

tekknik wrote: post #282
gchamonlive wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could make a religion out of this

You do realize you’re disrespecting an entire class of people right? Or let me guess, it’s acceptable because you don’t agree with their beliefs right?

First, stop projecting.

Second, I am not disrespecting anyone. There is no reference to any particular religion so I don't see how I am offending this class of people.

Third, I should be free to create any system of belief I want, if that somehow makes me feel like I am reconnecting to a higher power. If I feel like creating a religion based on machine generated quotes learned from scriptures, what is the problem with that?

Re: Bible API

#298

Post by TomMarius »

memling wrote: post #287
jacquesm wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, let's take those stone tablets that Mozes brought down from the mountain. What do you think are the chances they would have made it as far as they did if he said: "look guys, here is some stuff I chiseled into a bunch of tablets while I was up on the mountain" vs "this is the word of god"? It's an appeal to authority if there ever was one and by placing the authority in a spot where it can not be directly queri…

> Well, let's take those stone tablets that Mozes brought down from the mountain. Yeah, that's one of those obvious examples I was thinking of before, but upon reflection I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense to view this as a link in the evolution of ethics and morality into religion. No one is going to follow a ceremonial law as intricate as the one in the Torah unless they already believe in a god or gods.[1] The u…

I thought the scientific consensus is that Moses is most probably a legendary figure

Re: Bible API

#299

Post by Jaruzel »

taborj wrote: post #290
Jaruzel wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wondered the same thing. Surely a useful API is for data that changes, and the recipient doesn't want to manage the content themselves? An API for searching static data seems only useful as a learning exercise.

Or if said static data is a huge data set and unwieldy to maintain. Or if that data is copyrighted, but allows free usage of small selections.

Both valid points. Thanks!

Re: Bible API

#300

Post by tekknik »

gchamonlive wrote: post #297
tekknik wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize you’re disrespecting an entire class of people right? Or let me guess, it’s acceptable because you don’t agree with their beliefs right?

First, stop projecting. Second, I am not disrespecting anyone. There is no reference to any particular religion so I don't see how I am offending this class of people. Third, I should be free to create any system of belief I want, if that somehow makes me feel like I am reconnecting to a higher power. If I feel like creating a religion based on machine generated quotes learned from scriptures, what is the problem wit…

You don’t get to say when you’re offending people, others do. I’m religious and you have offended me.

Create whatever you want but if you’re goal is to poke fun at a group of people realize you’re one of the problems people keep pointing to in this world. Instead of saying anything you could’ve simply ignored this post but you had to make your ridiculous and pointless statement that does nothing but spread hate.

Post reply on HN