At the debate his (painted) skin was literally a darker shade than Harris’s.

Billionaires are a scourge of humanity.

Original art (paintings and sculptures) by local artists. They csn be checked out for three months at a time. It’s really nice to have some original art in your home even if it it’s not by a big name.

Also, I can easily access most of my country’s important newspapers’ online articles that are normally behind a paywall.

Ah, a fellow Krabbé connoisseur!

Haha, I see. Good on you!

Tbh I think I can understand why people do it. For some using various substances are a quick and simple way to relax/numb unwanted emotions/etc… Some start because of peer pressure. For others it’s just learned behaviour (you’re more likely to become a smoker if your parents are).

Personally, I’ve never as much as tried cigarettes because it just never appealed to me and I had mostly non-smoking friends and family. But I definitely have other bad habits I shouldn’t have gotten into and have trouble getting rid of, so I get the feeling.

Wait, even as a child? Where are you from if I may ask?

Never have I ever as much as tried anything you can smoke (cigarettes, joints, shisha…).

Only interesting if you’re romantically attracted to women, though.

Even if you love couches, you should know who to vote for at this point.

Lol… That’s one way to admit Harris won the debate.

It seems like more and more internet spaces are being taken over by bots. At some point the internet will just be AI talking to itself, while humans will return entirely to offline communication.

From what I’ve seen of the guy, I feel the only reason anybody knows him is his name.

Voting for the felon and sex offender because the other side is amoral is… weird.

Trump suggested that restraint would be unfair since his Democratic critics are “getting personal all night long.”

This shows why it was paramount that the Democrats left the “high road”. Trump has no clue how to react when someone finally hits back at the bully.

Welcome to the Fediverse! I’ve been here since the 3rd party app shutdown and haven’t used Reddit ever since. Niche communities are still lacking here, but it gets better as more people join. Also Lemmy servers and apps have gotten more stable over the past year. So I hope you’ll enjoy it here!

Yes, I very much agree that such explanations are helpful.

Yes, of course.

Both of these things need defining before anybody can answer your question.

“Censoring”, the way I understand the word, means that there’s some kind of institution charged with overseeing and removing parts of a text. So I wonder at which point in the development of the Bible you believe this has occurred.

I’ve argued in a different comment that it’s no secret that certain texts were picked and chosen by the early church as part of its canon, but that (in my opinion) is a very different thing than censoring. To give an analogy: If I was an editor and had to choose the “100 greatest novels of the 20th century” for a book, I would not be “censoring” those I didn’t choose. Therefore I’m asking you what exactly you mean by censoring, and if you can give examples of censorship happening in the development of the Biblical texts.

Secondly, “original Bible” is not at all easy to define. The (Christian) Bible is a collection of texts of diverse genres, by a multitude of authors, in three languages, spanning at least seven or eight centuries in their development. None of the original manuscripts have survived. Instead, for every part of the Bible, there exist different copies which sometimes differ slightly, sometimes starkly. This is the reason textual criticism of the Bible exists as a field of scholarship. Most notably, the (older) Septuagint version of the Book of Jeremiah is about one eighth shorter than the (later) version of the Masoretic text.

All of this means that if you’re going to talk about the “original Bible”, you have to tell us what you mean by that. Do you mean

• the original manuscripts of each individual book or passage, all of which are lost?
• the oldest surviving copies of each passage, respectively?
• the Septuagint (and if yes, which version of it)?
• the Masoretic text (and if yes, which version of it)?
• the current scholarly consensus on the most faithful manuscripts, as collected e. g. in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia and the Novum Testamentum Graece 28?

Hehe

King James notoriously removed mentions of the word tyrant in his English translations.

AFAIK this is an urban myth. But even if true, it’s hardly a case of “censoring”, but more a (questionable) translation choice. (Because “tyrant” is not a word that appears in the original Hebrew or Greek, so it can’t have been censored in that sense.)