Ha ha! Yeah, redwoods.....
What?
Printable View
Ha ha! Yeah, redwoods.....
What?
Redwoods - What?
Just that "flowery" seems too trivial a word to use of a work that, regardless of accuracy or religious content, is possibly the greatest product of the English language.
A small bit of the passage (1 Corinthians 13 vv1-2)
Geneva (http://www.genevabible.org/files/Gen...orinthians.pdf)
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and Angels and have not love I am as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal
And though I had the gift of prophecy and knew all secrets and all knowledge, yea if I had all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and had not love, I were nothing"
King James' AV (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...20;&version=9;)
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. "
The two versions are very similar. The King James' has something extra that Cuppajoe might call floweriness, but I'd call dignity - "tongues of men and of angels" carries more weight than "tongues of men and angels" - "mysteries," straight from the original Greek "mysteria" rather than "secrets" - the more precise, yet rhythmic "charity" rather than "love."
Choosing between these is a matter of taste, but there are numerous versions around which have less regard for accuracy of translation.
Consider (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...0;&version=74;)
"I may be able to speak the languages of men and even of angels, but if I do not have love, it will sound like noisy brass. If I have the gift of speaking God's Word and if I understand all secrets, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I know all things and if I have the gift of faith so I can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing."
"it will sound like noisy brass" does not mean "I am as sounding brass." And why has the translator omitted the "tinkling cymbal" that is certailnly present in the Greek? And where did the translator pick up "If I have the gift of speaking God's word?" Certainly not from the Greek "ean echo prophetaian" that he is "translating."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shield&Sword
Ah, how so? I disagree.
Define "Christianity" then.
As far as translations are concerned, I have about six that I read regularly (The ESV, the NIV, the KJV, the NKJV, the HCSB, and the NASB). If you read multiple translations that all appear to be different, it helps to get at the meaning of the original language. It makes more work, takes more time, and is therefore less "enjoyable" . . . but I find the process of re-reading multiple translations of the same verse/chapter invaluable, as far as comprehension is concerned.
I used to always use the NKJ, but now I have a (ESV) English Standard Version. They are very similiar. There is also the Message if you ever want to see a passage from a very different perspective
I think, in the passage you cite, that the Geneva reads a bit more smothly, and I do like 'love' over 'charity', and 'I were nothing' over 'I am nothing'. 'Mysteries' certainly beats 'secrets', however. Dignity is certainly present in both translations, and I think it would be very difficult to take it away (although the translator in your third example certainly has a go at it. That's awful).
Check out Revelations 6:12:
Geneva: And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and lo, there was a great earthquake, and the sun was as black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon was like blood. And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, as a fig tree casteth her green figs, when it is shaken of a mighty wind.
King James: And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; and the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
Geneva just seems to me a bit smoother in general (although they both have their share of yob's commas). I stand by my adjective.
"I stand by my adjective."
Fair enough - as I said, it is a matter of taste.
Quite so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whifflingpin
Any idea what a 'sackcloth of hair' is, by the way? I gather it's something black...
Sackcloth is cloth to make sacks from - or maybe sacks are what you make out of sackcloth.:confused:
"helios egeneto melas os sakkos trikhinos" (the) sun became dark/black as sack/sackcloth (made) of hair.
Incidentally, since you've stirred me up to take a closer look, where the two translations differ, the King James stays closer to the original, as above using "became" rather than "was." "Untimely figs" rather than "green figs," because (according to my Greek dictionary, at any rate,) "olynthos" (the word used in the original) was "a fig which grows in the winter, but seldom ripens," so not merely unripe or green, but one which, by growing at the wrong time would not ripen.
Crusader
When i hear a christian who say that the whole bible is word of God letter by letter, i ask him about some passages and after that the person say: "you must read whole bible to understand it" or "do you have another silly mistakes?" and untle now i didnt understand what is the relation between reading whole bible and believing the whole bible is inspired word by wrod from God. For me the bible contain also words of God that remained from the original bible, from the book that Jesus peace upon him got, and from the Torah and from the book of David peace be upon them, but the books that remained untle these days are not pure words of God, some passages are added and some are removed, some are modified by normal persons. Are they still words of God? and how you know if the modifications did not affect the main idea, what if the main idea is made by people and not what God wanted?
We find the most clear phrase about trinity that exist in KJV is decided by 50 sects of christianity as a not original phrase from the bible and it was canceled, no trinity can be find in bible so clear other than this verse. What about crucifiction, the famous phrase that "Jesus" shouted when he was crucified (the one about forgivness) is decided in NIV as a phrase that doesnt exist in the most old scriptures.
Which bible you mean that i most read to understand the idea of the bible, the one the protestant use? or the one that Catholic use, with 6 books more than protestant's one? or the one that orthodox use, with 151 psalm? and so on differences, and so on phrases and passages, added and cancled. I discussed alot about these phrases, i dont think i got time to discuss more with exams i got now, i will try to log in when i can.
I think that as far as I'm concerned, what people do with sackclothes is more interesting. ;) Sackclothes are generally mournful attire, aren't they? Also, I think the Old Testament prophets wore sackclothes at certain times, though I'll have to look that up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whifflingpin
Ah, you're changing your wording as time goes on. So the Trinity is present in the Bible elsewhere, just not as "clearly?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Shield&Sword
How much difference do you think can be found between these versions?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shield&Sword
Do you think any one of them doesn't contend that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ, the son of God incarnated in the flesh for the purpose of personally reconciling mankind to God?
Maybe we should discuss about this at another thread but i'll ask you two question firstly;Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
Does God need anything?
Why does God need a son?
I don't think it matters here. The question is whether the Bible postulates those facts or not.
It does.
You can question the logic or truth, and we can do that in another thread, but Shield&Sword routinely attacks Jesus' place in the Christian Bible, so I just want to see how he responds there.
I think admin will probly take our last posts to another new subject on forum when she see. But anyway;Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
So does God need anything? Then he's not God anymore. Because only "creatures" created by someone needs things.
I think you should start a new thread - this is a thread concerning Bible translations.
Shield&Sword is questioning different Bible translations, and is inducing from their number that the Bible or the faith is flawed or contaminated, or some such thing. So I think my first response there was on topic.
No i didnt change my words. Yes i said so clear, but i didnt say it exist in bible in other forms, you know "between lines" or "you must read whole book" as i always hear. My point was that trinity as base of christianity say: "the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God, but they are not 3 gods but one" in all bible verses we dont find any thing that show that the Son is God or the Holy spirit, and no other verse than the one that was canceled (decided as fabrication) show that father and son and holy spirit are ONE. Some times christians use the verses were Jesus and holy spirit and father are mentioned together as sign of trinity, but they cant approve the 2 other parts are gods or the whole 3 parts are one, they can use it as 3 persons mentioned toghether but not the trinity as christians believe, and reading whole bible cant give us the minimom idea that Jesus and Father and Holy Spirit are one God or every part of them is God, only the father is God. As i said the three can be mentioned toghether in one phrase, as the first part of John1 5:7, but nothing more, thats what i meant by clear, saying that these 3 are god and all 3 are one.
By the way if you got another part were trinity is mentioned in not direct way please tell me about it.
About bible translatione, is there translation called protestant translatione and Catholic one, because we find a huge difference between them. And between KJV and NIV and so on, because i find verses that i cant find in other.
I dont attack anyone, i only ask questions and discuss, scuse me if you felt i attack you, Jesus peace be upon him is my prophet and i cant attack him. Believe me my interest in religious studies began when i arrived here, i aways hear insults and so on on Quran and prophet Muhammed peace be upon him, so i read and decided to talk with christians in polite way, not the way that others use here to talk with us, all i do is talk and discuss nothing else, and i discovered since i started to talk why others insult us muslims without agreeing to talk or discuss even our book.