Skip to comments.
Today’s NIV Bible Barred from LifeWay Christian Bookstores
Christian Post ^
| Jan. 27, 2005
| Pauline J. Chang
Posted on 01/28/2005 3:15:12 AM PST by paudio
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-197 next last
1
posted on
01/28/2005 3:15:12 AM PST
by
paudio
To: paudio
Since certain names like John and Peter imply a gender, should we change the names to something more neutral like Pat. Even Jesus implies a gender, perhaps a new name is in order....
To: paudio
Our "Parent" who art in heaven"?.........yeah right.
To: paudio
Matt 5:18 "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."
The "Jot" is the Hebrew word "Yodh" which is the 10th letter of the Hebrew alphabet. It is also the smallest letter. It's European or English equivalent is the letter "Y" as in the English term Yahweh or in Hebrew YHVH since there were no vowel's used in the ancient script.
The word "jot" itself is an English transliteration of "iota" which is the 9th letter of the Greek alphabet. "Iota," in turn, is the nearest Greek equivalent for the Hebrew yodh.
The "tittle" is the small decorative spur or point on the upper edge of the yodh. If you can imagine a tiny letter with a slightly visible decorative mark.
Tittle is used by Greek grammarians of the accents and diacritical points. It means the little lines or projections by which the Hebrew letters differ from each other. One example would be the difference between the letter L and I. The difference is only one small mark. We use phrases like "the dotting of the i, and the crossing of the t," and "every iota."
It is interesting that the Jewish scribes who copied the MT (Massoretic Text) of the Hebrew Bible scrolls paid the greatest attention to the minutiae of detail and such marks attached to each consonant throughout the entire text. They even numbered every letter, word, sentence, paragraph, chapter, section, and scroll to insure that the total equalled that of the text being copied before allowing it to enter the holy synagogue.
The meaning of the passage is very clear. Not even the smallest letter or even its decorative spur will ever disappear from the "God Breathed" Word until all is fulfilled. In fact when heaven and earth are replaced by a new heaven and earth, the Word of the Lord will have accomplished its purpose and will be fulfilled in every detail even to the very letter.
Not One "Jot Or Tittle"
Don't Mess With the Text!
4
posted on
01/28/2005 3:45:22 AM PST
by
BellStar
( I went to the Inauguration after all!)
To: paudio
When you feel you have to water down the Bible so the Goddess-worshippers don't have a problem with it, you've gone too far.
Ridiculous. And Zondervan? Shameful.
To: paudio
Jesus called God, "Father," and used the pronoun, "He." So should we.
6
posted on
01/28/2005 3:54:12 AM PST
by
Tax-chick
(Wielder of the Dread Words of Power, "Bless your heart, honey!")
To: BellStar
Don't Mess With the Text!
So we should all learn Hebrew, Aramaic and ancient Greek? Many fundamentalists consider only the King James Version the only true Word of God and it is actually a rather poor translation.
7
posted on
01/28/2005 3:57:24 AM PST
by
R. Scott
(Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
To: Smartaleck
Our "Parent" who art in heaven"?.........yeah right. Recently I saw a PBS documentary about the lesbian Methodist pastor who was defrocked.
In that church, the congregation prayed, "Our Mother/Father, who art in heaven ..."
I kid you not.
The real kicker was that many in the congregation thought the head pastor (the lesbian was the junior pastor) was too much of a biblical literalist.
8
posted on
01/28/2005 4:05:29 AM PST
by
Martin Tell
(Red States Rule)
To: R. Scott
You are completely wrong about the King James being a bad translation. In fact, it and the New American Standard version have over a 90% accuracy in a word for word translation from the oldest manuscripts extent. Other translations such as the New International Vesion and Phillips have around a 75 - 80% accuracy.
9
posted on
01/28/2005 4:06:29 AM PST
by
Jemian
(When two people go into an abortion clinic, only one gets out alive. Maybe.)
To: R. Scott
So we should all learn Hebrew, Aramaic and ancient Greek?
That's not what was implied. Simply that Zondervan shouldn't take liberties with the translation FROM those languages, especially to change the meanings to be more palatable to the gender-sensitivity police.
10
posted on
01/28/2005 4:11:48 AM PST
by
beezdotcom
(I'm usually either right or wrong...)
To: Jemian
You are completely wrong about the King James being a bad translation. In fact, it and the New American Standard version have over a 90% accuracy in a word for word translation from the oldest manuscripts extent.
I consider a 10% error rate as being pretty bad.
11
posted on
01/28/2005 4:14:19 AM PST
by
R. Scott
(Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
To: paudio
Just another attempt to advance us all towards being apostate - change a thing here and there and eventually, any change is acceptable... It must really irk some folks that the man is supposed to be the spiritual head and master of the household ;-)
12
posted on
01/28/2005 4:14:24 AM PST
by
trebb
("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
To: beezdotcom
Simply that Zondervan shouldn't take liberties with the translation FROM those languages, especially to change the meanings to be more palatable to the gender-sensitivity police.
PC should never enter into the translation of any work.
13
posted on
01/28/2005 4:16:20 AM PST
by
R. Scott
(Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
To: Jemian; BellStar
Thank you Bell Star (especially) and Jemian for your informative posts. I understand your point, Bell Star, and you are quite right. Translation of the Bible should be a painstaking enterprise to accurately and precisely interpret the literal (i.e., pronouns) and cultural meaning (i.e., idioms).
I'm quite surprised that Zondervan has strayed from this. What exactly is it they are attempting to do, besides bastardizing Holy text?
While in college I learned that it's quite possible that William Shakespeare helped with writing the King James version. Studies apparently have been done on that. It was quite interesting.
Myself, I prefer the New American Standard Version....and I like the Amplified Bible for a simple study. It would be best, however, to use the book that has the Greek and Armaic (I think it is) languages placed in columns and get an even better understanding that way....I forget what that type of book is called.
14
posted on
01/28/2005 4:19:51 AM PST
by
nicmarlo
To: SerpentDove
When you feel you have to water down the Bible so the Goddess-worshippers don't have a problem with it, you've gone too far.Ridiculous. And Zondervan? Shameful.
I totally agree with your thoughts!
To: R. Scott
I gave myself a little leeway when writing those statistics. It was about 2 years ago when I saw those figures on the literalness of translations. I am thinking that the KJV is 99% accurate and the NAS 97% accurate. I'm not sure and would have to do some digging to come up with the exact figure.
It is impossible for translators to be completely accurate with a text due to abstract concepts being conveyed. So, any percentage in the +90% is actually quite good. I do think it best for people to study Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, however not required. I also think that we can trust our Sovereign God to give us the knowledge we need to come to faith regardless of the translation.
16
posted on
01/28/2005 4:21:14 AM PST
by
Jemian
(When two people go into an abortion clinic, only one gets out alive. Maybe.)
To: R. Scott; Jemian
10% error rate 10% error rate, made in good faith, is much better than 40% error rate by intent. So, your point is, R. Scott?
17
posted on
01/28/2005 4:21:56 AM PST
by
nicmarlo
To: R. Scott
Don't Mess With the Text!
Translation: he can never be made to be she any more than a translation that would call a cow a goat!
18
posted on
01/28/2005 4:22:51 AM PST
by
BellStar
(Obesity is the outward proof you are still not clean and sober!)
To: xzins
19
posted on
01/28/2005 4:23:49 AM PST
by
Gamecock
(GWB: "Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills.")
To: R. Scott
A rather poor translation of questionable manuscripts, at that. And one that has been updated and changed many times over the years. I'd tell KJV-onlyists to put that in their pipe and smoke it, but King James was a well-known enemy of smoking, so I'm sure they don't have pipes.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-197 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson