Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: John O
Well, I know that Catholics and evangelical Christians all say the book of Samuel was divinely inspired. I guess that's close enough to revealed by God.

Not necessarily. Pick up the soundtrack CD of a movie sometime and then pick up a CD of music "inspired" by that movie. There is a big difference between the Word of God and the Word of God filtered through fallible human authors who introduce their own opinions, world view, interpretations, and errors into the mix.

One problem with modern copies of ancient texts is that they often give the false impression that there is one difinitive and correct copy of ancient texts. Heck, read the introduction to a book containing the collective works of Shakespeare, written far more recently, and you'll see that not only isn't there one difinitive version of many Shakespeare plays but that the spelling has been regularized and edited. Similarly, if you go back and look at Biblical texts, including those found at the Dead Sea, you'll find that they don't always agree 100% (hence the footnotes in some translations). Does that mean that the Bible is riddled with errors? No. But it does mean that it's also not 100% perfect, either. And I honestly don't see why that's a problem for so many people. If you are basing your entire faith on the meaning of one word, phrase, or even story in the Bible, I think you are missing the forest for the trees.

67 posted on 01/27/2005 8:31:39 AM PST by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]


To: Question_Assumptions
One problem with modern copies of ancient texts is that they often give the false impression that there is one difinitive and correct copy of ancient texts.

This is why textual criticism is an important field of study. Unfortunately it is usually neglected in our churches.

There are two main 'types' of translations. "Formal equivalence" (FE) which is a word by word translation (such as used in the KJV) and "dynamic equivalence" which is a thought by thought translation (such as is used in the NIV).

FE is always more accurate as it retains the original meaning of the words unfiltered through the cultural context of the translators.

Likewise the ability to check the original texts for hard passages is priceless in determining exact meanings. (Use that Strongs and use your Hebrew and Greek dictionaries)

Most modern translations are garbage, that is, if they aren't translated using FE then they can only be called paraphrases and not the Word of God.

93 posted on 01/27/2005 10:36:39 AM PST by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson