Posted on 05/19/2015 9:48:39 AM PDT by US Navy Vet
From Left to Right: Mati Weiderpass, Ted Cruz, Kalman Sporn and Heidi Cruz at a literal fireside chat in Mr. Weiderpass apartment.
A nuclear-armed Tehran presents an urgent threat to freedom. Opposing the Iran deal are two unlikely allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel. And its just the latest sign of a thaw in a relationship that proves the wisdom of the old Sanskrit proverb, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Saudi Arabia officially dropped the Arab boycott against Israel in 2005 as a condition of joining the World Trade Organization. Last July, Prince Turki Al Faisal, Saudi Ambassador to US from 2005-2006, published an op-ed in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. It did not mention the Palestinian peoples right of return to their former homes in current Israel, a key demand of Palestinian activists for decades. Even more surprising, Faisals article did affirm the importance of the Holocaust and the Jewish peoples historic claim to Jerusalem.
(Excerpt) Read more at observer.com ...
Well I’m not intending to suggest that Greek should be today’s common tongue. My point is that some commentators have noticed that Koine Greek was particularly suited to expressing complex theological thought at precisely the time such a language was useful.
I tend to agree with you, but would have suggested Greek was perhaps a better language than French for Diplomacy . . . but then, French serves its purpose of ambiguity in many cases which is after all the weapon of diplomacy.
You can still find that definition listed as archaic in current dictionaries:
It’s very difficult for a culture where a lot of people have a hard enough time reading simple English to have to re-translate an “archaic” language into the language they actually speak. It is a barrier.
We don’t need barriers.
I was replying to the claim that KJV wasn’t accurately translated, not whether modern readers are inconvenienced by changes in English usage over 400 years.
The KJV was accurately rendered. Moderns need help following it the same as they would reading Shakespeare. Both continue to be admired for the beauty of the language. Shakespeare is probably the more difficult.
A King James Only movement arose in the 1950s because of controversy over how the Revised Standard Version translated some passages.
I was replying to the claim that KJV wasnt accurately translated, not whether modern readers are inconvenienced by changes in English usage over 400 years.
The KJV was accurately rendered. Moderns need help following it the same as they would reading Shakespeare. Both continue to be admired for the beauty of the language. Shakespeare is probably the more difficult.
I don’t think old English is all that “beautiful”. I say that having read Shakespeares entier works (and it was painful). What I think it is is old.
All of this is a bit moot these days though, now that we have full Greek and Hebrew available online. The first time I ever availed myself to one of these tools I was reminded that there are some ancient manuscripts used by the KJV that translate to verses that don’t even exist in the NIV.
“I dont think old English is all that beautiful. I say that having read Shakespeares entier works (and it was painful). What I think it is is old.”
I believe you mentioned that English isn’t your first language and that’s likely why you don’t see the beauty of the KJV and Shakespeare.
As far as tools for understanding the Bible, it’s never been easier to get access to multiple translations and Greek and Hebrew texts. It takes study no matter what text or translation someone uses. The way that John uses “Logos” isn’t going to be fully appreciated by anyone unfamiliar with Greek thought of his time. Ancient readers would have understood his reference, modern readers will miss it.
I believe you mentioned that English isnt your first language...
Old(e) English is not my first language. When singing hymns in church I audibly change the thee’s and thou’s into their modern english counterpart. I consider it to be a foreign language, though similar to the language we speek. Kinda like Puerto Rico and Mexico both speak “Spanish”, but they are very different versions.
As far as tools for understanding the Bible, its never been easier to get access to multiple translations and Greek and Hebrew texts. It takes study no matter what text or translation someone uses. The way that John uses Logos isnt going to be fully appreciated by anyone unfamiliar with Greek thought of his time. Ancient readers would have understood his reference, modern readers will miss it.
“When singing hymns in church I audibly change the thees and thous into their modern english counterpart.”
The KJV was translated near the end of the run for the use of thee and thou as personal pronouns, except for part of Scotland where apparently you can still hear it in daily conversation. It’s an inflected pronoun, I suppose it came over from German.
It amuses me that the book of Mormon borrows this pronoun form. Joseph Smith produces/translates his book around 1829 and for some reason his Golden Plates were fixated on Middle to Early Modern English. Maybe the plates knew it sounded “religious” to the modern ear even though it was just the everyday pronoun of its own era.
Yep. It sounded “religious”. And here we are.
My Mormon friends are very much KJV people. They call the other versions “easy read” as though there is something intellectually weak with reading a book in your native tongue.
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.