Posted on 03/10/2006 6:19:21 PM PST by sionnsar
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. Isn't this going to put a crimp in the Creationists' "the Bible is the Word of God and Must Be Taken Literally" argument? ;)
And how about the Douay-Rheims? It's OLDER than the KJV (just by a couple of years, but still . . . )
ya bunch of lazy bums. Learn new testament greek and hebrew, or don't pretend that you care about the niceties of G-d's Word.
You can't understand the Koran if you don't know Syrio-Aramaic as well as Arabic.
New Testament:
Logos, in John means Word, but also Reason, and Meaning.
Love refers to any one of 7 different kind of love. Hardly ever is romantic love considered.
In Isaiah, there is no virgin birth prophecied, if you read the Hebrew.
And indeed the Channellor Rheims Version, Confraternity Version, Jerusalem Bible and Community Bible are all Catholic versions, as well.
I don't think erwV is mentioned at all in the NT.
And what are the other three, besides the obvious ones I mean?
It's like taking another look at something in a mirror . . . the same but different. Amazing.
I use the Vulgate, which is really easy to read, and follows the Greek and Hebrew texts fairly well for dog-latin.
The Douay-Rheims, btw, is a pretty good translation of the Vulgate in the 17th c. manner . . .
The Roman Catholic Douay-Rheims translation was written AFTER the Tyndale, Coverdale, Great, and Geneva bibles (on which the KJV depended) (not to mention Wycliffe's 15th Century version, published before the Roman Catholic Archbishop dug up and burned his body)...all done by Protestants--often at risk of being burned alive by the servants of Rome.
Clearly a Catholic English bible was a Johny-come-lately, probably done to try to prove certain Roman doctrines--attempting to keep the Bible in their full control.
I am (slowly) learning Homeric Greek. Nice to know there is somebody else out there outside of Oxbridge.
This is a very fair and careful analysis of the various translations.... I was almost expecting a "KJV only" argument, but was pleasantly surprised.
Personally I use the English Standard Version (ESV) for study (a very recent and accurate translation). The New King James Version (NKJV) is also about the most beautiful of the modern tranlations, preserving (relieving one of my pet peeves) the tradition of capitalizing the pronouns for God, as He's definitely worth it!
Lord willing I'll start learning Koine Greek this summer....
By the end of the semester I had almost 100 lines memorized. I can still reel off the first ten or so . . . that was fun when I visited my daughter's fourth-grade history class disguised as an Athenian lady of the upper class. For the boys, a Bronze Age sword and a Greek helmet - the girls tried on a hemation and tried (unsuccessfully) to turn a spindle (glad they didn't ask me to - I can manage for a few seconds and then everything falls apart). We talked about translations and how they work, the compromises they make -- with lots of examples. I wasn't familiar with Fagles's splendid 1990 translation at the time (although it was the early 90s when my daughter was in the 4th grade), but we had fun with Fitzgerald and Pope and (my favorite) Lattimore. I think they enjoyed the baklava best, though . . . always feed them and they will be happy!
The Rheims NT appeared 30 years before the KJV and had an important influence on the KJV text.
Indeed, the Vulgate prototext provided the only guidance for KJV translators where no reliable Greek texts existed. The KJV use of other Vulgate texts is well known.
Relax - it's not that bad. It's a good translation of the Vulgate, which is older than any of the versions you mention. Blame St. Jerome, if you like.
It's very slow, slogging really, but I am doing my own translation while comparing to the translation provided in Loeb. I have a couple Homeric Greek dictionaries. Good idea memorizing--Emerson said that was the best way to learn to read a language, read the same ten pages over and over until it is totally memorized. Santayana said that Homer was the best kind of poet, totally mature and not given to overstatement. I don't mind following the advice of such as Emerson and Santayana now and then.
Yeah, I guess the writers of the Gospels just got it wrong when they quoted that passage in Isaiah. Why didn't the Holy Spirit catch that when He inspired them to write? Guess He just didn't know His Hebrew like you do. So glad you set us straight on this.
I'm glad too Isaiah predicted that unusual event of a "young woman" conceiving and bearing a child. What an earth-shaking thing!
And how many years of biblical Hebrew have you had?
I don't have the advantage of formal education in this. I am self-taught, meaning that my teacher is more or less completely in the dark too.
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.