Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: vladimir998

“But it doesn’t - because it wasn’t printed with modern spelling in 1526.”

The 1526 edition also used heavy Gothic font. The font isn’t the point. It is the words used to make the translation. And the Tyndale translation was a very good translation. It is also available with modernized spelling, although my copy retains the original spelling.

http://www.amazon.com/Tyndales-New-Testament-David-Daniell/dp/0300065809/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1384438399&sr=8-3&keywords=tyndale+bible

http://www.amazon.com/Tyndale-New-Testament-OE-1526-William/dp/1598562908/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1384438405&sr=8-4&keywords=tyndale+bible


308 posted on 11/14/2013 6:17:12 AM PST by Mr Rogers (Liberals are like locusts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

“The 1526 edition also used heavy Gothic font. The font isn’t the point….It is the words used to make the translation. And the Tyndale translation was a very good translation. It is also available with modernized spelling, although my copy retains the original spelling.”

I understand all that. If you buy a modernized spelling copy of the original D-R, you’ll find it to be – in most parts – just as easy to read as any part of Tyndale’s NT. That was the point.


309 posted on 11/14/2013 8:13:20 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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