Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

KJV

Page 1 of 3 [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

14 Nov 2010, 7:38 pm

I happen to have a preference for the so-called King James translation. This bases primarily on aesthetics and habit, to be sure.

But the KJV has the distinct advantage, as compared to other Anglo versions, of being the last translation of which I am aware assembled by serious scholars who were also believrers who had no significant collective theological axe to grind.

It is not without its issues - places where scholarship lacked data, or where text was taken over wholesale from previous versions, or where errors based on the shift from Greek to the Latin of the Vulgate were perpetuated. But no version is free from such.

I have to consider a mostly unbiassed vrsion a serious plus.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

14 Nov 2010, 7:47 pm

Philologos wrote:
I happen to have a preference for the so-called King James translation. This bases primarily on aesthetics and habit, to be sure.

But the KJV has the distinct advantage, as compared to other Anglo versions, of being the last translation of which I am aware assembled by serious scholars who were also believrers who had no significant collective theological axe to grind.

It is not without its issues - places where scholarship lacked data, or where text was taken over wholesale from previous versions, or where errors based on the shift from Greek to the Latin of the Vulgate were perpetuated. But no version is free from such.

I have to consider a mostly unbiassed vrsion a serious plus.


Aside from accuracy or conformity to religious requirements, the King James Version is simply a lovely piece of imaginative literature and inspirationally poetic. No reason for me to invest in belief of its fantasies but certainly in some parts well worth enjoying for its use of language.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Nov 2010, 8:41 pm

Philologos wrote:
I happen to have a preference for the so-called King James translation. This bases primarily on aesthetics and habit, to be sure.

But the KJV has the distinct advantage, as compared to other Anglo versions, of being the last translation of which I am aware assembled by serious scholars who were also believrers who had no significant collective theological axe to grind.

.


What advantage.? It is a thoroughly bad translation of the Hebrew of the TNKH (what you heathen call the Old Testament). I read TNKH in Hebrew so I know what I am talking about. Go to Isiah 7:14. If the translation shows the word "virgin" consign it to the flames. That is not what the Hebrew text says.

ruveyn



Last edited by ruveyn on 14 Nov 2010, 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Nov 2010, 8:42 pm

Sand wrote:

Aside from accuracy or conformity to religious requirements, the King James Version is simply a lovely piece of imaginative literature and inspirationally poetic. No reason for me to invest in belief of its fantasies but certainly in some parts well worth enjoying for its use of language.


It is a rotten translation of the 39 books of what the gentiles call the Old Testament.

ruveyn



Nambo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,882
Location: Prussia

14 Nov 2010, 8:44 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

Aside from accuracy or conformity to religious requirements, the King James Version is simply a lovely piece of imaginative literature and inspirationally poetic. No reason for me to invest in belief of its fantasies but certainly in some parts well worth enjoying for its use of language.


It is a rotten translation of the 39 books of what the gentiles call the Old Testament.

ruveyn


Can you recommend a good translation please?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Nov 2010, 8:48 pm

Nambo wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

Aside from accuracy or conformity to religious requirements, the King James Version is simply a lovely piece of imaginative literature and inspirationally poetic. No reason for me to invest in belief of its fantasies but certainly in some parts well worth enjoying for its use of language.


It is a rotten translation of the 39 books of what the gentiles call the Old Testament.

ruveyn


Can you recommend a good translation please?


See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPS_Tanakh

Also the Fox translation is pretty good too. It is the translation of the Five Books of Moses AKA The Torah. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everett_Fox. The only people who know how to translate the Hebrew into English and retain the sense of the original text are Jews.

ruveyn



Last edited by ruveyn on 14 Nov 2010, 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

pgd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,624

14 Nov 2010, 8:58 pm

Philologos wrote:
I happen to have a preference for the so-called King James translation. This bases primarily on aesthetics and habit, to be sure.

But the KJV has the distinct advantage, as compared to other Anglo versions, of being the last translation of which I am aware assembled by serious scholars who were also believrers who had no significant collective theological axe to grind.

It is not without its issues - places where scholarship lacked data, or where text was taken over wholesale from previous versions, or where errors based on the shift from Greek to the Latin of the Vulgate were perpetuated. But no version is free from such.

I have to consider a mostly unbiassed vrsion a serious plus.


---

Tend to agree with your summary. Never read the KJV (Thee, thou). Have read the NewKJV (You, you). It's my understanding that The Pilgrim's Progress book by John Bunyan is based on the Geneva Bible (the Bible right before the KJV).



pgd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,624

14 Nov 2010, 9:03 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Philologos wrote:
I happen to have a preference for the so-called King James translation. This bases primarily on aesthetics and habit, to be sure.

But the KJV has the distinct advantage, as compared to other Anglo versions, of being the last translation of which I am aware assembled by serious scholars who were also believrers who had no significant collective theological axe to grind.

.


What advantage.? It is a thoroughly bad translation of the Hebrew of the TNKH (what you heathen call the Old Testament). I read TNKH in Hebrew so I know what I am talking about. Go to Isiah 7:14. If the translation shows the word "virgin" consign it to the flames. That is not what the Hebrew text says.

ruveyn


---

ruveyn - Am inclined to agree with you as to how Christianity has twisted the Jewish scriptures.

My feeling today is that Christianity/some denominations of Christianity would do anything to make their point including misquoting and mistranslating the Jewish scriptures - anything to make Judaism look bad and Christianity look good so the Christians could steal members away from Judaism and collect all the collection plate money instead.



pgd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,624

14 Nov 2010, 9:07 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

Aside from accuracy or conformity to religious requirements, the King James Version is simply a lovely piece of imaginative literature and inspirationally poetic. No reason for me to invest in belief of its fantasies but certainly in some parts well worth enjoying for its use of language.


It is a rotten translation of the 39 books of what the gentiles call the Old Testament.

ruveyn


---

ruveyn - Am inclined to agree with you. It's my belief that some Christian denominations have made poor translations/even mistranslations of the Jewish scriptures so Christians would view Judaism as bad and Christianity as good. That way the Christians could steal members away from Judaism as well as get their hands on all the collection plate money.



Nambo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,882
Location: Prussia

14 Nov 2010, 9:29 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Nambo wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:

Aside from accuracy or conformity to religious requirements, the King James Version is simply a lovely piece of imaginative literature and inspirationally poetic. No reason for me to invest in belief of its fantasies but certainly in some parts well worth enjoying for its use of language.


It is a rotten translation of the 39 books of what the gentiles call the Old Testament.

ruveyn


Can you recommend a good translation please?


See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPS_Tanakh

Also the Fox translation is pretty good too. It is the translation of the Five Books of Moses AKA The Torah. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everett_Fox. The only people who know how to translate the Hebrew into English and retail the sense of the original text are Jews.

ruveyn


Cheers Ruveyn, Just ordered two of the JPS from Amazon, (a pocket version that I can take to work).



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

14 Nov 2010, 9:35 pm

I am not commenting on the accuracy of the translation but on the use of language which many creative people find very worthwhile. All religious tracts are replete with cuckoo ideas and pretty much total ignorance of the way the universe is constructed. I also enjoy Alice in Wonderland Norse myths and many other fantasies but I do not appraise them for literal accuracy.



happymusic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,165
Location: still in ninja land

14 Nov 2010, 9:37 pm

I like the language of the KJV.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

14 Nov 2010, 9:51 pm

I've heard a lot of people recommend the ESV. I don't really know or care enough though about all of the interpretation issues.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Nov 2010, 9:56 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
I've heard a lot of people recommend the ESV. I don't really know or care enough though about all of the interpretation issues.


The word "virgin" appears in the translation of Isiah 7:14. Consign it to the flames.

ruveyn



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

14 Nov 2010, 10:02 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
I've heard a lot of people recommend the ESV. I don't really know or care enough though about all of the interpretation issues.


The word "virgin" appears in the translation of Isiah 7:14. Consign it to the flames.

ruveyn

Oh, ruveyn, that's the same thing with EVERY Christian interpretation. At least pretty close to every single one. I am going to have to ask that more tolerance be granted, despite the theological distortions.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Nov 2010, 10:10 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Oh, ruveyn, that's the same thing with EVERY Christian interpretation. At least pretty close to every single one. I am going to have to ask that more tolerance be granted, despite the theological distortions.


Bugger theology. I am talking about an incorrect translation. There is no excuse for it.

ruveyn