Ecclesiastes 9:5

[The Grand Nudger]

....as an addendum to the above, of course a nominal christain like Bel would identify with Blakes heretical "christianity". It's appealing precisely because of how nominally christian it is. Nominal christians like their christianity the same way that overt atheists do. Decidedly un-christian. His mind is a hostage and acts like any other hostage might. Sympathizing with their taker.

[Bucky Ball]

....as an addendum to the above, of course a nominal christain like Bel would identify with Blakes heretical "christianity".  It's appealing precisely because of how nominally christian it is.  Nominal christians like their christianity the same way that overt atheists do.  Decidedly un-christian.  His mind is a hostage and acts like any other hostage might.  Sympathizing with their taker.

Blake : "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell: “All deities reside in the human breast.” And the notebook verses known as The Everlasting Gospel include this statement

Thou art a man God is no more
Thy own humanity learn to adore. 

But as Blake labored long and hard on The Four Zoas, and afterward on the prophecies Milton and Jerusalem, the figure of Jesus took on an increasingly crucial role. Concerned as he was with the breakdown of the self, he needed help from an agency beyond the self; without intervention by “the Saviour even Jesus,” the fall into formlessness would have no end. If Jesus were simply what is best in humanity, what would be the point in calling him “the Saviour” at all?
The function of religion, in Blake’s view, is to ask ultimate questions about existence, and the questions are more important than the answers. He did declare once, “The Old and New Testaments are the great code of art,” but that doesn’t mean that the Bible has a monopoly on truth. Rather, the Bible is the particular set of symbols that are embedded in the Western imagination, inspiring Blake as it inspired Michelangelo and Raphael before him. But he always read the Bible, as Erdman puts it, counterclockwise, in explicit contrast to orthodox interpretation. As Blake says in The Everlasting Gospel,

Both read the Bible day and night
But thou read’st black where I read white.

Blake explicitly rejected a great deal in the New Testament, including the doctrine of the virgin birth and the Pauline emphasis on sin. He liked the Old Testament even less, etc" 

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/2016/11/02/th...not%20kind

[LinuxGal]

The idea comes from the fact that blakes christianity would have been deemed heretical in his own time.  That mainline churches today aren't far off from his beliefs is down to the creeping post-christian character of contemporary mainline denominations.

Just twenty years after Yeshua was executed Paul turned his flavor of reform Judaism into a blood cult.  The idea of drinking blood, even "symbolically" would have creeped Yeshua and Peter and James the fuck out. Now the Catholic Church says it's not even symbolic.

[FlatAssembler]

In Vulgate in Ecclesiastes 2:16, it says "...et futura tempora oblivione cuncta pariter operient...". I guess that's supposed to mean "...and the future times will cover entire them by oblivion...". However, why is "cuncta" neuter then, if it refers to people of unspecified gender? Shouldn't it be "cunctos", in masculine?

[FlatAssembler]

"Memoria eorum" translates as "the memory of them" - in other words, others' memories of the deceased.  Very common on war memorials - the motto of the Royal Canadian Legion is "Memoriam Eorum Retinebimus," or "We will remember them" (retain the memory of them).

The passage essentially means that [others'] memories of the dead will eventually fade into nothingness.

Did you study Latin at a university? How old are you that you remember such details? Based on your profile picture, I'd guess you are at least 50.

[Bucky Ball]

"Memoria eorum" translates as "the memory of them" - in other words, others' memories of the deceased.  Very common on war memorials - the motto of the Royal Canadian Legion is "Memoriam Eorum Retinebimus," or "We will remember them" (retain the memory of them).

The passage essentially means that [others'] memories of the dead will eventually fade into nothingness.

Did you study Latin at a university? How old are you that you remember such details? Based on your profile picture, I'd guess you are at least 50.

Why don't you make a list and post the qualifications that those who are fortunate enough to be allowed to respond to your stupid questions must have.

[arewethereyet]

"Memoria eorum" translates as "the memory of them" - in other words, others' memories of the deceased.  Very common on war memorials - the motto of the Royal Canadian Legion is "Memoriam Eorum Retinebimus," or "We will remember them" (retain the memory of them).

The passage essentially means that [others'] memories of the dead will eventually fade into nothingness.

Did you study Latin at a university? How old are you that you remember such details? Based on your profile picture, I'd guess you are at least 50.

There are two questions you should never ask a woman.  1.  How old are you?  2. When is your baby due?

Unless you are a bartender or an obstetrician...don't do it.

[Bucky Ball]

There are all kinds of problems and issues with respect to "translation" of any text from one language to another. : linguistic, literal, most accurate, are any idioms present in the original made evident in the "translation" ?, etc etc.

https://www.bible-researcher.com/vulgate4.html

If the literal order of the Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic words does not yield a sensible sentence in English, or if the original language contains an idiomatic expression, a direct word-for-word translation is less accurate than a translation that captures the meaning but loses the structure of the original.

" A thought-for-thought translation is known as dynamic equivalent, while a word-for-word translation is called formal equivalent. Essentially this is a metric of how literal a translation is (does it follow form or meaning?). Remember that both form and meaning can be important; this is a subjective decision (just like all of the other criteria). 'Literal' is not always better, especially when the text refers to idioms or cultural/historical practices or events which are unfamiliar to modern readers."

"One final fact about Greek is that it normally doesn't explicitly use pronouns - they are used for emphasis. Matthew 26:33 is one of the times when a pronoun is used, which is something that most translations miss.

While many exegetes recommend syntax mimicking translations, most linguists would recommend one that doesn't attempt to do that, because it confuses the meaning too much, and doesn't actually give any substantial benefit to the reader. Hope this helps a bit in your understanding."

The real question is not anything with respect to Latin, or the Vulgate.
The real question is what education this dude has in linguistics, the many issues of translation in general languages in general which include Hebrew and Aramaic, and how he knows what was the original language of the gospels, which were "proclamations of faith" for use in liturgical services, ... proclamations of the "good news" (euvangelion). NO one then sat around "reading gospels". They were trolled up and locked up and unavailable except to a very few.

[Bucky Ball]

There are all kinds of problems and issues with respect to "translation" of any text from one language to another. : linguistic, literal, most accurate, are any idioms present in the original made evident in the "translation" ?,  etc etc.

https://www.bible-researcher.com/vulgate4.html

If the literal order of the Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic words does not yield a sensible sentence in English, or if the original language contains an idiomatic expression, a direct word-for-word translation is less accurate than a translation that captures the meaning but loses the structure of the original.

" A thought-for-thought translation is known as dynamic equivalent, while a word-for-word translation is called formal equivalent. Essentially this is a metric of how literal a translation is (does it follow form or meaning?). Remember that both form and meaning can be important; this is a subjective decision (just like all of the other criteria). 'Literal' is not always better, especially when the text refers to idioms or cultural/historical practices or events which are unfamiliar to modern readers."

"One final fact about Greek is that it normally doesn't explicitly use pronouns - they are used for emphasis. Matthew 26:33 is one of the times when a pronoun is used, which is something that most translations miss.

While many exegetes recommend syntax mimicking translations, most linguists would recommend one that doesn't attempt to do that, because it confuses the meaning too much, and doesn't actually give any substantial benefit to the reader. Hope this helps a bit in your understanding."

The real question is not anything with respect to Latin, or the Vulgate.
The real question is what education this dude has in linguistics, the many issues of translation in general  languages in general which include Hebrew and Aramaic, and how he knows what was the original language of the gospels, which were "proclamations of faith" for use in liturgical services, ... proclamations of the "good news" (euvangelion). NO one then sat around "reading gospels". They were trolled up and locked up and unavailable except to a very few.

Last sentence ... they were "rolled up" Scrolls were very valuable.

[Astreja]

"Memoria eorum" translates as "the memory of them" - in other words, others' memories of the deceased.  Very common on war memorials - the motto of the Royal Canadian Legion is "Memoriam Eorum Retinebimus," or "We will remember them" (retain the memory of them).

The passage essentially means that [others'] memories of the dead will eventually fade into nothingness.

Did you study Latin at a university? How old are you that you remember such details? Based on your profile picture, I'd guess you are at least 50.

I just turned 66, and I'm currently studying Latin in university (going into my second year of Latin, and my first year of Greek, in September). I have a very good memory for alphanumeric data (still remember the phone number my family had fifty years ago), and because I play in concert bands that sometimes rehearse or perform at Legions I regularly see monuments and plaques with the Legion slogan on it.