Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
June 4, 2010 at 4:29 pm (This post was last modified: June 4, 2010 at 4:43 pm by mo3taz3nbar.)
Quote:You're not talking about the bible now, just one translation into English. The bible has been translated many times since the KJV. The NIV is considered to be the most accurate now, but still more accurate translation can be had from varying sources.
there is a difference between a version and a translation the word i quoted from king james version is not talking about translation
Quote:Son, you don't want to hear my opinion....it would flame the wallpaper in your room. I quote these other islamic "scholars" to show you that you are giving us little more than a No True Scotsman argument. You see, they think that they are better muslims than you just as you think that you have the sole handle on the truth.
It's a common affliction among religious types. You're no better than the average xtian fundamentalist.
No worse....certainly no better. And your invisible man in the sky is no more compelling than theirs.
before quoting you have to see the reasons by yourself and understand it. if u used this way in religion believe me you can find whatever you want easily even if what you want isnt the truth
about what you think is invisible man in the sky you will know in one day hope it will not be late
for you to understand that you was so lazy to even examine the truth in the right way
i had a challenge for you in previous post but of course you ignored it. and i wrote a thread before and i wrote some of the reason that makes me believe in islam and in god plz look at this thread again
Quote:You're not talking about the bible now, just one translation into English. The bible has been translated many times since the KJV. The NIV is considered to be the most accurate now, but still more accurate translation can be had from varying sources.
there is a difference between a version and a translation the word i quoted from king james version is not talking about translation
The KJV is one translation. There are many. The New International VERSION <---meaning english translation from scratch from the original text (correct according to the best information available at the time).
Version = translation
The KJV footnote is talking about that specific translation. Understanding the text requires investigation into the true meaning from the original. Serious bible scholars use the original language to work out the most accurate meaning.
Quote:i had a challenge for you in previous post but of course you ignored it.
I certainly hope that you do not think that I sit around eagerly searching for your next blurb from Holy Land? You are not that important nor interesting and your religion is no better than any of the other nonsense which is dumped here by various believers.
If you would care to direct me to this so called "challenge" I'll take a look at it.
Quote:about what you think is invisible man in the sky you will know in one day hope it will not be late
Don't hold your breath. Islam is every bit as stupid as every other religion and just as phony.
June 4, 2010 at 8:13 pm (This post was last modified: June 4, 2010 at 8:14 pm by tackattack.)
I would respectfully disagree about the NIV. I personally consider it the most polluted version aside from the lolcatz and hiphop versions. It's definately easier to read and probably the widest distributed. It might be better thought of as a thought for thought versions (which allows a lot of room for speculation). I think the NASB, KJV and the NKJV are the particularly the YLT are thebest literal translations.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
" the NIV is based on different manuscripts, which modern scholars generally (though not unanimously) believe better reflect the texts as originally written."
KJV & NKJV : "One major criticism involves the fact that it is based solely upon the ancient texts available during the time of King James and not on earlier manuscripts and documents which have since been discovered
the NKJV's adherence to the Textus Receptus seems to many to violate the spirit of open scholarship and open inquiry, and to ascribe a level of perfection to the documents available to the 17th century scholars that they would not have claimed for themselves"
NASB : "The greatest perceived strength of the NASB is its reliability and fidelity to the original languages, which, along with other literal translations, also allows for ambiguities in the text's meaning. Its corresponding weakness is that its readability and literary style sometimes prove confusing to the average reader. "
Similarly this applies to Young's Translation.
(other quotes from wikipedia - coz we all know it's RIGHT!!! )
Glad we could amuse you. The only reason I'll continue is because I think it's relevant to the thread.
I agree with the NIV being more inclusive, and is far more readable. I prefer to do my own thinking though and would prefer a more base linguist translation witha few papers missing than something that tried to merge several varying documents from @2k years (and older) ago and use modern language (which has developed considerably since). I think the latter allows a far wider margin of error in comprehension and translation (vis. the translation of homosexual). Basically, I'd rather have people not understand it than misunderstand it. I'm also a Shakespeare and Burns fan so I guess I'm a little anachronistic.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
Bart Ehrman ( Misquoting Jesus ) on the "reliability" of the King James version.
Quote:The King James Version is filled with places in which the translators rendered a Greek text derived ultimately from Erasmus's edition, which was based on a single twelfth-century manuscript that is one of the worst of the manuscripts that we now have available to us! It's no wonder that modern translations often differ from the King James, and no wonder that some Bible-believing Christians prefer to pretend there's never been a problem, since God inspired the King James Bible instead of the original Greek! (p. 209)
June 6, 2010 at 7:42 am (This post was last modified: June 6, 2010 at 7:59 am by Caecilian.)
The KJV at least has the distinction of being a great work of literature in its own right. I don't believe a word of it, but some of the passages are extraordinarily beautiful. For example, 1 Corinthians 13:
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
3And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4Charity suffereth long, [and] is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8Charity never faileth: but whether [there be] prophecies, they shall fail; whether [there be] tongues, they shall cease; whether [there be] knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these [is] charity.
English prose doesn't get any better than that. But then, like tackattack, I'm an oldfashioned sort who loves Shakespeare.
For reference, heres the same passage from the NIV:
1If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,[b] but have not love, I gain nothing.
4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love
Its just not as good.
He who desires to worship God must harbor no childish illusions about the matter but bravely renounce his liberty and humanity.
Mikhail Bakunin
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything
Friedrich Nietzsche
)
