firedragon
Veteran Member
So by scholarship you meant translation.
Did they use a septuagint and an older manuscript of the NT for their translation? Why not the Hebrew Tanakh instead because it would have been more authentic for translation?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What is your biggest complaint/disagreement with the bible
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
So by scholarship you meant translation.
Did they use a septuagint and an older manuscript of the NT for their translation? Why not the Hebrew Tanakh instead because it would have been more authentic for translation?
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I was comparing the KJV only to other English translations. I can't speak for language versions.
Translation is always subjective, ambiguous and imprecise; as indeed, is interpretation. One of the benefits of translation by committee, is that each individual contributor to the process, must by definition expect to have his own interpretation challenged.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, not just subjective as a single individual. There is also shared cultural, social and political assumptions.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Who was that for?
ElishaElijah
Return
Please elaborate on this because I found just the opposite especially Proverbs for Wisdom, I found these to be timeless truths as well as for practical living. Unless of course this is off topic and in that case would like to know what you mean in a private conversation .
ElishaElijah
Return
Anyone but sometimes the person who wrote the OP may not want the conversation to go there, maybe maybe not. Would be helpful to actually pick a subject in the Bible and look at what is said in the context for the correct meaning. There is one correct interpretation but can be many applications of that truth.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Okay, I will answer. You can find general human wisdom in not just one religion and even non-religion. That says nothing about a God or no God. That just tells you that we have some things in common.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
As you do it. I could still do it differently as how I rate the Bible and what it is in relationship to humans and God. One way or another.
ElishaElijah
Return
Here is an example:
There’s a family swimming in their concealed back yard pool, the Dad yells at his son, you're not allowed to run.
The neighbor hears this instruction but can’t see the swimming pool or what’s going on.
Now you see the son playing sports running and the Dad says to his son, run! Go as fast as you can.
The neighbor is confused now, I thought the Dad said no running allowed.
There’s a family swimming in their concealed back yard pool, the Dad yells at his son, you're not allowed to run.
The neighbor hears this instruction but can’t see the swimming pool or what’s going on.
Now you see the son playing sports running and the Dad says to his son, run! Go as fast as you can.
The neighbor is confused now, I thought the Dad said no running allowed.
Opinions of Clara Tea:
BIGGEST COMPLAINT ABOUT THE BIBLE: Those espousing Christianity follow Satan, not Christ (ignore bible).
KILLING AND IRAQ:
Example: The bible quotes God (in the 10 Commandments): "Thou Shalt Not Kill." President George W. Bush, elected by the Religious Right (an organization of those who espouse Christianity) repeatedly claimed to be "fightin' the Axis of Evil," or sometimes just "fightin' evil."
Why was Iraq said to be evil? Because, W. Bush made playing cards of a man that he called "Doctor Evil" (a high ranking government official of Iraq). God said "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness."
In 1991, when Iraq (under Saddam Houssein) attacked Iraq to repel it's invasion of Kuwait (which used to be part of Iraq), US soldiers and Iraqi soldiers both testified that the US used tanks with plough shares and machine guns to shoot Iraqis, and while still alive, bury the bodies (many still living while being buried) in mass graves. Blaming Saddam for these mass graves in the war continued by W. Bush, gave W. Bush more reason to called Iraq evil. I reiterate, God said "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness."
Many nations (France, Germany, et al) objected to W. Bush's invasion of peaceful nations, but W. Bush lied about having intel showing Iraq's link to terrorism ("Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness)." Colin Powell was ordered to lie to the US.
The prophets of God said "DON'T ATTACK IRAQ." Revelation (a chapter of the New Testament bible said that if anyone attacked Iraq, they would face the wrath of God, and they would face economic hardship from God, and Revelation 15 says that they would face seven mutations of Covid (we haven't yet had all seven). God, knowing that many would ignore his ancient prophets sent PROPHETS OF GOD IN MODERN TIMES. Many were renowned psychics prior to God choosing them to be His prophets. I personally knew many of them. They were ignored. Some felt that they had false prophecies, but that could not be since their prophecies were exactly the same as prophecies in Revelation in the holy bible.
Then W. Bush lied about Niger selling yellow-cake to Iraq and sent Wilson to spread those lies (but Wilson refused). I reiterate: God said "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness," and "Thou Shalt Not Kill." So, W. Bush and Dick Cheney outed CIA wife, Valery Plame as punishment (exposing her identity as a CIA agent, which resulting in the identification and execution of her associates in Iraq).
Numerous orange alerts were designed to scare us that North Korea (part of the fictional Axis of Evil) was building nukes that could (and would) strike California. According to Tom Ridge (responsible for making orange alerts), he didn't make those alerts, but they came from superiors (W. Bush or Cheney).
HAGEE:
John Hagee - Wikipedia
Wikipedia: "Hagee purported that Adolf Hitler's antisemitism was especially derived from his Catholic background, and he also purported that Hitler was "a spiritual leader in the Catholic Church,"[18] as well as purporting that the Catholic Church under Pope Pius XII encouraged Nazism.[19] Hagee also blamed the Catholic Church for instigating the Dark Ages, claiming that it allowed the Crusaders to rape and murder with impunity."......"Hagee has been described as making slanderous or demonizing comments about Islam.[33][34] Hagee has claimed that "Islam not only condones violence; it commands it".[35][36] He has also claimed that a contrast exists between Islam's "violent nature" and Christianity's "loving nature"[35][37] and that the Quran teaches, and Muslims have a mandate, to kill Jews and Christians."....."claimed that a tetrad which began with the April 2014 lunar eclipse was a sign of the end times."
Reverend John Hagee said that we must pray to Jesus to win the war in Iraq (kill more effectively). I reiterate, God said "Thou Shalt Not Kill."
Hagee: Bachelor of Science, History and Education; Master of Education Administration, and his alma maters are Trinity University and the University of North Texas (notice that Hagee doesn't have a degree in theology, yet many follow his ministry).
Hagee did some good, giving aid to Jews.
NRA:
In order to get elected by the Religious Right, candidates must be for gun rights and have the approval of the National Rifle Association. Senator Kerry, a legitimate war hero was slandered by Veterans for Truth, and made out to be a coward and traitor. I reiterate that God said "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness." and the NRA didn't apporve of him though he went hunting during his campaign against draft dodger W. Bush (who spent the war with the Texas Air National Guard...noncombat, trained to fly an obsolete plane, and he went AWOL).
GLOBAL WARMING:
Global Warming is a hoax, said Donald Trump (surrounded by non-scientists). Drilling offshore, fracking (suspending the Clean Water Act), polluting, avoiding solar tech, pandering to the oil/coal industries, they worship mammon over God, leaving behind a toxic waste dump where once God's miracle environment once stood, as they rapture to heaven. Hurricanes are more intense due to Global Warming. W. Bush held back help for hurricane Katrina victims and stayed on vacation.
HOMELESS:
Jesus fed, cured, and didn't care about money. Hoards of homeless are ignored, as the new tax structure gave to the rich and pushed the middle class into the poor class. Republicans opposed universal health care (Obamacare).
BOY RAPING PRIESTS:
Rape is not a standard function of the Catholic church, so objecting to protecting priests (and allowing them to rape more little boys) is not the same as blasphemy or being against God. Bankrupcy of the Catholic church protects mammon and doesn't compensate innocent victims.
Suave
Simulated character
I strongly disagree with the Biblical claim asserting Eve as being the mother of all mankind. I find the Bible's genealogy of Jesus Christ to be incomplete with its genealogy of 77 generations listed between Jesus Christ back to Adam who was with Eve, the mother of all mankind according to Genesis.
A straightforward addition of the chrono-genealogies yields a date for the beginning around 4,000 B.C. Chronologists working from the Bible consistently get 2,000 years between Adam and Abraham. Few Biblical scholars would dispute that Abraham lived around two thousand B.C. Many Christians assert there are gaps in the Genesis genealogies. One of their arguments is that the word begat, as used in the time-line from the first man Adam to Abraham in Genesis 5 and 11, can skip generations. If this argument were true, the date for creation using the biblical time-line of history cannot be worked out.
Well known Progressive creationists/Old-Earth creationists such as Hugh Ross suggest biblical Adam could have actually lived nearly 100,000 years ago. Well-known Biblical scholar James Ussher places the date of Abraham around 2000 B.C. (Ussher’s date for Abraham’s birth is 1996 B.C.), the remaining 96,000 years must fit into the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies, between Adam and Abraham.
Now, if we estimate that 40 years equals one generation, which is a generously high estimate, this means that 2,500 generations are missing from these genealogies. But this renders the genealogies ridiculously meaningless.
Or the genealogies are just wrong. I see no reason to exclude that possibility.
Complaining about the Bible is like complaining
about Harry Potter. I don't. My complaint is that
so many people think the Bible is The Truth, &
that it must be imposed upon non-believers.
about Harry Potter. I don't. My complaint is that
so many people think the Bible is The Truth, &
that it must be imposed upon non-believers.
Segev Moran
Well-Known Member
Hebrew is not lost. We use it daily.
Some words have a very different meaning than modern Hebrew, yet at its core, the meaning of the words is the same.
There are some words that are very rare in the OT, making them much harder to interpret, but in Israel, we learn the OT from first grade and most people have no problem understanding the language.
No.
Many people do accept others' translations, this is the reason there is so much abuse of the texts. If someone would simply read the actual words, many of the religious BS would be quickly become irrelevant (like God and gays as an example).
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
The Old Testament was translated direct from Hebrew, and the New Testament from Koine Greek. As I understand it, there has - inevitably - been some debate about the integrity of the Hebrew texts used, but they had the libraries of Oxford, Cambridge, Winchester and Westminster at their disposal.
Suave
Simulated character
Please allow me to dare agree with the notion of the Christ to Adam genealogies in the Bible as being fabricated or fictionalized.
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
I see the Bible as a record of the history of man, but in the context of many different eras and times, with each era, unique to itself. Each is based on ancient thinking and not on modern people using revisionist history to enhanced sales. It shows ancient humans in their natural environments and how they changed over thousands of years, and how culture and its many people changed attitudes and perception during those same periods of time.
At one time slavery and conquest were the way of the world. But this changes over the eons. The story of the family of man, allows one to have a feel for how the family human evolved from its formation in early civilization, as it grew and moved closer to the modern eras.
In the New Testament there are often several accounts for the same things, with each presented differently by different authors. This is consistent with human nature, with people often seeing the same things in different ways. It is not about one author trying to maintain an official flattering structure of a book, but rather it was more about allowing many POV's, so the full meaning of those times can be inferred. Many times were not clear cut or based on group think.
Picture if you read a novel of an immigrant family that comes to the New World. In the first few chapters we learn about their past and their present and as the book progresses we learn about their future, through 10 generations. They change over time, with those times also changing them as culture evolves. The extended family goes from horse and buggy, to levitation cars, from illiteracy to supercomputers and virtual reality. From poverty, to living large and then back to poverty. This is the Bible, but the family's trials and tribulations last over 6000 years, with the most important lessons of living, summarized.
With this POV, what the Bible says is interesting in itself. It does not need micromanaging by me critiquing the authors methods of presentation or his choice of anecdotal stories. It is all good and interesting and allows me to see from where we came, so we can draw a line to the future.
The Bible shows a time when the world was very rough and violent. There are other times, when there is peace and prosperity. Humans would often be cruel but still others would make great sacrifices. The family of man endured and had an impact on even our present and future.
At one time slavery and conquest were the way of the world. But this changes over the eons. The story of the family of man, allows one to have a feel for how the family human evolved from its formation in early civilization, as it grew and moved closer to the modern eras.
In the New Testament there are often several accounts for the same things, with each presented differently by different authors. This is consistent with human nature, with people often seeing the same things in different ways. It is not about one author trying to maintain an official flattering structure of a book, but rather it was more about allowing many POV's, so the full meaning of those times can be inferred. Many times were not clear cut or based on group think.
Picture if you read a novel of an immigrant family that comes to the New World. In the first few chapters we learn about their past and their present and as the book progresses we learn about their future, through 10 generations. They change over time, with those times also changing them as culture evolves. The extended family goes from horse and buggy, to levitation cars, from illiteracy to supercomputers and virtual reality. From poverty, to living large and then back to poverty. This is the Bible, but the family's trials and tribulations last over 6000 years, with the most important lessons of living, summarized.
With this POV, what the Bible says is interesting in itself. It does not need micromanaging by me critiquing the authors methods of presentation or his choice of anecdotal stories. It is all good and interesting and allows me to see from where we came, so we can draw a line to the future.
The Bible shows a time when the world was very rough and violent. There are other times, when there is peace and prosperity. Humans would often be cruel but still others would make great sacrifices. The family of man endured and had an impact on even our present and future.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Okay. So since they used Hebrew texts, why is it corresponding with the Septuagint? Is not that conflicting?
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
There’s always an agenda with a work of this nature, of course. And a knowledge of the particular historical and cultural circumstances in which a work of literature was produced, or in this case translated, will be relevant to any considered interpretation.
Great works of literature have the power to transcend such considerations, at least partially. Some of the creative essence of the original is preserved; the insight, meaning and visionary power of truly great writing can survive imperfect or misguided translation attempts, and still shine through, largely or at least partly uncorrupted.
Shakespeare, I am told, still sounds like poetry in Bulgarian, one doesn’t have to speak Russian to recognise the genius of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky or Chekhov, and Jahaludin Rumi is acknowledged by non Farsi speakers around the world as one of history’s finest and wisest poets. As it is with these great writers, I would say, so it is with Genesis, The Psalms, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomon, the Gospels and Revelation; these are timeless jewels which have endured because of their literary merit, and there is something in the essence of them which will always translate, into any tongue and in any culture.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
That would depend on the extent to which the Septuagint would have been true to the Hebrew original. And also to what extent there was a consensus among Hebrew scholars, then and now, regarding the integrity of those copies of the Hebrew Tanakh available to linguistic scholars in 17th Century England. I know that the KJV translators made reference to pre existing translations, but worked as far as possible from original sources.