Yes. Jayhawker gives a link to another free online copy in his original post. Tanakh | Sefaria
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yes. Jayhawker gives a link to another free online copy in his original post. Tanakh | Sefaria
Yes. Jayhawker gives a link to another free online copy in his original post. Tanakh | Sefaria
I agree that the KJV represents the best standards of English scholarship, built on earlier English scholarship, as it stood at the start of the 17th century, and that good 21st century scholarship is found in the most reputable recent translations.... actually, two:
- Don't.
that its the blood? maybe i should become a vampire and only drink jewish blood
וַיִּ֤פֶן אַֽחֲרָיו֙ וַיִּרְאֵ֔ם וַֽיְקַלְלֵ֖ם בְּשֵׁ֣ם יְהוָ֑ה וַתֵּצֶ֨אנָה שְׁתַּ֤יִם דֻּבִּים֙ מִן־הַיַּ֔עַר וַתְּבַקַּ֣עְנָה מֵהֶ֔ם אַרְבָּעִ֥ים וּשְׁנֵ֖י יְלָדִֽים׃... actually, two:
- Don't.
- If you're too too cheap, too lazy, and or too disinterested to acquire a decent Tanakh, at least consult a reasonably good translation from a Jewish source, e.g., Sefaria
Though I seem to be on his ****list as of late, I've never thought of Jay's comments as being hateful. Biting, yes. Hateful, no. It's an art-form, really.I think he is just being hateful.
Thank you, @Jayhawker SouleActually, this thread was intended primarily for those intent on rendering sophomoric critiques of verses from the Tanakh. By all means do so but, if the intent is honest dialogue, you might wish to avail yourself of the fruits of modern scholarship - as has been done, for example, by the folks behind the NRSV.
I think that I do take their interpretations into consideration, and it is the correct thing to do if we are going to say that we are Bible-based. Consider this couple verses in Romans about it: "What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God." (Romans 3:1-2) This also bears out historically as they have kept the written words very carefully, so I don't see why any Christian would want to evade Jewish interpretations.
That statement is stupid on the face of it but, more to the point, it is irrelevant.
I'm sure genetics has a lot to do with it. You'd need to find a way to graft Jewish DNA onto your own.
NRSV, the copy that sits on my bedside cabinet right now. It took me a while, being raised on the poetic beauty of the Authorised Version, but I can quite get into it now; though my main version is the Judaica Press for when I quote on RF.Actually, this thread was intended primarily for those intent on rendering sophomoric critiques of verses from the Tanakh. By all means do so but, if the intent is honest dialogue, you might wish to avail yourself of the fruits of modern scholarship - as has been done, for example, by the folks behind the NRSV.
Because half the books they use are Jewish texts. It's really that simple.It's irrelevant but you want Christians to use Jewish text. Who's spouting stupidity again?
Which churches version?
Don't forget the Aramaic, וּבְזָעָאוַיִּ֤פֶן אַֽחֲרָיו֙ וַיִּרְאֵ֔ם וַֽיְקַלְלֵ֖ם בְּשֵׁ֣ם יְהוָ֑ה וַתֵּצֶ֨אנָה שְׁתַּ֤יִם דֻּבִּים֙ מִן־הַיַּ֔עַר וַתְּבַקַּ֣עְנָה מֵהֶ֔ם אַרְבָּעִ֥ים וּשְׁנֵ֖י יְלָדִֽים׃
He turned around and looked at them and cursed them in the name of the LORD. Thereupon, two she-bears came out of the woods and mangled forty-two of the children.
wat·tə·ḇaq·qa‘·nāh — 1 Occurrence
2 Kings 2:24
HEB: מִן־ הַיַּ֔עַר וַתְּבַקַּ֣עְנָה מֵהֶ֔ם אַרְבָּעִ֥ים
NAS: out of the woods and tore up forty-two
KJV: out of the wood, and tare forty
INT: out of the woods and tore like forty
Definition
to cleave, break open or through
NASB Translation
breached (3), break (4), break forth (1), break through (1), breaks forth (1), breaks open (1), broke open (1), broke through (2), broken (3), burst (2), burst open (1), cleaved (1), dashed to pieces (1), divide (1), divided (4), forth (1), hatch (2), hews (1), invaded (1), make for ourselves a breach (1), rip (1), ripped (1), ripped open (2), shook (1), split (7), split open (1), splits (1), tear (1), tore (2), torn (2).
through
THro͞o/
preposition & adverb
the sea and divide it,
- 1.
moving in one side and out of the other side of (an opening, channel, or location).
"stepping boldly through the doorway"
synonyms: into and out of, to the other side of, to the far side of, from one side to the other of
and he split wood
deep burst open, and the floodgates
so the waters were divided.
mighty men broke through the camp
so that the earth shook at their noise
swords, to break through to the king
That is the second best joke I have heard on the forum so far.Don't forget the Aramaic, וּבְזָעָא
or the Talmudic discussion which ties it to הובקעו
... actually, two:
- Don't.
- If you're too too cheap, too lazy, and or too disinterested to acquire a decent Tanakh, at least consult a reasonably good translation from a Jewish source, e.g., Sefaria
Because half the books they use are Jewish texts. It's really that simple.
No, we wouldn't all be Jewish because that's not how Judaism works. Christianity, in its own texts, completely mutilates verses of the Tanach, especially Paul - he does this a lot. It's in there for everyone to see. It's also not an 'interpretation'- it's often complete and deliberate mistranslation to make the verses match what their own books say.With different interpretations. If the interpretations were the same the would be no difference. We would all be Christian or all be Jewish. But that is not the case is it.
Actually, this thread was intended primarily for those intent on rendering sophomoric critiques of verses from the Tanakh. By all means do so but, if the intent is honest dialogue, you might wish to avail yourself of the fruits of modern scholarship - as has been done, for example, by the folks behind the NRSV.
It's also not an 'interpretation'- it's often complete and deliberate mistranslation to make the verses match what their own books say.