[Stryke 9]

Mik: King James is far and away the best version, so long as you can take a little abstruse prose in the law-based books. The NIV is supposed to be fairly decent, but I've got one and it lacks the great feel King James had. Supposedly more literally accurate or no, it reads like one of those forced attempts to make an old ideology "hip" to dem youngsters these days.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by TrashMan


In your dreams......No one short of GOD himself can prove me wrong!:D

Or right.

Touche.

[mikhael]

Stryke, the reason I seperate the KJV from whatever the Catholic approved version because the KJV is supposed to be edited. I'd like to get the two versions, just for comparison's sake.

[Kazan]

all editions of the bible are edited and spun

[mikhael]

yeah, I know, Kaz. But sometimes there's meaning to be had in finding out HOW they're edited to be different and how the versions spin each other.

From a historical and theolgical (not theosophical) point of view, his is actually one place where Jews and Muslims have the advantage on Christians. Jewish liturgical law, I believe, has a set of rules that act as a sort of 'information hygiene' inspector, ensuring that copies of the text are identical. Muslims, have similar rules (springing from the same source, IIRC). Christianity doesn't have that in the New Testament. This serves as a good explanation for differences found int he four Gospels and for later changes that crop up in various translations and revisions.

[Setekh]

Originally posted by mikhael
Mine is the english translation done by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall. Its the first translation done by a native English speaking, non-middle-eastern Muslim. He warns in the preface notes that this is NOT al-Qu'ran, as that sacred book can only be written in arabic for several linguistic and literary reasons. Its nicely annotated and is careful to note where the wording may not match precisely to the original meaning.

Mmmm. It's been a little hobby of mine to learn Arabic, Hebrew and Greek (Hebrew is on the way in university, Greek and Arabic are moving very slowly). I'm frustrated by being unable to read so far, since my Muslim friends will always block off discussions by saying that only they can read the Qu'ran, and so end of story. Pretty sad way to discuss things, I guess.

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
My entire comment was based on the blatant ignorance of fact in the post I was quoting, specifically the fact that he was saying that the New Testament would be closer to the specific words and acts of Jesus than the Koran/Quran would be to the acts of Mohammed. Sorry for my own factual inncacuracies.

That's cool. That you can admit anything wrong about your own words speaks very, very highly of you, IMHO.

[Stryke 9]

Hmm... I don't think there's any single translation that includes all the stuff that was there before the priests took to cutting out inconvenient passages. All the versions I know of are based off of basically the same material as the KJV. I'm fairly certain you could get translations of the other stuff separately, if you knew what you were looking for and made friends with some theology prof, but as far as common versions go you might be out of luck there.

The "Catholic approved version", last I checked, was the NIV. Or, really, the Latin translations, but I don't suppose that's what you want. But it's been a while, and my memory's always been crap.

[Setekh]

Hey, Stryke, I'm curious. What would you classify as an inconvenient passage? I've had discussions about this with my friends from the Art faculty at uni (great opinions over there), and before I lease my view on you, I want to hear the definition behind your assertion there of the cuttings-out.

The NIV can't really be the totally Roman-Catholic approved version, though - it lacks the Apocrypha/Deuterocanon. Unless they mean the NIV as an additional text, and not the whole deal.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Setekh
Mmmm. It's been a little hobby of mine to learn Arabic, Hebrew and Greek (Hebrew is on the way in university, Greek and Arabic are moving very slowly). I'm frustrated by being unable to read so far, since my Muslim friends will always block off discussions by saying that only they can read the Qu'ran, and so end of story. Pretty sad way to discuss things, I guess.

I would recommend finding your local mosque (I'm sure you have one, somewhere in Sydney) and trying to discuss things with the guy in charge.

Failing that, I'm always willing to discuss al-Qu'ran from a theological, secular point of view.

[edit]
And this reminds me yet again, I need to write up that thing I wanted to discuss with you.
[/edit]

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by mikhael
From a historical and theolgical (not theosophical) point of view, his is actually one place where Jews and Muslims have the advantage on Christians. Jewish liturgical law, I believe, has a set of rules that act as a sort of 'information hygiene' inspector, ensuring that copies of the text are identical. Muslims, have similar rules (springing from the same source, IIRC). Christianity doesn't have that in the New Testament. This serves as a good explanation for differences found int he four Gospels and for later changes that crop up in various translations and revisions.

Actually the primary problem with "forcing" Christians to stick to the original, unedited version, is that virtually nobody speaks or reads Latin / Greek anymore.

Biblical Hebrew is a bit different from modern Hebrew, but no so different that I cannot understand what I'm reading (for the most part). And I never studied Biblical Hebrew.

Translations are definitely a problem, especially when they screw up something as crucial and history-changing as the Commandment "Thou shalt not kill." That is just a wrong translation; the original is: "Lo Tirtzach", literally, "(You shall) Not Murder". The "you shall" is implied in the word "Lo". There's a world of difference between murder and kill.

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Hmm... I don't think there's any single translation that includes all the stuff that was there before the priests took to cutting out inconvenient passages. All the versions I know of are based off of basically the same material as the KJV. I'm fairly certain you could get translations of the other stuff separately, if you knew what you were looking for and made friends with some theology prof, but as far as common versions go you might be out of luck there.

Eh? If you know of a specific passage (in the Old Covenant), ask me - I can read Hebrew.

[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by Sandwich
Translations are definitely a problem, especially when they screw up something as crucial and history-changing as the Commandment "Thou shalt not kill." That is just a wrong translation; the original is: "Lo Tirtzach", literally, "(You shall) Not Murder". The "you shall" is implied in the word "Lo". There's a world of difference between murder and kill.

Yah, I heard about this. As a lawyer, I know for a fact that there's a world of difference between murder and kill, just like Sandwich said.

You can kill in self-defense and you won't get prosecuted (at least, you don't deserve to get prosecuted). If you commit murder FOR ANY REASON, you're going to jail (or deserve to).

[Kazan]

puts $5 on the table the mistranslation of "thou shalt not kill" was intentional

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by aldo_14


Or right.

Touche.

The beautiull thing about religion is - IT DOESN'T NEED NO FRIGGIN PROOF!!!(Alltough I see proof everywhere)

I'm quite happy with how things stand now, while all nothing-but-science-belivers will allways wonder if there is a God....

[Zarax]

There will be no God as soon as the humanity will be omniscent, there's no other way around... Though Arthur C. Clarck has an interesting theory in his book 3010: Final Odissey

[karajorma]

Originally posted by TrashMan
I'm quite happy with how things stand now, while all nothing-but-science-belivers will allways wonder if there is a God....

I spend no more time wondering if there is a God than wondering if I'm going to be eaten by a giant mutant badger next time I leave the house. Both are equally improbable events to me.

[diamondgeezer]

I reckon I wonder about God a lot less than many Christians wonder about how, for example, stars are formed

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Kazan
puts $5 on the table the mistranslation of "thou shalt not kill" was intentional

Wouldn't surprise me.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer
I reckon I wonder about God a lot less than many Christians wonder about how, for example, stars are formed

if they wonder how stars are formed they failed middle school science

[Knight Templar]

Originally posted by TrashMan



The beautiull thing about religion is - IT DOESN'T NEED NO FRIGGIN PROOF!!!(Alltough I see proof everywhere)

I'm quite happy with how things stand now, while all nothing-but-science-belivers will allways wonder if there is a God....

Dude, just leave already.

The proof behind religon is that you are here, and that's how it happened, along with the faith of it's followers. If you are religous and don't understand that, you're in the wrong boat buddy.

[Kazan]

Knight: that's not proof and you know it - don't use the word wrong


TrashMan: keep the delusions coming