This reminds me of a funny story.


To give the background, my family is Jewish but not religious and my brother
is a christian convert. After my dad died I was saying Kaddish (which is a
prayer praising God, said on behalf of a dead parent) and started looking at
the Torah (5 books of Moses).  Of course I am reading a translation since I
don't read Hebrew.


Anyways, my mom is in the hospital for surgery and my brother and sister are
down. I'm looking for a book to read and take (I think it was Exodus).  My
version has the following: The verse and a discussion of the meaning (both
in Hebrew and in English).  I of course am reading the English.


My brother picks up my book at sometime and looks at it.  After a point he
asks me what I am reading and I tell him.  I tell him I find the discussions
fascinating.  He says, "Oh you mean the study guide" and I say, "No, the
discussions as to what the different words can mean" (Hebrew is a compact
language and one word can translate to many different words layering meaning
upon meaning on a sentence).  Anyways, he warns me that the "translation
might be off" and I tell him, I understand that, referencing the above re
Hebrew is a compact language. and he then tells me, "No I mean the
translation into Hebrew from the original."  I then say, the Hebrew in here
is the original, this is the Jewish Bible.  


He didn't talk to me for the rest of the day.


I still don't know whether he meant the greek or aramic translation or if he
thought the Hebrew was a translation from the King James.


Sandy

  _____  

That is somewhat a separate issue.  The Church of England was spun off from
the
Roman church, and the King appointed his own Arch Bishop, in order to
receive
absolution for his divorce, which at the time the Roman church refused. The
Calvinist translation (known as the KJV) is somewhat a different issue,
although
still a controversy for those scholars who are studying the history and
origins
of the bible.

The Hebrew language contains no vowels, and therefore is extremely difficult
to
translate into English.  As a result it was done via "committee, that was
appointed by the King, and thereafter has been termed the "Inspired Word of
God"
Many of the more conservative Christians (I call them radical) insist that
the
KJR is the "Literal Word of God,"  which, of course is completely false.

======================================
Stop spam on your domain, Anti-spam solutions
http://www.clickdoug.com/mailfilter.cfm
For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com
======================================
Aspire to Inspire before you Retire or Expire!

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Candace Cottrell
  To: CF-Community
  Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 3:25 PM
  Subject: Re: KJ Version

  Thanks. I was bothered by the fact that the king may have altered things
to
fit his own agenda. And there were some folks here criticizing me and making
me
feel like an idiot.

  I brought up the subject of divorce. Wasn't it true that in the original
texts, divorce was never permissable, but in the KJV it was altered so that
James could divorce his current wife? I believe I heard this in a history
class
in college.

  Candace K. Cottrell, Web Developer
  The Children's Medical Center
  One Children's Plaza
  Dayton, OH 45404
  937-641-4293

  http://www.childrensdayton.org
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  "There is no right price for the wrong product, even if it is inexpensive
and
delivered on time."

  >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2/26/2004 4:21:24 PM >>>
  In a roundabout way of answering the question, I'll point to something
  discussing the various historical revisions the bible.
  http://www.atheists.org/church/realbible.html

  I'll acknowledge that it's a biased source, but it still provides some
  historical background.

  One quote:
  "We may note one other oddity concerning the "received text" used to
produce
  the King James Bible: Because the Book of Revelation was never popular in
  the Greek Orthodox Church, it was hard for Erasmus to find Greek MSS of
the
  book. Indeed, he could not find a single MS that contained the last six
  verses. Consequently, he had to make up his own Greek - translating the
last
  six verses into Greek from the Latin Vulgate! To this day no Greek text
has
  ever been found that reproduces Erasmus' version of the last six verses of
  me Bible, yet it is the source of the King James rendering. "

  Another quote:
  "The Greek version reflects a Hebrew text more than a thousand years older
  than the Hebrew text used as the standard for the King James."

  Even if you disregard the political decisions of which books and chapters
to
  include in the bible, there are still fundamental problems with
translation.
  Concepts in one language don't always translate easily to another
language.
  Anyone who knows another language can attest to that. For instance, there
is
  a German word "Schadenfreude" that roughly means "taking pleasure in the
  discomfort of others". But there's no word in English to really express
the
  subtle nuances of it. Sadism is a common mistranslation.

  I'm sure Mike can speak to this, but Scholars have debated for centuries
  over the interpretations of passages in the Hebrew, and trying to bring
that
  over to yet another language is inevitably going to introduce vagaries.

  -Kevin

  > Can someone tell me why the King James version of the bible is said to
be
  altered to fit his own agendas?
  _____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

Reply via email to