Pat personally I would be very interested in reading your translation of the
gospels..would you consider sending me a digital copy?
Allan

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Nov 29, 3:22 pm, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Pat what it comes down to is I take all translations with a grain of salt
> > --  that is why there are huge oceans full of it..
> >
> > Translation are a very difficult proposition at best  and Pat medically I
> do
> > not have the ability to learn and use any language.. I can use english
> > because it is my birth language, Have fun translating.
> > Allan
> >
>
> Years ago, I'd started a new translation of the New Testament with a
> friend/colleague, but, sadly, that individual is no longer living.
> We'd finished the Gospels and were just into Acts when personal
> situations arose and work stopped.  4 years later, collaboration
> became impossible.
> Having made the attempt, once, as a part of a collaborative effort, I
> think that would be the best way forward, as two heads are better than
> one and, in tricky cases, you can actually reason out something that
> neither individual would have come out with themselves.  But i've
> found it hard to find people willing and able to DO that kind of
> collaborative work.  And you need to be both willing AND able.
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Pat <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Nov 29, 12:02 pm, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > even after learning the languages what you understand is still a
> > > > translation. so as I read down your statement you are telling me
> never to
> > > > believe what you say because it is a translation?
> > > > Allan
> >
> > > Well, I kind of see your point.  If I'm quoting from the Qur'an, and
> > > my quote is put forward in English, then, yes, you're forced to rely
> > > on MY translation, which could be, like any other, fraught with
> > > agenda.  But, when I DO make such quotes, I do it with my best
> > > understanding of the original text and do my level best to be fair to
> > > the original.  As I've had more experience with Hebrew and Greek, I
> > > tend to quote those texts more often and, of course, there are times
> > > when I put forward a quote from, say, the KJV.  In the future, when I
> > > quote from someone ELSE'S translation, I will mark it as such, as what
> > > you say is perfectly fair and a good comment.  If the quote is based
> > > on my own 'best translation', I should also mark it as such, to be as
> > > fair as possible.
> >
> > > For example, when Isa. 34:14 (KJV) states: "The wild beasts of the
> > > desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the
> > > satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there,
> > > and find for herself a place of rest."
> >
> > > I take exception with the term 'the screech owl' and would translate
> > > it as 'Lilith', as THAT'S the word used in the original text.  And, of
> > > course, when one knows the history behind the entity known as Lilith,
> > > the whole phrase has a deeper meaning, as the legend of Lilith ends
> > > with her finding refuge in the desert.  Plus, by mentioning the name
> > > itself, it lends credence to the Oral Tradition (Oral Torah) that
> > > contains the sequence of traditions regarding Lilith as being
> > > perfectly accepted in the times of Isaiah.  In other words, I wouldn't
> > > 'translate' the word at all because the original text had a proper
> > > name there.
> > > The word translated as 'Satyr' is another problem, as the original is
> > > "sa'ir", which can mean 'hairy/shaggy' or 'a he-goat'.  There's
> > > nothing necessarily demonic about the word OTHER than the close
> > > connection with the word Lilith in the same phrase.  This has led many
> > > translators to think Faun or Satyr in this case.  Whilst it's
> > > possible, I think I'd leave it as 'he-goat'.
> > > Perhaps one of these days (DON'T hold your breath!!!), I'll do my own
> > > translation of the Old and New Testaments, but it's a huge job and I
> > > have my own job that needs to be done first--putting forth my own
> > > theories.
> >
> > > Nevertheless, I appreciate your point and will strive better to make
> > > it known when 'what I'm saying' is someone else's translation or one
> > > of my own 'best understandings'.  It IS an important difference and,
> > > of course, I would ask that you accept my own as being 'best'.  By no
> > > means does that automatically rule out a sub-conscious agenda; so, be
> > > wary of mine as you would care to be.  But know that I will try to be
> > > fair and will have investigated all possibilities before deciding on
> > > any given translation.  I really WILL do my best, as I wouldn't want
> > > to intentionally mislead anyone when it comes to scriptures that so
> > > many take so seriously...and, quite probably, should.
> >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Pat <
> [email protected]
> > > >wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Nov 26, 6:52 pm, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > Translations are a time a dozen  every one is trying to express
> their
> > > own
> > > > > > point of view.
> > > > > > Allan
> >
> > > > > Exactly, which is why, after reading 4 different translations of
> the
> > > > > Qur'an, I realised I needed to learn Arabic, to avoid the
> translator's
> > > > > mistakes and/or agendas.  The very same reason I learned Hebrew nd
> > > > > Greek, to do justice to the Old and New Testaments.  The
> translations
> > > > > are, in many cases, so skewed as to be, in some places, stating the
> > > > > exact opposite of what the original intended.  NEVER count on
> > > > > translations...NEVER!!
> >
> > > > > > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Pat <
> [email protected]
> >
> > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > On Nov 26, 4:05 pm, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Of course I am reading a translation,  It is people reading
> thing
> > > > > into
> > > > > > > words
> > > > > > > > are not really there. When you are looking into spirituality
> you
> > > are
> > > > > > > looking
> > > > > > > > for clarity  not confusion. It seems to me people read into
> what
> > > is
> > > > > > > written
> > > > > > > > just what they want to hear. My self I prefer to read what is
> > > said
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > people want it to say.
> > > > > > > > So far I have seen little of  Isaiah  but maybe I am reading
> the
> > > > > wrong
> > > > > > > > section.
> >
> > > > > > > And, of course, you need the Hebrew.  I have a very good
> Hebrew/
> > > > > > > English breakdown and study of Isaiah at home.  It breaks it
> down
> > > into
> > > > > > > two volumes of around 800 pages each.  Lots of commentary,
> which
> > > gives
> > > > > > > multiple interpretations.  Funnily enough, though, as it's a
> Jewish
> > > > > > > study guide, does it try to match any Christian or Islamic
> > > > > > > interpretations...except for where it refutes them.  Which, in
> my
> > > > > > > book, is another way of mentioning them just refraining from
> > > accepting
> > > > > > > them as valid.  But it certainly gives a very wide view of the
> > > book.
> > > > > > > Isaiah was one of the prophets directly mentioned in the
> Qur'an, so
> > > I
> > > > > > > reckon there must have been a reason for giving him credence
> and,
> > > as
> > > > > > > Isa 29:12 matches perfectly with the beginning of the
> revelation of
> > > > > > > the Qur'an, it's no small wonder.  The two give credence to one
> > > > > > > another.  And, of course, the tone of God speaking through
> Isaiah
> > > > > > > matches the tone of God speaking through Gabriel to the Prophet
> > > > > > > Muhammed (pbuh) perfectly.  Same patterns of speech exactly.
>  But
> > > the
> > > > > > > two could NOT have been written by the same human author; but,
> > > there's
> > > > > > > every reason to assume the God was the same.  At least that's
> the
> > > > > > > 'party line'.  ;-)
> >
> > > > > > > Have a good weekend!!!
> >
> > > > > > > > Allan
> >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Pat <
> > > [email protected]
> >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 25, 6:03 pm, iam deheretic <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Pat  I have not finished reading quran,  I see to much
> that
> > > was
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > written
> > > > > > > > > > by God or Allah  but the direct influence of man..
> > > > > > > > > > But believe what you want to believe..
> > > > > > > > > > Allan
> >
> > > > > > > > > I assume, then, that you're reading a translation.  The
> whole
> > > > > poetic
> > > > > > > > > aspect of it along with double/triple entendres get
> completely
> > > > > lost.
> > > > > > > > > But, of course, that doesn't detract from my statement that
> the
> > > > > very
> > > > > > > > > beginning of the revelation OF the Qur'an matches that
> prophecy
> > > in
> > > > > > > > > Isaiah word-for-word.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Pat <
> > > > > [email protected]
> >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 16, 9:24 pm, pathfinder <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Just like in the days of Noah, shall the days be when
> the
> > > Son
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > Man
> > > > > > > > > > > > is revealed. Noah's message was strange and
> > > inconceivable.
> > > > > Jesus
> > > > > > > > > spoke
> > > > > > > > > > > > of this in Luke 17:26> "And as it was in the days of
> > > No'e, so
> > > > > > > shall
> > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > be also in the days of the Son of man." The warning
> is
> > > also
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > numbers: 8 souls saved.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Isaiah 29:10> "For the Lord hath poured out upon you
> the
> > > > > spirit
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets
> and
> > > your
> > > > > > > rulers,
> > > > > > > > > > > > the seers hath he covered. > (11)- And the visioin of
> all
> > > has
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > become unto you as the words of a book that is
> sealed,
> > > which
> > > > > men
> > > > > > > > > > > > deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I
> pray
> > > > > thee:
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > he
> > > > > > > > > > > > saith, I cannot: for it is sealed:> (12)- And the
> book is
> > > > > > > delivered
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray
> thee:
> > > and
> > > > > he
> > > > > > > > > saith,
> > > > > > > > > > > > I am not learned.>
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Just as an aside, this Isaiah 29:12 is exactly what
> > > happened to
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).  The first word that was
> revealed
> > > to
> > > > > him
> > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > > > "Read!" and his response was "I am not learned".  This
> > > prophecy
> > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > > > fulfilled word for word and resulted in the Qur'an.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > (13)- Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this
> > > > > > > > > > > > people draw near me with their mouth, and their lips
> do
> > > > > honour
> > > > > > > me,
> > > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > > > > have removed their heart far from me, and their fear
> > > toward
> > > > > me is
> > > > > > > > > > > > taught by the precept of men:> (14)- Therefore,
> behold, I
> > > > > will
> > > > > > > proced
> > > > > > > > > > > > to do a marvelous work among this people, even a
> > > marvelous
> > > > > work
> > > > > > > and a
> > > > > > > > > > > > wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall
> perish,
> > > and
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > understanding of their prudent men shall be
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>



-- 
 (
  )
I_D Allan

If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,

Reply via email to