Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because, the "intent" can only come from those who wrote it in the originals. Hence, though it may be plausible to insert words to enhance the meaning of the passages, it doesn't always make the most sense to do so.
If you have to add words to make the original meaning clear when preparing a translation, what is wrong with adding words? You make it sound as if the original meaning can never be fully and accurately relayed in a translation. If this is true, then only people who understand the Bible's original languages can ever have a complete and accurate understanding of the Bible. Since most people in the world do not understand Greek or Hebrew they cannot understand the Bible according to your standards. So why does God want so many people to be ignorant of His Word?
The study guide was concocted to prop up a fraud. The translation does nothing for people who don't want the old english. It's also been diliberately altered numerous times to back several frauds. Sorry, but I have studied it much to your disappointment.
I'm simply NOT into being force fed Kool-Aid or sniffing model airplane glue.
Nope, I am not dissapointed. That is your choice. I would love to read over all of your studies, care to share?
The study guide was concocted to prop up a fraud. The translation does nothing for people who don't want the old english. It's also been diliberately altered numerous times to back several frauds. Sorry, but I have studied it much to your disappointment.
I'm simply NOT into being force fed Kool-Aid or sniffing model airplane glue.
You don’t seem to understand much about the history of the English language. The AKJ was published in 1611, which was well into the period known as Modern English. Old English dates to the period before the Norman Conquest, which began in 1066. Old English, i.e. Saxon, is as different from Modern English (and the English of the AKJ) as modern English is from modern German.
Furthermore, much of the English of the AKJ had not been in general use for several centuries before 1611. The pronouns thee, thy, ye, etcetera reflect a time when English had separate forms of “you” to indicate singular and plural antecedents as well as formal and informal forms of address. Modern languages like German as well as Hebrew and Koine Greek have multiple forms of the pronoun you. The translators used the older English pronouns because the modern pronoun “you” does not accurately convey the grammar of the Bible’s original Greek and Hebrew. Modern English uses “you” to mean both singular and plural; this is “standard” English, but it is only a matter of convenience. Thee, thy and thine are no longer used to indicate singular 2nd person pronouns, but in many dialects of English the pronoun “you” is used in place of these earlier singular pronouns while plural 2nd person antecedents are represented by expressions such as “yous”, “yous guys”, “yaw”, “yaw’ll” and “yins”. I don’t know of a single post-1611 translation that accurately indicates when “you” is singular as opposed to plural.
BTW: the –eth and –est verb endings that are found in the AKJ were going out of use in spoken English by the time the AKJ was printed. But the printing industry had not kept up with spoken English. It was common for people to see “readeth” in print but say “reads” when they read the passage out loud.
You don’t seem to understand much about the history of the English language. The AKJ was published in 1611, which was well into the period known as Modern English. Old English dates to the period before the Norman Conquest, which began in 1066. Old English, i.e. Saxon, is as different from Modern English (and the English of the AKJ) as modern English is from modern German.
Furthermore, much of the English of the AKJ had not been in general use for several centuries before 1611. The pronouns thee, thy, ye, etcetera reflect a time when English had separate forms of “you” to indicate singular and plural antecedents as well as formal and informal forms of address. Modern languages like German as well as Hebrew and Koine Greek have multiple forms of the pronoun you. The translators used the older English pronouns because the modern pronoun “you” does not accurately convey the grammar of the Bible’s original Greek and Hebrew. Modern English uses “you” to mean both singular and plural; this is “standard” English, but it is only a matter of convenience. Thee, thy and thine are no longer used to indicate singular 2nd person pronouns, but in many dialects of English the pronoun “you” is used in place of these earlier singular pronouns while plural 2nd person antecedents are represented by expressions such as “yous”, “yous guys”, “yaw”, “yaw’ll” and “yins”. I don’t know of a single post-1611 translation that accurately indicates when “you” is singular as opposed to plural.
BTW: the –eth and –est verb endings that are found in the AKJ were going out of use in spoken English by the time the AKJ was printed. But the printing industry had not kept up with spoken English. It was common for people to see “readeth” in print but say “reads” when they read the passage out loud.
The Tyndale bible is credited as being the first Modern English translation, it was printed in 1525. There were old English translations before Tyndale, but i think the AKJ was produced with a Tyndale translation at the ready.
You don’t seem to understand much about the history of the English language. The AKJ was published in 1611, which was well into the period known as Modern English. Old English dates to the period before the Norman Conquest, which began in 1066. Old English, i.e. Saxon, is as different from Modern English (and the English of the AKJ) as modern English is from modern German.
Furthermore, much of the English of the AKJ had not been in general use for several centuries before 1611. The pronouns thee, thy, ye, etcetera reflect a time when English had separate forms of “you” to indicate singular and plural antecedents as well as formal and informal forms of address. Modern languages like German as well as Hebrew and Koine Greek have multiple forms of the pronoun you. The translators used the older English pronouns because the modern pronoun “you” does not accurately convey the grammar of the Bible’s original Greek and Hebrew. Modern English uses “you” to mean both singular and plural; this is “standard” English, but it is only a matter of convenience. Thee, thy and thine are no longer used to indicate singular 2nd person pronouns, but in many dialects of English the pronoun “you” is used in place of these earlier singular pronouns while plural 2nd person antecedents are represented by expressions such as “yous”, “yous guys”, “yaw”, “yaw’ll” and “yins”. I don’t know of a single post-1611 translation that accurately indicates when “you” is singular as opposed to plural.
BTW: the –eth and –est verb endings that are found in the AKJ were going out of use in spoken English by the time the AKJ was printed. But the printing industry had not kept up with spoken English. It was common for people to see “readeth” in print but say “reads” when they read the passage out loud.
I understand more about the english language than you think. It's my native tongue, I studied english literature. I've also lived in Britain in the 1970s and researched the spurious scriptures used for promoting the Trinity. It was these various scriptures which Joseph Smith plagerized when he created his book of Mormon. He compied 1 John 5:7,8 - 1 Timothy 3:16 both of which are spurious. He also copied portions of their surrounding context. But most importantly, what Joseph Smith did'nt know he was copying the mistakes of the translators. It's the biggest way of proving the book of Mormon to be a hoax.
I'm not going to debate any cut n paste here. If you like the King James Version then go for it. The country it was created in is almost totally atheist now along with the rest of Europe and it's obvious it has'nt done those people much good. As Paul stated, if you are not understood, you might as well be talking to the air and that is exactly what reading the (AKJV) does for people today.
If you have to add words to make the original meaning clear when preparing a translation, what is wrong with adding words? You make it sound as if the original meaning can never be fully and accurately relayed in a translation. If this is true, then only people who understand the Bible's original languages can ever have a complete and accurate understanding of the Bible. Since most people in the world do not understand Greek or Hebrew they cannot understand the Bible according to your standards. So why does God want so many people to be ignorant of His Word?
Quote:
If you have to add words to make the original meaning clear when preparing a translation, what is wrong with adding words?
This is based ONLY when understanding the original meaning. How many translations are there now? How many meanings are there?
Quote:
You make it sound as if the original meaning can never be fully and accurately relayed in a translation.
Didn't say that, but the Word for Word meanings can only come from the source of the Word. Trying to interpret a document that was designed in the Spiritual with a carnal mind is like trying to shoot at a can a mile away with a BB gun.
Quote:
If this is true, then only people who understand the Bible's original languages can ever have a complete and accurate understanding of the Bible. Since most people in the world do not understand Greek or Hebrew they cannot understand the Bible according to your standards.
I don't even think those who read and write the language in the original could understand this. Jesus actually talked with them face to face and they saw not, nor heard not. This Word can only come from Him, if a person SEEKS it.
Quote:
So why does God want so many people to be ignorant of His Word?
He doesn't. He wants those who EARNESTLY seek Him, and then He will reveal to them as they are ready to receive. Our carnal minds can only handle so much at a time, otherwise most would go insane, which is why it should be and is a lifetime process.
Haven't you ever read a passage that you have read a hundred times, and then all of a sudden it took on a Light that you have never seen before? I believe it is the Spirit revealing to you. Happens to me all the time.
How many people were put to death for having a copy of the Scriptures in the 1800's and 1900's? (Besides China.)
THe original languages were taught from yr. 0 to 1300's.
Ofcourse it never changed in the latin and Greek countries.
godspeed,
freedom
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
