Changes

:(edit conflict) A translation approach of "same word, same translation" in every context would result in departures from original meaning.  "Get" is not translated today into the same word every time in French (which lacks the same word).  The translation depends on the real meaning of the word in English, which varies among "understand", "fetch", "receive", etc.

:(edit conflict) A translation approach of "same word, same translation" in every context would result in departures from original meaning.  "Get" is not translated today into the same word every time in French (which lacks the same word).  The translation depends on the real meaning of the word in English, which varies among "understand", "fetch", "receive", etc.

:"men" doesn't work for "κόσμον" in [[#3:16|John 3:16]], because it excludes most of the world's population.  Translating "κόσμον" as "the inhabitants of earth" is better, but is verbose and clumsy, and raises the false implication non-human inhabitants.  "Us" conveys the original meaning best among the alternatives.  As to your analogy, the expectation would be that God would love all His creation, but individuals as subjects would not carry that same expectation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:13, 22 September 2012 (EDT)

:"men" doesn't work for "κόσμον" in [[#3:16|John 3:16]], because "men" would exclude most of the world's population.  Translating "κόσμον" as "the inhabitants of earth" is better, but is verbose and clumsy, and raises the false implication non-human inhabitants.  "Us" conveys the original meaning best among the alternatives.  As to your analogy, the expectation would be that God would love all His creation, but individuals as subjects would not carry that same expectation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:13, 22 September 2012 (EDT)

::One suggestion might be to use "humanity," and thereby avoid the potential misreading of "us" as implying the existence of a "them" whom God did not love while maintaining a focus away from a broad reading of passage that would mistakenly have it take on an environmentalist tone.[[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 16:15, 22 September 2012 (EDT)

::One suggestion might be to use "humanity," and thereby avoid the potential misreading of "us" as implying the existence of a "them" whom God did not love while maintaining a focus away from a broad reading of passage that would mistakenly have it take on an environmentalist tone.[[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 16:15, 22 September 2012 (EDT)