104
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 450:
Line 450: + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Conservative Bible Project (view source)
Revision as of 21:39, November 9, 2009
, 21:39, November 9, 2009→Sources: new section
:Wow, that's enlightening about the KJV and relative weakness of today. I guess we'll have to fill the gap with the annotations, as you say. I'm glad you're translating the [[Epistle to the Hebrews]], because it's written at a high level (by an unknown author).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:22, 31 October 2009 (EDT)
:Wow, that's enlightening about the KJV and relative weakness of today. I guess we'll have to fill the gap with the annotations, as you say. I'm glad you're translating the [[Epistle to the Hebrews]], because it's written at a high level (by an unknown author).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:22, 31 October 2009 (EDT)
== Sources ==
What a terrific idea to do this translation. Congratulations on your initiative and ambition.
I'm considering participating but first, please could you give me some guidance on your sources. I'm impressed that you want basing your new translation on the earliest sources because you're omitting the story of the woman caught in adultery, which, as Andy says in his introduction to this project, isn't in the two earliest, fairly complete sources for the New Testament, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.
Does this mean that you want to base your translation on the earliest well-attested sources? That's great but aren't you just a little nervous that you might create a somewhat controversial translation, out of step with traditional Christian theology? For example, the last 12 verses of Mark were added to the canonical version of the Gospel 100-200 years later than Codex Sinaiticus; the earliest text of Mark containing these verses is the fifth-century Codex Alexandrinus. That's important because this addition to Mark's Gospel contains the story of the Resurrection, including the appearance to Mary Magdalene, the appearance to the apostles, the commission to preach to the world, the description of 'signs' including casting out devils, speaking in tongues, etc, and the ascension. That's a lot of Christian tradition to omit from your translation of the Bible.
And what about the verses of the First Epistle of John which are the biblical foundation for the Trinity? (1 John 5:7-8). They date from the ninth (yes, '''ninth''') century. Should they be omitted? I'm worried that would upset a lot of people.
Anyway, there are a lot of textual variants in the Bible and it's a major challenge to scholars to work out which are authentic and which are later additions. Some guidance on which texts I should follow would be helpful before I get stuck into this project. [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 16:39, 9 November 2009 (EST)