Siteadmin, Check users, Administrators
12,071
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 357:
Line 357: − + Line 378:
Line 378: + + + + + + + +
Talk:Conservative Bible Project (view source)
Revision as of 02:23, October 21, 2009
, 02:23, October 21, 2009→Problems with this project
2.) Does anyone on this project even speak hebrew or any of the other languages the original drafts the bible was scripted in? Because if your not, its not translation, it't the deliberate corruption of a document to meet your political goals
2.) Does anyone on this project even speak hebrew or any of the other languages the original drafts the bible was scripted in? Because if your not, its not translation, it't the deliberate corruption of a document to meet your political goals
3.) Using "concise" terms kinda seems like newspeak to me. Trying to exclude ambiguity and create black and white passages is a hall mark of ingsoc. Indeed, this entire project seems like it is coming directly from minitru
3.) Using "concise" terms kinda seems like newspeak to me. Trying to exclude ambiguity and create black and white passages is a hall mark of ingsoc. Indeed, this entire project seems like it is coming directly from minitru
4.)I fail to see how "comrade" is a liberal term, its etamology goes back to the 1500's. Sure it was used by the USSR, but the nazi used "heil hitler" dosn't make "hail to the chief" a facist song
4.)I fail to see how "comrade" is a liberal term, its etymology goes back to the 1500's. Sure it was used by the USSR, but the nazi used "heil hitler" dosn't make "hail to the chief" a facist song
5.) I highly doubt an ultr right wing version of the bible is going to enter the "liberal" public schools as a textbook when the "liberal" versions arn't allowed
5.) I highly doubt an ultr right wing version of the bible is going to enter the "liberal" public schools as a textbook when the "liberal" versions arn't allowed
6.) If reading it is neccesary to critisize it, and that will "open" our minds, then the same could be said of "The Origin of Species"
6.) If reading it is neccesary to critisize it, and that will "open" our minds, then the same could be said of "The Origin of Species"
:You could at least try to understand it better before criticizing it. For starters, do you even respect the truth that is in the Bible? If you're someone who rejects the Bible, then your criticism is particularly absurd.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:19, 20 October 2009 (EDT)
:You could at least try to understand it better before criticizing it. For starters, do you even respect the truth that is in the Bible? If you're someone who rejects the Bible, then your criticism is particularly absurd.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:19, 20 October 2009 (EDT)
:In reply to [[User:BenBr]]: For your information, I can read ancient Greek almost as quickly as I read modern English. Better yet, I have three lexicons available to me, to assist me in understanding any particular word that I might find difficult to understand. As to Hebrew, I have begun to study classical Hebrew, to address that particular issue. And if I don't know everything about the ancient languages, I have formed a Committee of Translators that includes many who have at least as good an understanding as I have. I have taken over the management of this project primarily because I have the time to devote to it.
:Now if anyone wants to see a sample of my work, I invite that person to read the translations of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, the Epistle of Jude, and now the Revelation to John the Apostle.
:With regard to "the deliberate corruption of a document to suit political goals": is that not exactly what the so-called Committee on Bible Translation, authors of the NIV and its derivatives, have done? That is one reason that a new version of the Bible is necessary. The other reason is the need to translate the Bible into good idiomatic English, and to reach modern readers the way the originals might have reached their readers, hundreds of years ago, or thousands.
:I know perfectly well that this project has gotten a lot of publicity of late, the tone of which is somewhat less than favorable. I must observe that most of what I've read on the outside scarcely deserves a reply. As to what does deserve a reply, I hope that I have been able to answer most of the questions that one might be inclined to raise.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 22:23, 20 October 2009 (EDT)