Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ten Commandments"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
* I propose that we use the king james version for this entry. | * I propose that we use the king james version for this entry. | ||
** Why? Personally, I believe we should keep the NIV because it gives a more precise meaning for some of the words. [[User:PhilipB|PhilipB]] 11:17, 5 January 2007 (EST) | ** Why? Personally, I believe we should keep the NIV because it gives a more precise meaning for some of the words. [[User:PhilipB|PhilipB]] 11:17, 5 January 2007 (EST) | ||
| − | + | *** Because the King James version is so familiar, so beloved, and of such great ''literary'' importance, it seems to me that if an article is describing a ''familiar'' or ''frequently quoted'' passage in the Bible, it should present ''both'' a (presumably more) accurate modern translation ''and also'' the more frequently quoted King James version. Just my $0.02. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:25, 5 January 2007 (EST) | |
| − | + | *** P. S. Obviously the King James text continues to be such a mental landmark that even if we use modern language for the commandments themselves, we still call them "The Ten Commandments" rather than "The Ten Laws" or "The Ten Commands." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:31, 5 January 2007 (EST) | |
| − | + | **** Dpbsmith, I agree with you. Why don't we post both as SharonS recommends? Does anyone else have an opinion? [[User:PhilipB|PhilipB]] 14:12, 5 January 2007 (EST) | |
| − | |||
*There are advantages and disadvantages to both versions. I think the best idea is to post both. Multiple translations convey a better sense of the differing ways in which the Hebrew can be interpreted. This will make the page much more well rounded and complete.--[[User:SharonS|SharonS]] 12:40, 5 January 2007 (EST) | *There are advantages and disadvantages to both versions. I think the best idea is to post both. Multiple translations convey a better sense of the differing ways in which the Hebrew can be interpreted. This will make the page much more well rounded and complete.--[[User:SharonS|SharonS]] 12:40, 5 January 2007 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 19:12, January 5, 2007
- I propose that we use the king james version for this entry.
- Why? Personally, I believe we should keep the NIV because it gives a more precise meaning for some of the words. PhilipB 11:17, 5 January 2007 (EST)
- Because the King James version is so familiar, so beloved, and of such great literary importance, it seems to me that if an article is describing a familiar or frequently quoted passage in the Bible, it should present both a (presumably more) accurate modern translation and also the more frequently quoted King James version. Just my $0.02. Dpbsmith 12:25, 5 January 2007 (EST)
- P. S. Obviously the King James text continues to be such a mental landmark that even if we use modern language for the commandments themselves, we still call them "The Ten Commandments" rather than "The Ten Laws" or "The Ten Commands." Dpbsmith 12:31, 5 January 2007 (EST)
- Dpbsmith, I agree with you. Why don't we post both as SharonS recommends? Does anyone else have an opinion? PhilipB 14:12, 5 January 2007 (EST)
- Why? Personally, I believe we should keep the NIV because it gives a more precise meaning for some of the words. PhilipB 11:17, 5 January 2007 (EST)
- There are advantages and disadvantages to both versions. I think the best idea is to post both. Multiple translations convey a better sense of the differing ways in which the Hebrew can be interpreted. This will make the page much more well rounded and complete.--SharonS 12:40, 5 January 2007 (EST)