bible translations

S

spuriousmonkey

Banned
Banned
I was visiting a US hotel and of course there was a bible in the room. I was browsing through it a bit and they had inserted a single passage in many different languages in the introduction. I know of course several languages and compared them a bit. I came to the conclusion that these few lines of text gave a totally different feeling in the different languages.

How can anyone then take anything literally of the bible? We are not reading any original, we are reading translations, and moreover, probably interpretational translations. And every nation basically even reads a different bible!?!
 
*sarcasm* What are you talking about?? Come on, we all know the bible is the word of god! It cannot be added to or taken away from, so i can tell you here and now that every translation is identical to the original. */sarcasm* :D
 
Originally posted by spuriousmonkey
I came to the conclusion that these few lines of text gave a totally different feeling in the different languages.
Click to expand...

Do you have any examples?
I am curious what the differences were.
 
I don't think the bible is a complete hunk of junk. There is some profound stuff in there, its just so hard to stifle through. Like you said its been translated so many times that you really can't tell what was originally intended because we can be sure the translators would not have totally understood what was being said.
Its like chinese whispers, tell me a story and I guarantee it will be different when I try to tell it to someone else. Imagine that happening over a thousand years.
So yes now it is difficult to tell whats crap and whats not. Most is crap.

Strangely I think the only part worth anything at all is genesis.
And I think it originally would have been intended as a myth or fable. When looked at that way its symbolicism is rather impressive. The garden of eden could easily have meant the earth before man evolved. When you think about it, it was "perfect" before man came. And man did have the opportunity to be perfect along with it but he(or she as it were) "bit the apple"(or took the easy way out) and started "sinning" or contradicting natures laws.

I don't think there is anything supernatural about genesis, I just think it was written by a wise story teller who never intended for it to be taken so seriously. You can read the bible and see it regress after genesis from what is clearly a fable to people trying to pretend these things were really happening.
In a way if you read genesis it basically tells you not to listen to the rest of the bible. Not in so many words but it tells you humans are fucked. So why do people keep reading the words of people? Why trust apple eating people? Thats who's writing it.
You can't blame genesis for how we changed it. Think about it, it was the first one, and clearly it was never meant to be taken seriously, everything else has been added on to it.
I can honestly say I respect the book of genesis for what I assume (through logical reasoning) it was originally supposed to be.
A fable. A deep and profound fable.(unfortunately this was its downfall, it impressed many and inspired a ficticious book that ruined the world, but I don't blame it)
 
Re: Re: bible translations

Originally posted by one_raven
Do you have any examples?
I am curious what the differences were.
Click to expand...

i would have to translate it into english from memory...hardly reliable and the point would get lost on english anyway, since it would be a translation.

But for instance the finnish version was short and to the point, the dutch one was very old fashioned dutch and unnatural.
 
Re: Re: Re: bible translations

Originally posted by spuriousmonkey
the point would get lost on english anyway, since it would be a translation.
Click to expand...

I guess that was the whole point, huh?
It loses something in the translation no matter the intentions or knowledge of the translator.
 
Last edited:
To focus on translational drift is comical. Which translation of the creation event, the global flood, the exodus and conquest, the virgin birth, and the resurrection do you find most reasonable?
 
"People have been reading the Bible for nearly two thousand years. They have taken it literally, figuratively, or symbolically. They have regarded it as divinely dictated, revealed, or inspired, or as a human creation. They have acquired more copies of it than any other book. It is quoted (and misquoted) more often than other books. It is translated (and mistranslated) more than the others as well. It is called a great work of literature, the first work of history. It is at the heart of Christianity and Judaism. Ministers priests, and rabbis preach it. Scholars spend their lives studying and teaching it in universities and seminaries. People read it, study it, admire it, disdain it, write about it, argue about it, and love it. People have lived by it and died for it. And we do not know who wrote it." -Richard Elliott Friedman, Who Wrote The Bible?
 
Originally posted by edgar
the same basic messages are universal.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah....Is that why we have catholicims, Evangelism, prespeterianisn, totalirian, non donominational, Jehova Wittnessism, Mormonism, copiticism in Egypt, ect. ect...hundreds of branches that would take it as an insult if you tell them that they share one basic message.
 
That's a great quotation EvilPoet!

The translation issue isn't that big of a deal as far as I can tell. I can read Dutch, German and some French. The basic message of the Bible, redemption and salvation, remains the same throughout all three languages (and the numerous dialectal versions such as Friesan, Gronigers, Flemish, etc. I might add).

As for how people can take the Bible literally, people do so because that is their desire, their belief and their faith. It isn't that difficult to see how it happens. Why some Christians can't manage to place their faith and trust in Jesus Christ without accepting everything as "literal" truth is beyond my own personal reckoning.

No one can prove or disprove the miracles written about in the Bible. Miraculous events may occur so no one can say that the virgin birth is a lie. The fact that it has never been observed in humans or other mammals may convince you one way or the other but that does not mean that it could not have happened once. Asexual reproduction happens and allegedly is the evolutionary precursor to sexual reproduction according to those who claim we evolved from pond scum. I see no reason an all powerful Creator God couldn't inseminate a virgin bu that is beyond the scope of this discussion. The universe happened. Life happened. It still baffles the living shit out of multitudes of scientists. It's a scientific miracle of sorts.

IMHO, being a literal "Bible thumper" isn't anymore difficult than going around believing everything visible and invisible is all the product of random chance factors (aka cosmic coincidence) and we all know that there are hundreds of those just on this forum alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top