/christian/ - Christianity

Religious discussions and spirituality

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.0 (updated 2021-01-10)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules
More

(used to delete files and postings)


Faith in Translation Anonymous 09/16/2021 (Thu) 16:17:57 No.1505
Acts 12:4, KJV >And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people. Acts 12:4, NIV >After arresting him, he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him out for public trial after the Passover. Literary definition of πάσχα (pascha): >Noun - Accusative Neuter Singular >Strong's 3957: The feast of Passover, the Passover lamb. Of Chaldee origin; the Passover Practical usage of πάσχα in Greek: >Πάσχα • (Páscha) n (indeclinable) >(Primary) 1. (religion, Christianity) Easter >Καλό Πάσχα! ― Kaló Páscha! ― Happy Easter! >(Secondary) 2. (religion, Judaism) Passover The English term "Passover" was first known to be recorded in the English language in William Tyndale's translation of the Bible. Acts 12:4, Tyndale 1526 >And when he had caught him he put him in preson and delyvered him to .iiii. quaternios of soudiers to be kepte entendynge after ester to brynge him forth to the people. Acts 12:4, Wycliffe 14th c. >And when he had caught Peter, he sent him into prison; and betook him to four quaternions of knights, to keep him, and would after pask bring him forth to the people Major translations in other languages: Acts 12:4, Luther 1545 (German) >Da er ihn nun griff, legte er ihn ins Gefängnis und überantwortete ihn vier Rotten, je von vier Kriegsknechten, ihn zu bewahren, und gedachte, ihn nach Ostern dem Volk vorzustellen. Acts 12:4, Clementine Vulgate (Latin) >Quem cum apprehendisset, misit in carcerem, tradens quatuor quaternionibus militum custodiendum, volens post Pascha producere eum populo. Acts 12:4, Reina-Valera (Spanish) >Y habiéndole tomado preso, le puso en la cárcel, entregándole a cuatro grupos de cuatro soldados cada uno, para que le custodiasen; y se proponía sacarle al pueblo después de la pascua. Contemporary Early Modern English translations: Acts 12:4, Coverdale 1535 >Now whan he had taken him, he put him in preson, and delyuered him vnto foure quaternions of soudyers, to kepe him: and thought after Easter to bringe him forth to the people. Acts 12:4, Geneva 1590: >And when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to be kept, intending after the Passeouer to bring him foorth to the people. Which translation approach bears the faithful context to the English reader?
Open file (27.20 KB 320x240 BibleKJV.jpg)
>>1505 This is one of those cases where if we let the Bible define its terms for us, we have no problem. If we attempt to impose our own definitions on words, like we want it to mean this or that, we start to have problems. The word literally means what it means in the context of where it's given. If I say a word from the KJV, any word at all, I mean it in the way that it's used there. Hopefully that helps. I should take a moment to note that our modern language and the original dictionaries of the English language were written on the basis that this, the King James version specifically, was the "accepted" translation. It was also the only one used until something like 1880 (the first Revised Version) at the earliest. What that basically means is that, for English, you always get the accurate translation of words just by referring back to it. It also means that you know you are referring to the same things that the Bible does in English by using its words. It's only when you start getting away from that, like the modern versions do, that you begin to get into trouble. I would also say that any of the earlier versions that led up to the KJV, like the Geneva 1560 or Tyndale 1534 translation, are going to be fine 99% of the time. These earlier translations had less time and resources dedicated to making them perfectly reflect the received text as we know it, but they were made toward the same end. The main item of importance is that the translations were based on, and should reflect, the received Greek New Testament and the original Hebrew and Syriac Old Testament, that way you get the original books of the Bible as they were in the first century. By comparing the amount of research, energy and resources poured into each translation project leading up to the KJV, we see that nothing before 1611 compares to the minute attention to detail of every word, tense and sentence structure that the KJV translation does. This extra attention to detail has paid tremendous benefits in the long term to the English world. And until people started moving away from the Authorized version in the 20th century, we had the best understanding of the Bible because of it that it was possible to have. This is due to the overall accuracy of the 1611 translation to the received and preserved text that represents the written word of God. You will also notice that a great moral decline is tied to the introduction of modern versions, especially moving into the mid to late 20th century. This is because people were moving away from the Bible that was accurate and trustworthy and heaping up to themselves teachers with itching ears, as it says in 2 Timothy 4: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." These "fables" would be the modern versions, which contain thousands of deletions from passages throughout the Bible, including entire verses, especially in the New Testament. The Bible represents the one unchanging truth. It can't be changed, people. But as soon as people starting switching over to them, they started noticing all the errors and contradictions in those modern versions, and it led to a great falling away. They gradually lost interest in the Bible after finding all of the errors and inconsistencies in the modern versions. This was probably part of the great deceiver's plan all along. Going all the way back to the beginning, Satan has always tried to cause people to doubt whether God really said things, or whether it was actually something else. But Christ assures us this is not possible. Hence He says in the Gospel of Matthew, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." And Peter says this about Scripture, "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." Hence, we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; but speaking the truth in love, may we grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ. Amen.
>>1505 Passover, obviously. Translation as Easter is anachronistic and does not fit the context. Neither Herod nor any of the Jews would have been celebrating Easter. >>1520 >I should take a moment to note that our modern language and the original dictionaries of the English language were written on the basis that this, the King James version specifically, was the "accepted" translation. It was also the only one used until something like 1880 (the first Revised Version) at the earliest. What that basically means is that, for English, you always get the accurate translation of words just by referring back to it This is just nonsense, basically reflects complete historical and linguistic illiteracy. You should not go making knowledgeable claims about things you do not understand, brother.
>>1521 >You should not go making knowledgeable claims about things you do not understand, brother. If my claims are knowledgeable, why are they things I don't understand? That doesn't make any sense.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

no cookies?