he said, he said...he said

As the early fathers saw, Psalm 1 prepares the worshiper of I AM to participate in God’s eternal life, or better yet, for him to participate with the worshiper with his life (see v. 6).

Capisce?

No?

The above quote, taken from The Psalms as Christian Worship: A Historical Commentary, is the first sentence I tried to read from this resource. Needless to say, I just became less than thrilled with the prospect of venturing further.

I know there is a movement amongst modern hipsters to not capitalize pronouns referring to the diety...that would just be too...too...unmodern and unhip. Unfortunately for we neanderthals, it is also extremely and unnecessarily confusing. This kind of nonsense should be resisted. The best way would be to boycott any resource that engages in this misery. Logos should refuse to publish the works of anyone who engages in this nonsense.

Hmm

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Friedrich

This kind of nonsense should be resisted. The best way would be to boycott any resource that engages in this misery. Logos should refuse to publish the works of anyone who engages in this nonsense.

lol! sound frustrated!

As the early fathers saw, Psalm 1 prepares the worshiper of I AM to participate in God’s eternal life, or better yet, for him to participate with the worshiper with his life (see v. 6).

Capisce?

No?

The above quote, taken from The Psalms as Christian Worship: A Historical Commentary, is the first sentence I tried to read from this resource . . .. Unfortunately for we neanderthals, it is also extremely and unnecessarily confusing.

[:D]

i admit, i became puzzled in trying to understand it, too.

[8-|]

DominicM

David,

Logos has said that it favors no theological/doctrinal stance so it appeals to as wider audience as possible, if you wish to boycott a resource thats great, but it may be a blessing to someone at a different stage of the journey of faith..

Just because there may be a error in one part in this case capitlization, doesnt mean necessarily the whole book should be burned, if you are being challenged - great - however - using words like boycott is inflamitary, vote with your $$$, and please leave the judging to God.

Mike Childs

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326246#Comment_326246

using words like boycott is inflamitary, vote with your $$, and please leave the judging to God.

Gee, that's pretty judgmental of you, Dominic. HMMM. Or is that judgmental of me?

Matthew C Jones

not capitalize pronouns referring to the diety...

David,

I agree with you on capitalizing pronouns of the deity. And I find a lot of the modern writers disrespect God in many other ways too.. But I think we need to leave the choice of resources up to the customers. Logos will never meet your doctrinal views 100%. And neither will the customer base.

Reading the 5th chapter of the Revelation I see all Heaven will ring with worship and praise to God. I can accept a little ignorance here on Earth from creatures that don't think to capitalize. (You know most handbooks say it shouldn't be.You and I know better.[8-|][8-|])

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326254#Comment_326254

using words like boycott is inflamitary, vote with your $, and please leave the judging to God.

Gee, that's pretty judgmental of you, Dominic. HMMM. Or is that judgmental of me?

we probably all have enough to go around. at least, that is my judgment. [;)]

anyway, yeah, i'd not have the same conclusion/action as David says he does, but i do agree, that sentence was pretty confusing!

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326256#Comment_326256

Maybe I didn't fully indicate that my problem is as much with the lack of clarity and thus needless confusion as with the uncapped deity pronoun. What's swell is that this whole "problem" could easily be solved by using the old-school, tried and True pronoun capitalization...two birds, one stone--problem solved. Btw, I don't think the pronoun thing is an issue of doctrine. It is an issue of wisdom and facility.

Again, the only reason pointless FAIL's such as these continue is because no one bothers to do anything about them. And the whole purpose of a boycott is to vote with your $.

Btw, I used the word "boycott" (somewhat) tongue-in-cheek. I'm not envisioning pickets and protest marches...

...although, come to think of it, I am starting to get a vision...I think...I'll call it...

OCCUPY PUBLISHERS ROW!!!

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326265#Comment_326265

the uncapped deity pronoun.

Hey! That should be "...uncapped Deity pronoun..."

[;)]

I know that modern convention is to leave such pronouns uncapitalized. If you capitalize for academic work, you could technically get marked down.

I capitalize anyway.

Robert M. Warren

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326265#Comment_326265

Maybe I didn't fully indicate that my problem is as much with the lack of clarity

I think I took your original point immediately: In their rush to be kewl and modern, the editors sacrificed much clarity.

Josh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326288#Comment_326288

lol...this thread reminds me of another thread arguing whether or not "word" should be capitalized (e.g. God's word or God's Word).

(btw I, too, favor capitalizing pronouns referring to God.)

MJ. Smith

As the early fathers saw, Psalm 1 prepares the worshiper of I AM to participate in God’s eternal life, or better yet, for him to participate with the worshiper with his life (see v. 6).

Looking at it in context I believe that the double "with" is a typographical error. As for the capitalization, I don't complain about other oddities that are used in lieu of the tetragrammaton so this doesn't particular bother me. To misquote a famous old lady "What's the beef?"

this thread reminds me of another thread arguing
whether or not "word" should be capitalized (e.g. God's word or God's
Word).

and to me they mean different things when capitalized or not. Capital means Jesus; non-capital -- well, I'll not put my foot in my mouth on that one.

Josh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326294#Comment_326294

and to me they mean different things when capitalized or not. Capital means Jesus; non-capital -- well, I'll not put my foot in my mouth on that one.

What about when it is referring to the Bible? Should "word" be capitalized?

This brings up something else...why is Bible capitalized?

Allen Browne

I know there is a movement amongst modern hipsters to not capitalize pronouns referring to the diety...
The best way would be to boycott any resource that engages in this misery.

Resources that don't capitalize pronouns that refer to deity?
That would include the King James Version, then?

Example:

Jn 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326308#Comment_326308

I killed two birds with one stone...that leaves four for ole Jimmy. [8o|]

Jack Caviness

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326294#Comment_326294

Looking at it in context I believe that the double "with" is a typographical error.

No, I don't think so, but the second "with" might be better rendered as "in". Perhaps the sentence would make better sense this way:

"Psalm 1 prepares the worshiper of I AM to participate in God’s eternal life, or better yet, for Him to participate with the worshiper in his life"

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326308#Comment_326308

I know there is a movement amongst modern hipsters to not capitalize pronouns referring to the diety...
The best way would be to boycott any resource that engages in this misery.

Resources that don't capitalize pronouns that refer to deity?
That would include the King James Version, then?

Example:

Jn 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

That would also include the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, since there was only one case used throughout. Even people's names didn't get "capitalized" back then.

I like the old style of capitalizing personal pronouns that refer to God, but I must admit I've grown lazy in my own writing. It's just one extra keystroke to have to hit (the shift key). And it so rarely actually leads to more clarity to use the capital. It's just an honorific convention as far as I'm concerned. Yes, God is worthy to be honored with a capital letter. But in the end I think God cares more about where our heart is than whether we hit the shift key or not. (Or is that the Shift key?)

(And see how I've so deftly avoided using a personal pronoun about God at all in the preceding paragraph, which is another solution to the whole problem.)

Brad Fry

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326416#Comment_326416

God is more revered with an upper case "H"? Seriously? How about not only making the "H" uppercase but make it bold. And underlined. And redlettered.

David Matthew

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326300#Comment_326300

Bible is capitalized because, as the title of a book, it is a proper noun, as distinct from a common noun.

As for capitalizing pronouns referring to God, I honestly think it's an old-fashioned practice that helps make Christians seem out of touch with ordinary people. It has nothing at all to do with respect. It's like the old practice of using 'thee' and 'thou' when addressing God; the old guard used to accuse those who addressed him as 'you' of disrespect - an accusation devoid of any foundation. Jesus used the same terms when addressing his Father as when he addressed his disciples.

Maybe folk in the USA are a bit slower than the British to overcome such prejudices?

Mercifully God loves and accepts us all!

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326416#Comment_326416

That would also include the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, since there was only one case used throughout.

Actually, many Greek manuscripts are uncial, so everything is capped (you probably know that already). And I consider Hebrew block script to essentially be the same, all caps as opposed to all lower case. (IN HEBREW, EVERYBODY SHOUTS!)

And it so rarely actually leads to more clarity to use the capital. It's just an honorific convention as far as I'm concerned.

I can think of numerous places in the Tanakh where use of a capped pronoun or two would have be tremendously helpful.

Graham Owen

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326416#Comment_326416

And it so rarely actually leads to more clarity to use the capital. It's just an honorific convention as far as I'm concerned.

I still use capitals for clarity although I also tend to rework things where the capitals are essential to the understanding to avoid the use of personal pronouns.

Does any one know the history of the capitalising, just wondering why it was originally started, honorary or clarity.

As an aside, last week in our Bible Study someone drew attention to a word that was printed in italics in the version that they were reading believing that this indicated that the word was important. A quick check in the front pages showed that the use of italics indicated a word not in the original text! Publishers use many techniques to pass information to the reader to help with clarity but how many readers know how all these devices work?

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326447#Comment_326447

As for capitalizing pronouns referring to God, I honestly think it's an old-fashioned practice that helps make Christians seem out of touch with ordinary people. It has nothing at all to do with respect. It's like the old practice of using 'thee' and 'thou' when addressing God; the old guard used to accuse those who addressed him as 'you' of disrespect - an accusation devoid of any foundation. Jesus used the same terms when addressing his Father as when he addressed his disciples.

Using the old vocabulary may be no more than a personal reminder to themselves as to who they are discussing or speaking to. The Jews wore their phylacteries as a reminder to keep God's law. The head coverings several religions use are to show respect for God rather than superiority to fellow humans.

I have several friends who never write "God" when referring to THE God. They always write "G-d" or YHWH. And they do not say "Jesus" but say "Yeshu'a" instead. When questioned, they tell me it is out of respect. I could go question if their true motive is to feel superior to the "rest of us" but I think I will just accept their given reason. They don't condemn me for not doing the same practice. We get along just fine.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326452#Comment_326452

Does any one know the history of the capitalising, just wondering why it was originally started, honorary or clarity.

English is a Germanic language - German capitalizes all nouns. The question should be why was it dropped?

quoted test from a forum:

The Capitalisation of Nouns (closest modern parallel, German) faded away between the Middle and End of the Eighteenth Century. The Reason was primarily Æsthetic, as Writers and Printers moved away from Heavy Typography towards a more Italianate Model. There were also Œconomic Advantages, since it generally made Typesetting easier.

The heaviest Stiles of Typography are usually associated with low-status or popular Publications -- the Equivalent of today's Tabloids, with their shouty sans-serif Headlines. That fits with your cited Text -- the anti-coffee Pamphlet mentioned in Harper's this Month, which is fairly Shouty even by Restoration Standards.

By Contrast, high-status Writers (and their Printers) tended to favour lighter Typographical Stiles, especially going into the Augustan
Age. (Alexander Pope is a good Example One who 'lightened' the
Typography of his Books over the Course of his Career, particularly in
Editions meant for Persons of Quality; David Foxon's Pope and the Early Eighteenth-Century Book Trade is the canonical Work on this Topic.)

The Change didn't occur at once, by some top-down Decree, but happened
over a long period of Time, and according to Fashion. Regular Nouns go
from Capitalised to lower-case; emphasised Nouns go from Italicised-capitalised to italicised or roman lower-case, depending on House Stile. Certain proper Nouns go from SMALL CAPS to Capitalised.

Mike Binks

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326452#Comment_326452

I also tend to rework things where the capitals are essential to the understanding to avoid the use of personal pronouns.

I to try and work the Personal Pronouns for God out of the text - They are usually too gender specific, something I don't think that God really is?

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326603#Comment_326603

Does any one know the history of the capitalising, just wondering why it was originally started, honorary or clarity.

English is a Germanic language - German capitalizes all nouns. The question should be why was it dropped?

Isn't you logic -- and your linguistics -- somewhat lacking here for once? English may be a Germanic language, but it's not =German, nor is Germanic=German.

I'd say Swedish is more Germanic than English is, not having had the same huge Latin and French influences, and instead having had a huge influence directly from German. Yet we've never behaved like this. I brought out the oldest book I found with original spelling, the 1571 Church Order, and ok, there is a tiny number of words capitalized that wouldn't be so now -- but still far fewer than in modern English. And there are also words not capitalized that I believe would generally be capitalized by Christians today, like 'the holy Spirit' without capital H. Furthermore, I can't find any capitalized pronouns for God.

If we move forwards in time to the 1686 Church Law, we can see how Sweden has moved away from the earlier Latin/Western European/Catholic influence sphere towards a German/Protestant one. Nouns are now capitalized (but not adjectives, which you have several examples of in your quote), and if I'd had the original edition, it would almost certainly have been printed with that awful, almost illegible, German Fraktur typeface (while the earlier book would almost certainly have been in a more Latin script). Both of these characteristics probably disappeared 100-150 years ago (I suspect together), and we now capitalize almost nothing, other than names. We don't capitalize languages and nationalities, for example, nor days, months, religions, or -isms. And we don't capitalize words just because they happen to be in a title.

As for pronouns for God, I haven't managed to locate a single capitalized one in older books. I suspect it's a modernity added by stubborn people of my own generation. Though I guess it's possible it may have been used by Catholic authors somewhat earlier.

So from that I suspected that this originally had little to do with language groups, and that it might well have been no more original in English than it seems to have been in Swedish. And it seems I was right. Before they blacked out I got this from Wikipedia: "European languages, except for Ancient Greek and Latin, did not make the case distinction before about 1300." "Old English, for example, was rarely written with even proper nouns capitalized; whereas Modern English of the 18th century had frequently all nouns capitalized, in the same way that Modern German is written today".

In other words, this is a fairly late convention, added long after English separated from German, and, in fact, begun during a time when English was heavily influenced by French. Thus asking why it was started is just as legitimate as asking why it was dropped.

Personally, I always capitalize pronouns for God, but since He saw fit to have the Bible written in languages that couldn't even make that distinction, I doubt He cares. For all my respect for Judaism, though, I can't help feeling that their 'mutilation' of the word 'God' is disrespectful, and the same with their calling Him an 'It' (HaShem). I know intellectually that it's meant the other way, but I still feel the way I feel. Which I guess goes to show how subjective these things are.

I also wonder if there is any other language than English that is so 'egocentric' as to capitalize the word for 'I'? (That alone would make me capitalize pronouns for God in English, even if I didn't do it in Swedish.)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/326776#Comment_326776

Isn't you logic -- and your linguistics -- somewhat lacking here for once? English may be a Germanic language, but it's not =German, nor is Germanic=German.

Quite true - but all the languages I know of the capitalize all nouns are Germanic. And, yes, I'll admit that early modern English was the heyday of captials - consider the US Constitution. How 'bout the theory that people had a premonition that the House of Hanover would replace the House of Stuarts so they wanted to make them feel at home?[:D]

Actually it may have been a fad:

• 1500s At
least 40% of all printed works are Luther's works. In his German Bible
manuscript, he only capitalizes some nouns. On their own, the printers
add capitalization for all nouns.

• 1527 Seratius Krestus introduces capital letters for proper nouns and the first word in a sentence.

• 1530 Johann Kollross writes "GOTT" in all caps.