Translation pet peeve
Comments
-
tom said:
Taking this into consideration, the total number of trips that you have made going around the the big ball of fire in the sky that we call a sun can only be 22.51 times.
I'd do better at claiming that's correct if I hadn't celebrated by Mother's 98th birthday today. Of course, I might have been a late in life surprise.[;)]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
David Paul said:
So it's just a coincidence that Logos (and its ilk) happened on the scene, offering a never-before-possible-for-human-beings ability to go to-and-fro through Bible texts, lexicons, history, archaeology, commentaries, etc., etc., doing with a simple click unfathomable searches on the most discrete data, all at the (almost) end of the prophesied 2000-year famine of the word, and that is all just happenstance? The very first words I spoke to Bob when I met him at the first Camp Logos for L4 was that I believed Logos was the prime apparatus enabling the fulfilling of the Daniel 12 prophecy...and I only had a thimble-full of the evidence at that time compared to the ocean I have now.
I've always wondered what Calvin or Spurgeon would have done with Logos! But, I'd have to say, I actually think Biblical illiteracy is higher now (in spite of all this technology) than it was 100 years ago.
0 -
Josh! *smile* Thank you for that link! Fascinating! Peace to you! and Peace to all!Josh said:David Paul said:I was going to mention 1 Kgs. 7:21...but I didn't want to start any trouble.
Don't tell me to see a prophetic connection between this OT verse and the traditional format of the Bible!
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Bruce Dunning said:
Right now I'm in the middle of preaching through the entire book of Colossians in 6 weeks. I know that the letter was meant to be read out loud in the church. I wonder how long they did take to read it or how often it was originally read. I also wonder how much commentary accompanied the original readings.
These are all good questions. Especially the last one.
0 -
Josh said:Bruce Dunning said:
Right now I'm in the middle of preaching through the entire book of Colossians in 6 weeks. I know that the letter was meant to be read out loud in the church. I wonder how long they did take to read it or how often it was originally read. I also wonder how much commentary accompanied the original readings.
These are all good questions. Especially the last one.
They are curious questions, to be sure. I also think they are utterly irrelevant. The letter wasn't written for the Colossian, it was written to them. It was written for those upon whom the end of the age has come...which would be us (unless a possible but I think rather unlikely scenario was in effect). Although Paul was himself addressing individual churches with their individual issues, YHWH had much broader and more profound interests in mind. Yes...you guessed it...all them being intimately prophetic.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David Paul said:Josh said:Bruce Dunning said:
Right now I'm in the middle of preaching through the entire book of Colossians in 6 weeks. I know that the letter was meant to be read out loud in the church. I wonder how long they did take to read it or how often it was originally read. I also wonder how much commentary accompanied the original readings.
These are all good questions. Especially the last one.
They are curious questions, to be sure. I also think they are utterly irrelevant. The letter wasn't written for the Colossian, it was written to them. It was written for those upon whom the end of the age has come...which would be us (unless a possible but I think rather unlikely scenario was in effect). Although Paul was himself addressing individual churches with their individual issues, YHWH had much broader and more profound interests in mind. Yes...you guessed it...all them being intimately prophetic.
I don't agree with your statement that these questions are "utterly irrelevant". From my perspective knowing the answers to these questions could help us to understand how best to present and teach the Word in our time. I also think that the Colossian letter was written both to and for the them. Why else would Paul say to share the letter with the church at Laodicea and in turn read their letter in Colossae? Not only was it written to and for them but it is also written for us.
Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God
0 -
Justin,
I appreciate you taking the time in your earlier post (March 1, 2013) to contribute to the discussion and to provide some relevant quotes concerning preachers and their handling of Scripture in the original languages. Though my thoughts were meant for all believers, I certainly would not argue that the task of preaching is nearly an “impossible” one requiring a great deal of prayer and careful study. It is truly overwhelming when one thinks about it.
Reading some of A.W. Tozer’s thoughts on the Holy Spirit last night, and what was missing (or probably assumed by us) was John 3:27. I particularly enjoyed this comment from Tozer that I think is relevant to our discussion:
“Fundamentalism has stood aloof from the Liberal in self-conscious superiority and has on its own part fallen into error, the error of textualism, which is simply orthodoxy without the Holy Ghost. Everywhere among Conservatives we find persons who are Bible-taught but not Spirit-taught. They conceive truth to be something which they can grasp with the mind.”
It is this sentiment that I was appealing to without trying to deprive any Spirit-filled believer from the value and importance of using original language resources in the study of God’s Word. Indeed, while “everything else is a translation,” let all boasting be only in the Cross. I remain convinced there are some who boast elsewhere in the church, a phenomenon that sadly began way back in the first century (A.D.).
Finally, I understand both Tozer, and another fellow I enjoy reading, C.S. Lewis, never had theological training (well, the kind that comes from universities anyway), but I marvel what was accomplished through both. Of course C.S. Lewis was a very educated Irishman (as we all know Irish believers are the best – kidding but you did notice my last name, right?) from Oxford who was privately tutored in Greek, and it was said that he knew Greek as well as English when he died.
Regards
0 -
Josh,
You have raised some worthwhile aside issues with regards to translations, that being the mechanics of producing the books themselves. Red lettering is an invention, of course, but my preference to have it removed is rooted in the comfort of the reader more than anything else. Related to that is the need for comfortable font size, and more relevant to the topic of study, paragraphed in order to aid the English student in following the thought of the writer. All these preferences really make a difference in the second, third, fourth, etc. hour of study. I have personally found switching to an e-book reader a great help with regards to these matters.
I agree that book study is probably the best way to undertake our studies. I understand most were read out loud in one setting (thinking of the Epistles), but was that the case for the larger ones like Corinthians and Romans? If so, I guess first century believers afforded more than 20 minutes for public speaking. If context is “king,” then a book study is usually the best way to ascertain context, though admittedly the author has not fully developed a particular topic/theme, so one must examine all relevant Scripture from a topical study methodology.
Regards
0 -
Mark O'Hearn said:
Josh,
You have raised some worthwhile aside issues with regards to translations, that being the mechanics of producing the books themselves. Red lettering is an invention, of course, but my preference to have it removed is rooted in the comfort of the reader more than anything else. Related to that is the need for comfortable font size, and more relevant to the topic of study, paragraphed in order to aid the English student in following the thought of the writer. All these preferences really make a difference in the second, third, fourth, etc. hour of study. I have personally found switching to an e-book reader a great help with regards to these matters.
I agree that book study is probably the best way to undertake our studies. I understand most were read out loud in one setting (thinking of the Epistles), but was that the case for the larger ones like Corinthians and Romans? If so, I guess first century believers afforded more than 20 minutes for public speaking. If context is “king,” then a book study is usually the best way to ascertain context, though admittedly the author has not fully developed a particular topic/theme, so one must examine all relevant Scripture from a topical study methodology.
Regards
Yeah, having an easy to read text makes a difference when studying for a long period of time. I love my Crossway ESV Personal Size Reference Bible, but the text isn't as big as I'd wish. I find myself opening up my Crossway ESV app on my phone more often - not only was it free, but it scrolls up and down instead of flipping pages! I'm not a big fan of reading the Bible on the Logos app.
As for studying, I prefer a book study - going verse by verse through the whole thing. I can typically get through an average sized book (like Judges) in two weeks. This is also how I prefer my sermons too. This church that I live by has been going through Matthew for over a year now!
0
