• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bible translations

paulmarkj

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
106
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I have just finished reading a modern translation of the Gospels translated by Andy Gaus. Gaus was used to reading the gospels in their original language and wanted to make the originals available to everyone. The book is called The Unvarnished Gospels.

I wanted to ask a general question, particularly to Christians, about the accuracy of translations in the bible: should the church translate the bible as accurately as possible (and change their beliefs accordingly) or should the church stick to existing beliefs and doctrines? Or perhaps people believe that the existing versions are the most accurate.

I am not saying that the The Unvarnished Gospels book is a better or worse translation than any other, but it does show there are different ways of translating the original.
 

leejosepho

Active member
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
348
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
paulmarkj said:
... should the church translate the bible as accurately as possible (and change their beliefs accordingly) or should the church stick to existing beliefs and doctrines?
If by "church" you are there referring to corporate, religious hierarchies, I would say any corporation’s general lack of conscience altogether disqualifies it from being considered trustworthy and reliable in relation to the ultimate best-interest of man. So then, I would say "the church" has no business even being in business in the first place -- that it definitely should not be involved in anything relating to mankind.

paulmarkj said:
Or perhaps people believe that the existing versions [of the bible] are the most accurate.
Some "versions" or "translations" are certainly more accurate than others, but even the “original writings” could only be of greatest value to an individual or to individuals who first clearly understand their context.

paulmarkj said:
... The Unvarnished Gospels book ... does show there are different ways of translating the original.
Yes ... but if one knows what it is there even *before* s/he reads, that number of possibilities diminishes quickly.
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
leejosepho said:
Some "versions" or "translations" are certainly more accurate than others, but even the “original writings” could only be of greatest value to an individual or to individuals who first clearly understand their context.
Agreed.
Due to language progression it is only fitting that we have more modern versions for our understanding. While I am not yet familiar with this particular one that you mention here The Unvarnished Gospels. I am curious. So long as the message is not altered. Also I use parrallels to make a more accurate and comprehensive conclusion/summary. A good site for this I have found is; http://bible.cc/ A worthy bookmark.
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
paulmarkj said:
I have just finished reading a modern translation of the Gospels translated by Andy Gaus. Gaus was used to reading the gospels in their original language and wanted to make the originals available to everyone. The book is called The Unvarnished Gospels.
Wow, I have not come across this translation you talk about. Where can I get it?


I wanted to ask a general question, particularly to Christians,
Well, I'm no Christian, but I feel that I am well-equipped enough to respond to your catechism.


about the accuracy of translations in the bible: should the church translate the bible as accurately as possible (and change their beliefs accordingly) or should the church stick to existing beliefs and doctrines? Or perhaps people believe that the existing versions are the most accurate.
I think that if they base an entire religion on the bible, they should encourage that the bible be, and stick to accurate translations. Currently, one can purchase a bible in many different translations. They're options are perdurable. Study bibles give one background, data, and explanations of difficult to comrehend verses. I prefer the New International Version. As I think, it's easier to understand, easy to read, and less confusing than others (King James, New American Standard), but that's just me.:2razz:

I am not saying that the The Unvarnished Gospels book is a better or worse translation than any other, but it does show there are different ways of translating the original.
What does this book only contain the Gospels? How exactly is it different?
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
kal-el said:
I prefer the New International Version. As I think, it's easier to understand, easy to read, and less confusing than others (King James, New American Standard), but that's just me.:2razz:
There it is! I knew eventually we would agree on something... As the NIV is my preference also.
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apostle13 said:
There it is! I knew eventually we would agree on something... As the NIV is my preference also.
That's good to hear. We have finally come to agreement. See, I'm not all that bad.:lol:
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
kal-el said:
That's good to hear. We have finally come to agreement. See, I'm not all that bad.:lol:
Naa... Truthfully I kinda sorta like you... But you know even more, I love my 11 year old son, and yet he still manages to annoy me almost daily.:2razz:
 
T

teenonfire4him77

I prefer the Living Translation, i have the touch point version, which just makes it easier to navigate. AND it has footnootes of how different words are said in different translations or in Greek.
It is in modern language, so it provides a better understanding for me.
The NIV is good too, althought i don't use it as much because the Touch Point has an easier navigation.
 

leejosepho

Active member
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
348
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apostle13 said:
Due to language progression it is only fitting that we have more modern versions for our understanding ...
I am not familiar with the term "language progression", but the idea of "versions" actually scares me a bit when a reliable "translation" (sans editorial interpretation) is what is truly being sought. But overall, some words from a long-ago (1970s) song come to mind ...

"Bought myself a paperback bible today!
"Pages are thin but I'm gonna read it anyway.
"I didn't care about the publisher ...
"Didn't matter to me who the printer's were ...
"It's still His Word, the best I've heard and I'm gonna read it anyway."
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apostle13 said:
Naa... Truthfully I kinda sorta like you... But you know even more, I love my 11 year old son, and yet he still manages to annoy me almost daily.:2razz:
Yea, I like you guys to, even though I may call you a liar and whatnot, it's nothing personal, that's just the way I talk.:2razz:
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
leejosepho said:
I am not familiar with the term "language progression", but the idea of "versions" actually scares me a bit when a reliable "translation" (sans editorial interpretation) is what is truly being sought.
I don't know language progression maybe I just coined it here. Sounded good though...lol Anyways it is pretty much self defining.
Yes... Some denominations have and use their own self serving interpretations. Adding/taking away. This is not good. Even to pick one up nauseates me.
Teenonfire4him said:
I prefer the Living Translation, i have the touch point version, which just makes it easier to navigate. AND it has footnootes of how different words are said in different translations or in Greek.
The King James original is most poetic... And the one I've memorized for quotes.
Anybody got a favorite book in the bible?
As for me I like Isaiah from the old. My favorite gosple is John. Other then that Revelation, as I have a far better understanding of it in these latter days.
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
teenonfire4him77 said:
I prefer the Living Translation, i have the touch point version, which just makes it easier to navigate. AND it has footnootes of how different words are said in different translations or in Greek.
It is in modern language, so it provides a better understanding for me.
The NIV is good too, althought i don't use it as much because the Touch Point has an easier navigation.
The New Living translation is basically the same as the NIV, they're both equally good for daily reading and comprehending. I am not familiar with the touch point version.
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
kal-el said:
The New Living translation is basically the same as the NIV, they're both equally good for daily reading and comprehending. I am not familiar with the touch point version.
Oh yes :doh I meant to comment on that in my previous post, got side-tracked.
It's good to have the actual word meanings right there in footnote.
Could you explain touchpoint? Almost sounds technical/electronic..?
 

paulmarkj

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
106
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
kal-el said:
Wow, I have not come across this translation you talk about. Where can I get it?

Well, I'm no Christian, but I feel that I am well-equipped enough to respond to your catechism.

I think that if they base an entire religion on the bible, they should encourage that the bible be, and stick to accurate translations. Currently, one can purchase a bible in many different translations. They're options are perdurable. Study bibles give one background, data, and explanations of difficult to comrehend verses. I prefer the New International Version. As I think, it's easier to understand, easy to read, and less confusing than others (King James, New American Standard), but that's just me.

What does this book only contain the Gospels? How exactly is it different?
I bought the 15 years ago, but have only just read it. It is still available on Amazon. He doesn’t say why he only translated the Gospels, but he has a another book out called The unvarnished New Testament.

The are differences at different levels: the style is more informal (but not just for show, this apparently follows the original style). It is set out like an ordinary novel (ie: without verse numbers, footnotes, small print or columns). More controversially, it translates some key words differently: eg: sky instead of heaven.

The Unvarnished Gospels said:
When Mary his mother was engaged to Joseph, before they got together, she was found to be carrying a child in her belly by means of holy spirit
The Unvarnished Gospels said:
Seeing the crowds he went up the mountain, and as he sat there his students came to him, and he opened his mouth and taught them, saying:
“The poor are in luck, the kingdom of the skies is theirs.
“The mourners are in luck: they will be consoled.”
Or compare
New Jerusalem Bible said:
John also declared, “I saw the Spirit coming down on him from heaven like a dove and resting on him. I did not know him myself, but he who sent me to baptize with water had said to me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and rest is the one who is going to baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ Yes, I have seen and I am the witness that he is the Chosen One of God.
Gaus translates seems to be more readable:
The Unvarnished Gospels said:
And John has testified, saying, “I saw the breath descending like a dove from the sky, how it alighted upon him. And I didn’t know him, but it was the one who sent me to bathe in the water who said, ‘Whoever you see the breath descending and alighting upon, that’s the one who will bathe them in the sacred breath.’ And I have seen and certified that this is the son of God
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
paulmarkj said:
More controversially, it translates some key words differently: eg: sky instead of heaven.
Oh nice, fuel his (kal-el's) fire... Sky like in Sky Pixie:lol:
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Apostle13 said:
Oh nice, fuel his (kal-el's) fire... Sky like in Sky Pixie:lol:
Haha, I'll overlook that.:lol: But seriously, at the time the bible was first written, it wasn't coherent to say the least, no chapters or verses, just writing. Letters or sermons. (Except Psalms) Over the centuries, those writings were organized into chapter-like divisions. In 1551, Robert Estienne was the first printer who organized the bible as we know it today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Estienne Can you even envision how difficult it would be to find a verse in the bible without any numbers identifying it?
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
George_Washington said:
I would say the most accurate translation of the Bible is the New American Bible. It's definitely the most recent and is full of footnotes to help you read and analyze scripture.
I don't know, I'll stick to my NIV. This website lists all the major English Translations of the bible:

http://www.firstpresb.org/translations.htm
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
George_Washington said:
lol Um, you read the Bible a lot? I thought you were an atheist.
He will make a far better Christian then he ever did an atheist... I prophecy.;)
kal-el said:
Haha, I'll overlook that. But seriously, at the time the bible was first written, it wasn't coherent to say the least, no chapters or verses, just writing. Letters or sermons. (Except Psalms) Over the centuries, those writings were organized into chapter-like divisions. In 1551, Robert Estienne was the first printer who organized the bible as we know it today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Estienne Can you even envision how difficult it would be to find a verse in the bible without any numbers identifying it?
Did you get a look at the link I provided earlier on this thread?
 

paulmarkj

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
106
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
kal-el said:
I don't know, I'll stick to my NIV. This website lists all the major English Translations of the bible:

http://www.firstpresb.org/translations.htm
What that link says about the King James version is what got me thinking about this subject many years ago. I had a friend who said the King James bible was best because of its beauty, by I contended that surely he should be looking for the most accurate interpetation rather than the one that he liked most.

Personally, I am not a Christian, though I believe that events did happen and the bible is very influential, so it is stil an important document.

I realise that some people take the view that they believe in God and this is the basis of their religion, but surely their belief stems from the bible, ie: without the bible, beleifs would be different.
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
George_Washington said:
lol Um, you read the Bible a lot? I thought you were an atheist.
You thought right. I like reading the bible. You want to know what you intend to bash, right? You know what they say, "keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer."
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Originally posted by Apostle 13
Did you get a look at the link I provided earlier on this thread?
O yea, I must have glanced over it before. That's a delectable website. It gives any single verse translations from all the popular bible's.

Originally posted by paulmarkj
Personally, I am not a Christian, though I believe that events did happen and the bible is very influential, so it is stil an important document.
Actually, everyone can attest to this, I think the bible is full of imprudent, abstract, unorthodox stories. Starring the sky bloke himself.:lol:

I realise that some people take the view that they believe in God and this is the basis of their religion, but surely their belief stems from the bible, ie: without the bible, beleifs would be different.
Agreed.
 

George_Washington

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
United States of America and proud of it!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
kal-el said:
You thought right. I like reading the bible. You want to know what you intend to bash, right? You know what they say, "keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer."

Yeah. I think you sound obsessed and possibly paranoid. I would seek professional help.
 
T

teenonfire4him77

Apostle13 said:
Oh yes :doh I meant to comment on that in my previous post, got side-tracked.
It's good to have the actual word meanings right there in footnote.
Could you explain touchpoint? Almost sounds technical/electronic..?
haha its not electronic. It just ocassionally within the book has like an explnation or summery of a bible story or important verse.
And like in the back, say you were looking up 'Sin', you would look up the word...and it would have all the FAQ's about sin, and have verses that go with them along with mini-explanations....and before each book is a summery of the book, who wrote it, estimated time it was written, what historical events it surronded etc....
 
Top Bottom