Active Users:669 Time:03/04/2025 04:09:44 AM
That bad of translations? Larry Send a noteboard - 12/01/2012 05:55:38 AM
The Aramaic is only relevant for the New Testament and small bits of the Old Testament, but Hebrew Old Testaments don't anachronistically translate those into Hebrew. Even so, it's clear that the original language of the New Testament was Greek. Even with Greek, the Septuagint is helpful to have for historical purposes but not strictly necessary.

As for English, sometimes I think the worst thing to ever happen was the translation of the Bible into English.


Or are you also thinking of those fundies who believe that the only true edition of the Bible is the King James edition? xx(
Illusions fall like the husk of a fruit, one after another, and the fruit is experience. - Narrator, Sylvie

Je suis méchant.
Reply to message
I'm wondering if I own too many Bibles. - 12/01/2012 12:08:16 AM 898 Views
I'm in the same boat - 12/01/2012 12:14:11 AM 755 Views
Just FYI - 12/01/2012 05:34:15 AM 673 Views
I know - 12/01/2012 05:54:00 AM 756 Views
You need a bible that has 5 translations side by side - 12/01/2012 04:16:25 AM 955 Views
Not quite - 12/01/2012 05:31:57 AM 788 Views
That bad of translations? - 12/01/2012 05:55:38 AM 803 Views
May I ask why you have the NIV rather than the NASB? *NM* - 12/01/2012 09:47:55 AM 330 Views
I think it's better. - 12/01/2012 09:11:58 PM 788 Views
Bible geekery. - 12/01/2012 11:55:48 AM 750 Views
Time for me to buy a green sweater. *NM* - 12/01/2012 11:23:14 PM 325 Views
I only have 4 - 12/01/2012 01:58:13 PM 836 Views
I heard the Norwegian one had the controversial "Thou shalt slaughter Leviathan and eat him" passage - 12/01/2012 11:24:50 PM 688 Views
Indeed - 13/01/2012 09:49:06 AM 909 Views
NIV Study Bible is high on my list of Must Haves. - 12/01/2012 08:34:08 PM 749 Views
I'm a little confused - 12/01/2012 11:25:28 PM 708 Views
I shall un-confuse you. - 12/01/2012 11:42:20 PM 685 Views

Reply to Message