The Foreignness of the Bible
Richard Rhodes doesn’t think it’s all that foreign. Read about it at Better Bibles. I give this one 5 stars out of 5.
Similar Posts
Some Basic Linguistics
ByhenryOne of the great problems I find in teaching biblical languages, or in explaining Bible translation to lay audiences, is that people don’t understand meaning very well. They assume that words have fixed, narrow ranges of meaning, and that if you search carefully, you can find a word or phrase to precisely represent that word…
KJV Better than Originals?
ByhenryJohn Byron comments on a web site that makes that suggestion. One of the champions of this bizarre position, Peter Ruckman, preaches just down the road.
James McGrath on the Conservative Bible Project
Byhenry… in the Christian Science Monitor, no less. (HT: Exploring Our Matrix.)
The Value of REB Eccentricity
ByhenryOr perhaps I should say REB uniqueness. One of the major reasons for using multiple Bible versions when studying the Bible in English (or any other language other than the originals) is to make yourself aware of alternate translations for particular passages. This goes beyond different ways of expressing the thought in English, to places…
Translation and Inspiration
ByhenryIn posting recently on translation I’ve noticed that many people connect one’s idea of inspiration with one’s approach to translation. The assumption seems to be that a person who believes in some form of verbal inspiration, especially verbal plenary inspiration, will necessarily favor a formal, word-by-word, or literal translaltion. Of these terms I prefer formal,…
Preserving Literary Quality?
ByhenryBryon’s Weblog has a quote from Leland Ryken and some commentary, followed by some rather silly comments by an obvious troll. What I found interesting here, however, was the idea of preserving the literary qualities of the Bible. Let me reproduce the quote Bryon used: “If your essentially literal translation is the RSV, the ESV,…