There are discussion here (and elsewhere) about cultural significance of certain things and what words meant in the days of Jesus verses now. And, from what I can see, they are legitimate discussions that will further enhance one's understanding of things being discussed.
That said, if there are enough cultural differences in 'Jesus's days' to what words spoken meant then compared to now, whose responsibility is it to communicate that information?
I mean, if 'cheating' means something different then than it does now (be it from the word's definition and its changes or the cultural influences of the time), is it the reader's chore to research that or those that edited the bible for current distribution?
And why?
Who holds the responsibility?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
- Miles
- Savant
- Posts: 5179
- Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
- Has thanked: 434 times
- Been thanked: 1614 times
Re: Who holds the responsibility?
Post #21Maybe where you live, but not in the several states I've lived in.The Tanager wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:21 pmCalling someone "dirt" or "a piece of dirt" is a common idiom that is equivalent to calling them "less than nothing."Miles wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:35 pmScholars do indeed generally agree on the translation of a word, etc, but often times they don't, which is why we get such atrocious variations as those appearing in the two examples I gave concerning σκύβαλον in Philippians 3:8, and חוּל in Psalm 10:5. In Philippians 3:8 "dirt" is nothing like "less than nothing,"
Sorry, but I'm quite certain you know exactly what I mean.What does "get" mean? You can procure something (food), become something (get scared), understand something (I get it). There are various English words that have held quite different meanings. Nice used to mean silly or foolish or simple. Awful used to mean being worthy of awe. Fathom used to mean to encircle with one's arms, but can now mean getting to the bottom of things after much thought. Languages are full of this kind of stuff.
.
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6623 times
- Been thanked: 3219 times
Re: Who holds the responsibility?
Post #22Who determines that the translations are indeed the most accurate and how are those reputations established? As you said, there are difficulties involved. Bias surely plays a big part in all of this. If the translation fits with your mindset, then it must be good?Paul of Tarsus wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:04 pm So what can the reader do to overcome these difficulties? One option is to use a Bible version that has a reputation for accuracy. I understand that the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible (NRSV) has a good reputation for accuracy.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
- The Tanager
- Savant
- Posts: 5003
- Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
- Has thanked: 45 times
- Been thanked: 150 times
Re: Who holds the responsibility?
Post #23Merriam-Webster gives this as its first entry for dirt:Miles wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:40 pmMaybe where you live, but not in the several states I've lived in.The Tanager wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:21 pmCalling someone "dirt" or "a piece of dirt" is a common idiom that is equivalent to calling them "less than nothing."
1a: EXCREMENT
b: a filthy or soiling substance (such as mud, dust, or grime)
c (archaic): something worthless
d: a contemptible person // treated me like dirt
Oxford Learners Dictionaries includes this idiom:
treat somebody like dirt (informal)
to treat someone with no respect at all
They treat their workers like dirt.
Lexico includes this definition:
1.7 (informal) A worthless or contemptible person or thing.
It was a rhetorical question. You didn't use "get" in what I quoted. I was just using "get" as an example of the complexity of languages.Miles wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:40 pmSorry, but I'm quite certain you know exactly what I mean.The Tanager wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:21 pmWhat does "get" mean? You can procure something (food), become something (get scared), understand something (I get it). There are various English words that have held quite different meanings. Nice used to mean silly or foolish or simple. Awful used to mean being worthy of awe. Fathom used to mean to encircle with one's arms, but can now mean getting to the bottom of things after much thought. Languages are full of this kind of stuff.
- William
- Savant
- Posts: 14131
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 910 times
- Been thanked: 1641 times
- Contact:
Re: Who holds the responsibility?
Post #24I dare say that many are having a relationship with the complexity of language whilst concurrently believing that they are having a relationship with The Creator of Life on Earth. Perhaps the two are not that related...The Tanager wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:23 pm I was just using "get" as an example of the complexity of languages.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3187
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
- Has thanked: 1510 times
- Been thanked: 824 times
Re: Who holds the responsibility?
Post #25I would agree fully if we weren't dealing with an all capable 'thing' that wants us to be with 'it' in heaven. Because of that, while humanity is indeed (IMO) responsible for some things, that list is severely limited.Purple Knight wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 2:28 pmMy opinion is that if the knowledge is there, if you can possibly obtain it by reasonable means (that is to say, searching and not luck), it's your obligation to go and get it.nobspeople wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 1:23 pmI mean, if 'cheating' means something different then than it does now (be it from the word's definition and its changes or the cultural influences of the time), is it the reader's chore to research that or those that edited the bible for current distribution?
But if all the knowledge is laid out on the table and there's still disagreement from the top people, that certainly counts as needing luck to select the correct interpretation.
My thread on morality being a guessing game:
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=38210
In other words, I don't think the common person should be required to read or learn or understand the ancient, original material to get its meaning, for example.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!
- Paul of Tarsus
- Banned
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:42 pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 150 times
Re: Who holds the responsibility?
Post #26You're making an issue out of what Bible version I think is best?brunumb wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:21 pmWho determines that the translations are indeed the most accurate and how are those reputations established?Paul of Tarsus wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:04 pm So what can the reader do to overcome these difficulties? One option is to use a Bible version that has a reputation for accuracy. I understand that the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible (NRSV) has a good reputation for accuracy.
Anyway, I suppose we all have our favorite versions of the Bible and choose whichever version we think best suits our needs. If I remember correctly, Bible scholar Hector Avalos recommends the NRSV. I respect his work, so I took his advice.
I'm not sure what you mean by "fits (my) mindset," but yes, I will probably choose a Bible version that is in line with my way of looking at things. Is there something terrible about my choice?As you said, there are difficulties involved. Bias surely plays a big part in all of this. If the translation fits with your mindset, then it must be good?
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6623 times
- Been thanked: 3219 times
Re: Who holds the responsibility?
Post #27How does any of that overcome the problems associated with biblical translations?Paul of Tarsus wrote: ↑Thu Apr 01, 2021 12:35 pmYou're making an issue out of what Bible version I think is best?brunumb wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:21 pmWho determines that the translations are indeed the most accurate and how are those reputations established?Paul of Tarsus wrote: ↑Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:04 pm So what can the reader do to overcome these difficulties? One option is to use a Bible version that has a reputation for accuracy. I understand that the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible (NRSV) has a good reputation for accuracy.
Anyway, I suppose we all have our favorite versions of the Bible and choose whichever version we think best suits our needs. If I remember correctly, Bible scholar Hector Avalos recommends the NRSV. I respect his work, so I took his advice.
I'm not sure what you mean by "fits (my) mindset," but yes, I will probably choose a Bible version that is in line with my way of looking at things. Is there something terrible about my choice?As you said, there are difficulties involved. Bias surely plays a big part in all of this. If the translation fits with your mindset, then it must be good?
All you have essentially suggested is to use a Bible you particularly like. In no way does that address the issue.I'd say that it's the responsibility of Bible scholars to ensure that Bible translations accurately reflect in the vernacular what was meant in the original languages. Unfortunately, doing so can be tricky because of the differences in the languages, the times, and the cultures.
So what can the reader do to overcome these difficulties?
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.