-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
B
Well Jesus is the only one who can save anyone from sin, christians can lead them, point too but that's about it..
Greek is Greek Aramaic is Aramaic but what I have learned reading a lot of bibles not all, there are well other a hundred out there but so far most are similar in concept.
Nothing is difficult it's only what a person limits themselves with. A passage that reminds me of this is the faith of a mustard seed thinking.
Greek is Greek Aramaic is Aramaic but what I have learned reading a lot of bibles not all, there are well other a hundred out there but so far most are similar in concept.
Nothing is difficult it's only what a person limits themselves with. A passage that reminds me of this is the faith of a mustard seed thinking.
Last edited:
Exactly! He does resuscitate our soul. What he does not do is resuscitate us from our sins! It is completely the wrong word to us. Jesus saves, delivers or rescues us from our sins. Which is the definition of soso.
Sin is a noun which in English is something we do. So, we need to be rescued or saved from what we have done. It is grammatically incorrect to say that you resuscitate a sin. Because that actually means you would be reviving the sin. You would not be reviving your soul.
And that was only one verse. So far, everything you have changed, you have discarded not just the correct definitions, but you have very poor grammar.
Also, before I finish reading this thread, I realize I need to qualify what I said on 2nd person singular. Of course, it is easy to know the personal pronoun of 2nd person singular in any language. What is hard, is to correctly CONJUGATE the verb that starts or completes the predicate. I have Bescherelles in French, Spanish and German. So that is tu, tu or du for 2nd person singular. BUT the most important part is the fact that I needed to have help to learn the verb. And not just in the present tense, but in the past, the imperfect, the perfect, the future, the pluperfect, etc. For every single verb there is. When I learned Spanish, I filled cards with the complete conjugation for the major verbs. And for French, and now for Greek, and also the same for Hebrew. So, I am not just talking about the pronoun, but the verb. Sorry if I didn't make that very clear.
I also have quite a few helps for both Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek, which tell me how to conjugate, or "parse" the verb. There is no such thing for early Modern English! If I can't speak it, then I don't know when I am reading it, if the verb is conjugated or parsed properly. I can assume it is, but I don't know from my study of English. I also may not know the tense the verb is in.
My suggestion to you, BeyondET, is that you need to go and study English grammar, and also the original languages. It would give you a much better understanding of writing. I was lucky back in the day, that in Canada, we were taught the British method. We did spelling extensively, vocabulary building and writing. Then, in Junior High and Senior High, we spent most of our time learning grammar. Then, in French, the same thing. Most people do not have that kind of background. Perhaps a course at community college in writing might help?
No, we do not limit ourselves. Language both limits and challenges us. Faith has nothing to do with understanding how to write correctly. Any atheist or pagan can learn to write correctly.
And yes, I misworded my post that this was in answer to. I apologize! Jesus SAVES us from our sins. He does not resuscitate us!
I would imagine that the Amplified has a copyright, like all books written (or translated) in the last 50 years. I am a musician, and it is the same with music. But every Bible I have ever read usually you can contact them if you are using longer passages, to receive permission. That was something I read about the NET Bible - you can quote much longer passages without permission, just acknowledging the source, like any scholar does with any book they are quoting. If I could only get a hold of a full commentary copy!
Again, the motive in translating is not to use the biggest and most complicated words possible. The goal has to be to make it readable. Your translations are not readable. I know the words, but the sentences are not correctly constructed. I'm not trying to take you to task. I think your love of God and the Word of God are commendable. BUT, as I found out on this site, if the words are too big, no one can understand what you are saying. If you read my posts from 4 or 5 years ago, they were very difficult with lots of big words. And a lot of people didn't understand me. If you want to make a difficult version, then your level of English has to be far above the level you are translating to. And to what point? If no one really understands it. A Bible is no longer used to teach children how to read, and it shouldn't be used that way for children.
Then there is the fact that you should be translating from the original languages. There are many tough issues in translating Greek, which even advanced scholars, who know Greek better than I ever will, disagree on. Some of them are just small issues, but a couple do affect theology. We are doing Hebrews 5-6 next week, and there are some very different ways of looking at the Greek, which are equally valid, but make a lot of difference when translating it into English. A translation from English to English really isn't a translation, is it?
B
Thanks for your input, though I'll more than likely keep it as the author had (resuscitate)
I like James Murdock Translation of the Aramaic Syriac. I'm just merely updating, and,but,then, stuff. I've looked into he Greek trans not my cup of tea besides what you said about orginal cannot be proven there is three camps to that one Greek one Aramaic one Hebrew none of them can prove without a doubt their language is orginal no one can its all theory as to what is orginal.
I looked into the amplified bible you mentioned and in my opinion the author is just simply changing the wording around and dropping a lot of the transition words, and but then, kind of cheesy in my opinion but o well it's their translation but that isn't of interest to me. I'm not looking at anytime soon publish a bible more than likely never will it's for my personal amusement for now.
I like James Murdock Translation of the Aramaic Syriac. I'm just merely updating, and,but,then, stuff. I've looked into he Greek trans not my cup of tea besides what you said about orginal cannot be proven there is three camps to that one Greek one Aramaic one Hebrew none of them can prove without a doubt their language is orginal no one can its all theory as to what is orginal.
I looked into the amplified bible you mentioned and in my opinion the author is just simply changing the wording around and dropping a lot of the transition words, and but then, kind of cheesy in my opinion but o well it's their translation but that isn't of interest to me. I'm not looking at anytime soon publish a bible more than likely never will it's for my personal amusement for now.
B
that is quite similar to the other word that was used by Dr. Murdock in translating Aramaic Syriac. Either using to save or to resuscitate is kind of weighing apples to oranges IMO. I think the proper wording is synonymous with context. Some may understand how I am using synonyms and some will not understand how I'm using the synonyms, it's quite ok either way. I do know I can learn from the positive and negative views of things.
I don't care if using "thou" is a dead language or not. It is the correct word to use. God's word is correct. God's word is truth. Culture may dictate words for you and others, but culture will never dictate the word of God for me. Changing the word of God to fit the needs of young people? Never. Young people need to adjust to the word of God as it stands. That's the problem with the modern church. Readable? The word of God is readable. The problem is people today want to be spoon fed. "If it doesn't read like I talk, if it doesn't fit my needs then it's not for me." Ridiculous!
B
I like the word thou, especially the use within some bibles it just rings more proper and honoring of the word.
If a person was to use only (you) or (your) there are limitation as to how and where to use it.
not the case with thou for the word can be as thou or thy or thine or ye , depending on the verbiage.
Other words I wouldn't mind seeing used more.
agnize: to acknowledge or confess; to take pride in
fadge: to succeed, to turn out well
trow: to trust, to believe
If a person was to use only (you) or (your) there are limitation as to how and where to use it.
not the case with thou for the word can be as thou or thy or thine or ye , depending on the verbiage.
Other words I wouldn't mind seeing used more.
agnize: to acknowledge or confess; to take pride in
fadge: to succeed, to turn out well
trow: to trust, to believe
Sure! If you so thoroughly immersed in 17th century culture, then you go for it! As for me, I will stick to my own culture and language. Using a dead language with archaic and obsolete words means that you lose a LOT of meaning! But if you can do it, and ignore the parts you don't understand, go for it!
Greek is easier to understand than KJV English for me. So I will continue to read in English and Greek, and leave the KJV to people who either got sent back and trapped in the 17th century, or maybe came forward 3 or 400 years in time, and don't really understand modern English. Works for me!
If I want to find out if the original 2nd person was plural or singular, I used to refer to my French Bible, before Seminary. Now that I can read Greek I use that. It's not a big deal.
God's word is in all translations, by the way, unless they are cult translations, like NWT. which, of course, no one reads here!