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!
I just can't begin to understand how anyone could seriously assert this! It boogles the mind! First, you cannot even begin to "directly" or "naturally" translate a western language like Chinese into English. It is such a totally different language. Plus, you say "Chinese" but do you mean Mandarin or Cantonese, or a different dialect. They are different. My grandson lived in Hong Kong when he was 3 and went to Chinese school. He had a lot of trouble with Cantonese, but Mandarin he found easy. (Although I always thought Mandarin was harder.)
Looking at one thread on whether Chinese uses definite and indefinite articles, it seems like the Chinese speakers don't even agree among themselves about this issue. One person says no, and calls them rather "determiners." Often to do with measure words, unlike English.
Question - Does the Chinese Language have Articles________________________________________________________________________________________
"Ty Eng, Lim, Chinese language enthusiast here Answered Sep 23 2016 · Author has 143 answers and 191.7k answer views
As @Robert Matthews (馬學進) and @Joseph Boyle mention, Cantonese can use measure words like articles. Teochew, another Southern Chinese language does the same thing. Vietnamese can do this as well.
尾魚臭腥 Bue heu cao co. The fish stinks.
No, although I’ve known speakers who use determiners gratuitously.
Another angle on it is to consider the numerical classifiers found in Chinese and most East and Southeast Asian languages. In Mandarin you never use them without numbers, but this is sometimes possible in Cantonese, which looks suspiciously like an article. If this were obligatory instead of occasional, you might have something like the noun-class system of Bantu."
So, you cannot begin to translate 16th century English naturally into any kind of Chinese. Another language, Russian, does not use any articles at all. So, you cannot directly translate either Greek, Hebrew or English of any sort into Russian.
For that matter, Greek has no indefinite article, although people translate nothing in front of the noun, into the indefinite article, a or an. And the JWs have twisted that all around in John 1:1d, by saying, "and the Word was a god." Seriously, they do!
So, it is obvious by this ridiculous statement you know nothing of English grammar, let alone other languages. Like French, German, Spanish or languages which are totally different, like Chinese or Korean or Russian. I did a LOT of grammar in French and German, and then in English, too! I remember talking to my Greek prof about grammar, and how it wasn't hard for me in Greek, because I had so much grammar in other languages. He said he has looked in vain for a simple English grammar test for ESL. He said the Koreans have no article, and also found Greek to be overwhelming. (I did get Outstanding Greek student, and besides a LOT of hard work memorizing vocabulary, and completing every assignment, my grammar background made it easier.)
As for KJV being not corrupt, I dare you to give me any verse in the NT, and I will show you how it deviates from the Greek. Not affecting doctrine, but not identical. Or wait...are you one of those people who think only the KJV is inspired, not the original manuscripts.
I just don't get where this cult came from. No, I do! Peter Ruckman and Gail Riplinger and their cult.
If the KJV is flawed then it must be true also that all translations, revisions and versions have flaws as well. God fully understood how the major modern versions would be presented and I am sure that they are all a reliable source of scriptural truth. You can wrest or twist any passage of any type of bible but if you allow the Holy Spirit to guide you then what you are reading is accurate and inspirational.
The biggest flaw of the KJV is 400 years of language changes and the science of nature. Go to post 41. It lists all of the problems KJV has because of the 400 years!! Words that no longer exist in English. Animals that don't exist like satyrs. Sentences that don't make sense. Etc.
The day the deacon and preacher told me in defense of their version worship that Jesus and Paul both preached from the King Jimmy toke me all I need to know......nothing but a translation, transliteration from 54 false teachers (Episcopal priests)........nothing more, nothing less!!
I think that anybody who thinks man is capable of translating the word of God without inspiration has no clue as to what the Bible even is. It really sickens me to see the foolish comments on these threads.
Maybe. She had me laughing much harder than I hoped or imagined anyone would laugh at my post. It's ironic -- I post something funny, hoping to make a few people laugh, and I'm the one who ends up laughing. It's utterly hilarious (wow, meta-humor).