T1B

Sam wrote:he did this word for word from the King James version and another translation.

I looked at an exerpt from one of his chapters and it's not Word-for-Word King James.

Maybe he "mixed" the King James with another Bible version to come up with his own bible version?

poptart wrote:

Sam wrote:he did this word for word from the King James version and another translation.

I looked at an exerpt from one of his chapters and it's not Word-for-Word King James.

:doh:

When I saw this, I thought "mvscal"

Michelle Obama

Looks interesting. :)

Sudden Sam wrote: Spent the last 4 years doing this book:

Speaking for 'fundies' everywhere who could care less...

Get a life.

The author as well.

Jsc810 wrote:You mean like all of the other versions of the Bible? Ok.

Rack!

PSUFAN wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:You mean like all of the other versions of the Bible? Ok.

Rack!

I love original.

Archive.

Jsc810 wrote:You mean like all of the other versions of the Bible? Ok.

What, are you suggesting there aren't other versions? As though the modern dementia of the Christer cult could be satisfied reading 17th century verse?

All aboard!

Contemporary English Version (CEV), is a completely new translation published by the American Bible Society in 1995. Originally intended as a children's translation, it uses a very simple, contemporary style. It is independent of traditional translations and freer of "biblical" terms. This is an especially good translation for people who speak English as a second language.

English Standard Version (ESV) is an "essentially new literal translation" follows the tradition of the King James, American Standard Version, and Revised Standard Version. Published in 2001 by Crossway, it was developed by a translation team of more than 100 scholars, with the goal of being very accurate (word for word), and yet very readable.

Good News Bible (Today's English Version) (TEV), completed in 1976, was translated by Robert G. Bratcher with six other scholars. This very free, though very accurate, translation avoids the use of traditional biblical vocabulary and communicates especially well with youth and the unchurched. Also published by the American Bible Society.

Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) is another new word-for-word translation that strives to be both literally accurate and readable. It is not as literal as the ESV or NASB, but is more so than the NIV. The Holman published by Broadman & Holman in 2003, is the product of nearly 100 scholars.

The Living Bible (LB), completed in 1971, is Kenneth N. Taylor's paraphrase of the American Standard Version. Easy to read and once immensely popular, it is often criticized for adding too much commentary to the biblical text. Published by Tyndale House, although apparently no longer available from them.

The Message (Msg) - Eugene Peterson completed this paraphrase of the entire Bible in 2002. Peterson takes great liberties with words in his attempt to effectively communicate both the original thoughts and tone of the Scripture. The result is a very earthy, informal language. Published by NavPress.

New American Standard Bible (NASB) - completed in 1971, was produced by 54 conservative Protestant scholars sponsored by the Lockman Foundation. This version is very literal in vocabulary and word order, although the resulting English is quite wooden. It often is preferred by those who want an English version that reflects the grammar of the original. An Update was published in 1995 which seeks to use more modern English while preserving the literal nature of the translation.

New International Version (NIV), completed in 1978, was the product of 115 evangelical scholars. Within a decade it became the best-selling English version. It combines contemporary, literary English with traditional biblical vocabulary. The NIV is copyrighted by the International Bible Society.

New King James Version (NKJV), released in 1982, involved 119 contributors. It updates the vocabulary and grammar of the King James Version, while preserving the classic style and beauty. Although it uses the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the original, it indicates where other manuscripts differ. Published by Thomas Nelson.

New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) of 1985 revised and updated the text and notes of the Jerusalem Bible of 1966. This version, translated by two Catholic scholars, is an elegant, literary rendering (perhaps the most poetic since the KJV). The notes reflect a modern, liberal perspective.

New Living Translation (NLT), published in 1996, is the product of 90 Bible scholars from around the world, from various theological backgrounds and denominations. This is a very readable translation, while remaining more faithful to the original texts than the Living Bible (see above). Also published by Tyndale.

New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) - published in 1989 by the National Council of Churches, revises the Revised Standard Version of 1952. While following the literal tradition of the RSV, the NRSV eliminates much of the archaic language. One distinctive is the use of gender inclusive pronouns to replace male pronouns when the original writers meant both men and women. The NRSV does not change masculine pronouns referring to God, however.

Revised English Bible (REB), completed in 1989, is a thorough revision of the New English Bible. Like the original, it was translated by a committee of British scholars, representing all the major Christian traditions in the United Kingdom. The more archaic language was omitted and a more conservative approach was taken toward some of the difficult passages. Many readers find it to be an excellent translation for personal reading and study, though its British idioms make it less popular in the U.S.

A New Testament of Note
Special mention also should be made of an important New Testament paraphrase. A paraphrase translates the thoughts of the original text, not the words. In 1958 J. B. Phillips completed The New Testament in Modern English. Phillips had a special knack of rendering difficult and long sentences into very understandable English. He even translates well some of the Greek puns and word plays that usually are lost. It can be very helpful to have a copy of Phillips nearby, especially when studying the epistles of Paul.

For Children
Several translations especially for children have been published in recent years, in addition to the CEV mentioned above. The International Children's Bible was completed in 1985 by 21 evangelical scholars. It is written on a high third-grade level. An adult edition, known as the New Century Version, also is available. Published by Thomas Nelson/Word.

The International Bible Society produced the New International Reader's Version (NIrV) as a children's version of the popular NIV. It also is on a third-grade reading level. Both of these Children's Bibles are excellent resources for children. The NIrV comes in several study Bible formats designed especially for children. Published by International Bible Society.



And remember, the degree of a Christer cult member's functional insanity is in direct proportion to the degree in which he regards the Word as literal.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:And remember, the degree of a Christer cult member's functional insanity is in direct proportion to the degree in which he regards the Word as literal.

If people really believed that to be the case, the Catholic Church wouldn't take anywhere near the beating it does.

No, it applies across the board to all the Christer groups...and to Islam as well.

Jsc wrote:Crumb explains that he avoided adding interpretation or clearing up confusing passages, leaving the Bible as is “rather than monkey around with such a venerable text… I approached this as a straight illustration job, with no intention to ridicule or make visual jokes.”

I laffed.

Crumb chose to repeatedly draw God, and God's face, despite the "Venerable Text" (his words) -- Exodus 33:20 -- telling us that NO man can see God's face.

He wrote a little comic book.

Ok.

But he didn't draw God's face. He drew a cartoon of a man's face.

Jsc810 wrote:

poptart wrote:Crumb chose to repeatedly draw God, and God's face, despite the "Venerable Text" (his words) -- Exodus 33:20 -- telling us that NO man can see God's face.

He wrote a little comic book.

Ok.

Great. Tell it to Michelangelo.

Yawwwn.

'Fundies' everywhere are asking...

What's for breakfast?

Jsc810 wrote:

poptart wrote:He wrote a little comic book.

Ok.

Great. Tell it to Michelangelo.

I don't know that Michelangelo made the claim, as Crumb has, that he was not adding interpretation.

Hey, anyone can write, draw, paint ... whatever they want.
I don't care.

But I will call out a 'tard like Crumb when he blatantly lies about what he is doing.

God gave him a talent. Crumb put effort into developing it and producing a piece of art/literature.

Good on him. I'm sure God being all powerful and all can let him know if He is displeased with Crumb's work.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:And remember, the degree of a Christer cult member's functional insanity is in direct proportion to the degree in which he regards the Word as literal.

If people really believed that to be the case, the Catholic Church wouldn't take anywhere near the beating it does.

The Catholic Church hasn't been criticized unfairly. The CC hasn't been criticized anywhere near to the point that it really deserves.

Go get 'em Ray.

PSUFAN wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:And remember, the degree of a Christer cult member's functional insanity is in direct proportion to the degree in which he regards the Word as literal.

If people really believed that to be the case, the Catholic Church wouldn't take anywhere near the beating it does.

The Catholic Church hasn't been criticized unfairly. The CC hasn't been criticized anywhere near to the point that it really deserves.

Point was that the Catholic Church does not read the Bible nearly as literally as other Christian sects do. Evolution out front told me so.

PSUFAN wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:And remember, the degree of a Christer cult member's functional insanity is in direct proportion to the degree in which he regards the Word as literal.

If people really believed that to be the case, the Catholic Church wouldn't take anywhere near the beating it does.

The Catholic Church hasn't been criticized unfairly. The CC hasn't been criticized anywhere near to the point that it really deserves.

You've got to let this go, honey.

Someone at work is staying up nights worrying about 2012. What should I tell her?

Tell her you've got dibs on her record player, Trev

Cuda wrote:Tell her you've got dibs on her record player, Trev

LOL'er

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:And remember, the degree of a Christer cult member's functional insanity is in direct proportion to the degree in which he regards the Word as literal.

Point was that the Catholic Church does not read the Bible nearly as literally as other Christian sects do. Evolution out front told me so.

C'mon , crapper, there have always been plenty of ignorant Catholics who take the bible literally. But in fact they did develop a branch of actual non-literalist nominally rational thinkers, and these are the Jesuits. However, rational thinkers empowered with a huge religious apparatus are a very dangerous group indeed. Not for nothing, that is, did Voltaire assign a special ring of hell to the Jesuits.

R. Crumb is a great artist whose astonishing work has always peeled away the layers of pre-fabricated "normal" pedestrian consciousness of corporate America. You know, the whole John Wayne/Andy of Mayberry bullshit stuffed in your head as a kid. :wink:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:R. Crumb is a great artist whose astonishing work has always peeled away the layers of pre-fabricated "normal" pedestrian consciousness of corporate America. You know, the whole John Wayne/Andy of Mayberry bullshit stuffed in your head as a kid. :wink:

Great, a man of integrity. Maybe he'll have a go at the tripe they've been stuffing in kids' heads for the past thirty years ?

Equally as false and twice as dangerous.

Do you think ?

Be specific? Do you mean the "tripe" of America's actual foreign policy since 1890? Or the fact that 1% of the population has acquired 80% of America's wealth by all manner of slight and scheme--all under the abstract philosophy of "Free Enterprise"? That John Wayne was a total chicken hawk? How about the info we as a people learned about Reagan's secret government plans--as partially revealed in the Irangate hearings? What exactly are you claiming is "tripe"?

1890. You surprise me Mr. TRN 2.

trev wrote:Someone at work is staying up nights worrying about 2012. What should I tell her?

If this country doesn't pull it's head out of it's ass in 2010, 2012 won't matter?