• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

CHRISTMAS - Exposed!

AbrahamSolomon said:
you can't use any Bible without digging Deep into Hebrew/Greek/Latin for its actual meaning as it is lost in Translations.
Click to expand...
I don't really agree with that. The plain reading of almost any translation will give you the correct understanding on 99% of the topics in scripture. You don't need to dig into the original languages to be saved, or to live a decent godly life.

Looking into the original languages is important if you want a fully rounded understanding. But even on an issue like polygamy, which is misrepresented slightly in most translations, you can plainly see it's not sin just from a plain reading (if you're honest enough to accept the scriptures instead of man's tradition).

I'm a big fan of looking into the original to get a deeper understanding of everything. But it's not necessary.
 
From many in my life that are trusted theologians, the difference between being able to read and write original languages and the english rendering of scripture is like the difference between black and white TV versus color HDTV. I have seen many B and W John Wayne movies and dont really like the colorized version but i know that he really wasnt black and white himself. Some nuances in the colorized version is artistic license and not really the way it was. It is artificially enhanced so my thought is if the theologian is true to the intent of original then it would be beautiful however i can smell a controlling rat from a long ways away. This doesnt pass the smell test.
 
Maddog said:
From many in my life that are trusted theologians, the difference between being able to read and write original languages and the english rendering of scripture is like the difference between black and white TV versus color HDTV.
Click to expand...
I was told exactly the same. However, from a teaching standpoint the advantage of being able to check the accuracy of a translation is that one can speak with certainty on the meaning of a passage. You can refute the, "Well, that's what I think it means" argument with confidence.
 
FollowingHim said:
I don't really agree with that. The plain reading of almost any translation will give you the correct understanding on 99% of the topics in scripture. You don't need to dig into the original languages to be saved, or to live a decent godly life.

Looking into the original languages is important if you want a fully rounded understanding. But even on an issue like polygamy, which is misrepresented slightly in most translations, you can plainly see it's not sin just from a plain reading (if you're honest enough to accept the scriptures instead of man's tradition).

I'm a big fan of looking into the original to get a deeper understanding of everything. But it's not necessary.
Click to expand...

You lose a lot of its root meanings, not only that you take on baggage when you translate into other languages.
Its always best to seek its root meanings. I like 119 Test Everything because they dig deeper and they really know how to explain it to your everyday person who don't have time to watch documentaries and do hours of research for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Despite what I said earlier, I won't lock this right now because the debate is calming down naturally.
 
PeteR said:
Beware 119. The do get some things very wrong, poly being one. The ministry is egalitarian, not patriarchal... Just saying.
Click to expand...
thats true, it should just be a tool.
 
FollowingHim said:
You don't need to dig into the original languages to be saved, or to live a decent godly life.
Click to expand...

I concur. One of the revolutionary ideas of the Reformation was to make vernacular translations of the Bible available to the common people who were never going to have academic understandings of Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, or Latin.

Insisting that one must learn these four languages as a prerequisite to being a Christian is akin to the Islamic stricture that one must learn Arabic in order to be a Muslim. The absurdity of Islam is that they have people running around saying Arabic language prayers by rote meaning that people are saying things and they have no idea what they're saying. It's just a ritual.
 
MeganC said:
The absurdity of Islam is that they have people running around saying Arabic language prayers by rote meaning that people are saying things and they have no idea what they're saying. It's just a ritual.
Click to expand...
Jesus said, "And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words" (Matt. 6:7).
 
MeganC said:
I concur. One of the revolutionary ideas of the Reformation was to make vernacular translations of the Bible available to the common people who were never going to have academic understandings of Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, or Latin.

Insisting that one must learn these four languages as a prerequisite to being a Christian is akin to the Islamic stricture that one must learn Arabic in order to be a Muslim. The absurdity of Islam is that they have people running around saying Arabic language prayers by rote meaning that people are saying things and they have no idea what they're saying. It's just a ritual.
Click to expand...

Every language has history and unique meanings so if I was saying G-d in Arabic it would be Allah.


'Iielan yasue almasih, aladhi 'aetah allah' iiaah liriah lieabidih, aydan al'ashya' alati yajib 'an tahduth qryban: wahadha 'arsalah mae mulakih' iilaa khadimih yuhanaa ;

Ailan Yasu al-Masih, may God grant him peace to Raya Laibaidh, aidan al-Aashiyah, which must occur, an offering: the placement of angelic weapons, ailah, a servant;

Allah, Arabic Allāh (“God”), the one and only God in Islam. Etymologically, the name Allah is probably a contraction of the Arabic al-Ilāh, “the God.” The name's origin can be traced to the earliest Semitic writings in which the word for god was il, el, or eloah, the latter two used in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament).

So when you take Hebrew into another language it loses a lot of its core meaning and adds baggage of another and that is why even with a well translated Bible we must go to its core, you could trust another person's understanding of it or you can pick up you shovel and dig.
 
@AbrahamSolomon, please stop copy-pasting from encyclooaedias. We know Allah is the arabic translation of God / Elohim. Just write your own thoughts. If you want to provide a reference, just paste the link.
 
FollowingHim said:
@AbrahamSolomon, please stop copy-pasting from encyclooaedias. We know Allah is the arabic translation of God / Elohim. Just write your own thoughts. If you want to provide a reference, just paste the link.
Click to expand...

I just like to show proof to what I am saying, most people won't take the time to click the links.
But fine, i will keep it short. I just believe in showing my work.
 
But it's not your work, and you post it inline as if you wrote it, with no indication that it is a quote. It just makes you look like a school kid cheating on an essay, or a bot. So it makes you seem less credible, not more credible.
 
FollowingHim said:
But it's not your work, and you post it inline as if you wrote it, with no indication that it is a quote. It just makes you look like a school kid cheating on an essay, or a bot. So it makes you seem less credible, not more credible.
Click to expand...

I see, but on this side I do a lot of studying.
I will reformat my new post, but it will take longer.
I will also make notes of my translations clearer as the last post way done my me.
I was offered a job in Translating Arabic/Farsi to English as my friend does for The U.S. Government and I passed on it.
 
Just write
Code: 
[quote]This is a quote[/quote]
To get this:
This is a quote
Click to expand...

Or highlight it and click the quote button at the top of the text box to have those tags added automatically.
 
Or if that's too confusing, just write:

The enclopaedia britannica says: "Allah, Arabic Allāh (“God”), the one and only God in Islam. "

Then it is clear which part you wrote, what you quoted, and where it came from.
 

FollowingHim said:
Or if that's too confusing, just write:

The enclopaedia britannica says: "Allah, Arabic Allāh (“God”), the one and only God in Islam. "

Then it is clear which part you wrote, what you quoted, and where it came from.
Click to expand...

I used to write code.
 
FollowingHim said:
But it's not your work, and you post it inline as if you wrote it, with no indication that it is a quote. It just makes you look like a school kid cheating on an essay, or a bot. So it makes you seem less credible, not more credible.
Click to expand...
:D :D I was marveling at the fact that in the middle of what I thought was a quote from ole Abe, there was the word 'God' with the o!! You ruined it... LOL!!!
 
PeteR said:
:D :D I was marveling at the fact that in the middle of what I thought was a quote from ole Abe, there was the word 'God' with the o!! You ruined it... LOL!!!
Click to expand...

Why are we mocking? When I use something I don't always change that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top