Subject:
|
Re: New Stories from the New Testament
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 14 Feb 2002 13:56:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1249 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:
> > Me, I love the KJV for the beauty of language, especially some well-known
> > passages like the Christmas narrative, but I study out of the NIV for
> > clearer understanding.
>
> The language is beautiful--and traditional--because we identify it
> as such. But I'd argue that any translation could be considered that
> way 350 years later. :D I do wonder what hidden, now-transparent
> biases might pop out of the NIV to some long-future reader?
That was going to be my point as well. I would argue that every
translation including the first one (ie, from the "mind of God" to the "hand
of man") automatically (though not necessarily intentionally) reflects some
of the biases of the translator. For all we know, James may have intended a
"good faith" translation of what he believed to be the correct message, and
only now are was able to infer his bias. Currently a gender-conscious
translation is the subject of some small controversy--the translators assert
that the translation is more true to the original, but detractors complain
that it is an effort to politically correct the text. I had a link to the
CNN story, but the link is now dead (durned liberal media!)
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New Stories from the New Testament
|
| (...) Ah. Okay. Well, I found it funny for a related reason--mostly that James had the translation slanted in a way to extol monarchy and, some suggest, Catholicism (James having been a closet Catholic as he was). That's ironic for a lot of the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
47 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
