/lit/ - Literature

>>10049607
He's right, you know.

>literary and philosophical aspects of the Bible

kek
you got meme'd, my friend.

>literary and philosophical aspects of the Bible
Stick with the pre-christian greeks

>>10049607
If he doesn't read the KJV, he is probably a evangelical whack.

>>10049607
>ITT autist memer tries to have a conversation with an autist relitard

>>10050239
an*************************

>>10049607
What's the problem with KJV?

>>10050239
He could be Catholic.

>>10050943
I read it for the cultural heritage it represents, but I've heard that the translation is imperfect and is also grounded on weaker texts. Nonetheless, it's what English-speaking people read for centuries, so what's really the point of making a new one? Apparently God was pleased enough with America and Britain to let us win World War II against the rest of the world.

VAI CORINTIAAAAAAAS

>>10051720
I know Catholicism isn't doing too well, but pins sound very evangelical.

>>10049607
He's right though, the KJV is garbage

>>10052486
t. brainlet

>>10051720
>Nonetheless, it's what English-speaking people read for centuries, so what's really the point of making a new one?

Because the prose isn't very good for a start. Some portion of English speakers may have been reading it in recent centuries but its still a relatively modern invention and doesn't represent the beauty of the text as most of the rest of the world experienced it for most of history

>>10052494
I actually prefer the KJV on the left.

>>10052494
This wasn't a good example to use. The broken reading and archaic speech of the KJV leads to more introspection and lends more magnitude to the text. That passage from the NIV reads like whinging prose.

>>10052605
The introspection is mediated by English poets, rather than prophets and Apostles.
I'll never understand why do Anglos think that it's acceptable to speculate and corrupt the Holy Book in which they actually believe. Why is that not heresy?

>>10052678
probably because christcucks are hypocritical, self-serving retards who judge what is "heretical" based purely on convenience

>>10052605
>The broken reading and archaic speech of the KJV leads to more introspection and lends more magnitude to the text

Lmao shut the fuck up

>>10052578
Then you're an idiot or worse lying to yourself

>>10052678
>I'll never understand why do Anglos think that it's acceptable to speculate and corrupt the Holy Book in which they actually believe.

I blame Americans who somehow think the 17th century is ancient history. They talk about the KJV like its what all of Western literature if based on

>>10052678
>translation is heresy
>thinking about scripture is heresy
This is what Catholics actually believe

>>10052753
Well, KJV and the works of Shakespeare are pretty foundational, at least for American, and even most later English, literature.

Obviously not as important in French or German or Spanish literature, though.

>>10049607
I don't know

>>10052932
Actually what you say holds true for all English-speaking countries. So many expressions, idioms, and just the way we articulate in English is derived from pic related, especially from the KJV and Shakespeare. Not reading the KJV, even if you're Catholic or Orthodox, is doing yourself a great disservice from a literary and cultural perspective.

>>10053260
>the pilgrims progress

Thats basically just the canon equivalent of Bane posting

>>10052703
We are not talking about a minor inconvenience here: we're talking about the only source of our entire religion and worldview. It's not something irrelevant.

>>10052917
>translation is heresy
There's a big difference between translating and doctoring.
>thinking about scripture is heresy
Never said that. Soing theology and tricking billions of people into believing a corrupted version of the Bible are vastly different things.

>>10053260
>Not reading the KJV, even if you're Catholic or Orthodox, is doing yourself a great disservice from a literary and cultural perspective.
Maybe, but it's certainly not a religious one. The KJV should be read as a fanfiction.

>>10052738
No, NIV is trash. It's dumbed down. Anything that seeks to adopt the style of accessibility, to adapt to the mass rather than seeks the mass adapt to it is trash. Raise, not lower.

>>10053331
>Raise, not lower.
>trying to improve on the word of God, Jesus, the Apostles and the Prophets

Jesus our Lord and Saviour, please forgive him.

>>10053343
Obviously LARPing.

>>10053343
Do you like those Shakespeare as told through emoticon books too? A translation can use elevated, magisterial language or prosaic and common language and still get the essential point across, I suppose. Neither changes the original text itself. But if you're translating, why would you want anything but the most elevated language possible when translating books about God?

>>10053348
Apparently caring about the word of God is now "LARPing".

>>10053358
>Do you like those Shakespeare as told through emoticon books too?
That's what the KJV is.

> A translation can use elevated, magisterial language or prosaic and common language and still get the essential point across, I suppose.
You are translating the most important text in existence: every single part of it matters, therefore magisterial language should be used only when that part in the source is magisterial, and the same applies for every other type of language.
If you are doctoring and "improving" the original source (and to think that one can improve it is pure heresy) then you are not translating: you are corrupting.

>But if you're translating, why would you want anything but the most elevated language possible when translating books about God?
If I'm translating I want to read what was contained in the original text, in the same way it was laid down. Since we are twlking about the Bible, this becomes an absolute imperative.

>>10053369
All translations are approximations and involve making choices. That is an inherent fact. If you're going to be such a stickler, then you should really insist that people learn Hebrew and Aramaic and Greek. Good luck with that.

>>10053260
switch pilgrims progress for canterbury tales or faerie queene

>>10053417
>he doesn't speak Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek

>>10053429
>tfw monolingual master race

>>10052753
Not all Americunts

>>10053417
The NIV takes almost no license in translating, while every sentence of the KJV has been reworked. This makes your argument invalid.

>>10052442
Based timão poster

>>10052494
>not posting the full version

>>10049607

>it's a "everyone in this group is like this one person I met" thread

You were probably too dumb to provide decent conversation anyway.

>>10049607
>shouldn't read the KJV
wait what why

>>10053838
Read on in this thread to see Christian autists attempt to explain.

>>10053847
In terms of English lit, KJV is obviously the best

But it's not the most accurate translation

>>10053851
>In terms of English lit, KJV is obviously the best

Not remotely true

KJV was created by Protestants, don't read it, it will lead you astray. Learn Latin so that you can read the Vulgate.

>>10052494
the one on the left is much better

KJV for references. NSRV otherwise.

>reading the Bible in a language other than Latin

Vatican II was a mistake

>Worshipping words instead of directing your worship to God himself.
>Thinking The Bible was meant for you instead of a message to the people that lived in that specific timeframe.
>Worshipping an institution just because it was the one that aligned with God 2,000 years ago even though it has been progressively corrupted by humankind for all this time.
>Thinking anything but your own soul is the path to salvation.

How does it feel to not nurture your own personal relationship with God and instead depend on some written word that may or may not have been inspired and preserved by divinity?

>>10054388
Most anons here on /lit/ don't actually care about the actual spiritual aspect and see The Bible as another meme book to check off their list and then act all high and mighty about having read it. Case in point, look at OP.

>>10050239
niv is goat

>>10053331
by this logic you are a brainlet if you read anything other than ancient aramaic

>>10054346
>reading translations

>>10049607
>not reading R. Crumb's Book of Genesis

>>10055357
>reading

>>10054346
>calling it Le Bible
non-jew interpreters of the Tanakh and associated gnostic apocrypha were a mistake.