/lit/ - Literature

Lol seething c*tholicuck

>>14131919
well post some for us then, my love
post us some of your favorite, your very favorite chapters

>>14131943
Doay-Rheims
16 For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world, to judge the world, but that the world may be saved by him.

18 He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

19 And this is the judgment: because the light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light: for their works were evil.

20 For every one that doth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, that his works may not be reproved.

21 But he that doth truth, cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, because they are done in God.

KJV
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

>>14131953
it reads real nice

I'm thinking about the usages of "doth" and "doeth". The usage of "doth" in verse 18 feels natural to me, while the doths in verses 20 and 21 feel like they should be doeths. But I'm no scholar. Any classic translation is better than some of the crap the kids are running around with these days.
I went to the wedding of a close friend, and the bride's family was all evangelicals. So for the gospel reading during the service I had to listen to some lady reading some 6th grade reading level passage out of Luke, for like 10 minutes. Felt very bad, I still feel the pain a little bit.

two words: knox translation

>>14131919
catholics don't read the bible anyway so it's a waste of paper

>>14131953
same shit

>>14132183
you're forced to do it for your first communion preparation.

>>14131977
>knox translation
is that an actual fucking joke?

>>14132183

Underrated.

>>14132197
>no wait they literally don't read the bible so much so that they're FORCED to do it
>TAKE THAT

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Other than Doay-Rheims and KJV there is not a single decent TR english translation out there
Let's not forget the Vulgate/TR are similar in the sense KJV used greek manuscripts and consulted the vulgate which was obviously copied from greek manuscripts

There is a reprint of Doay-Rheims before it got infected with the Critical Greek work with updated english (but still elegant)

>>14132249
NKJV

>>14132194
Douay Rheims came first and KJV has prot biases in it

>>14132250
didn't they use some "new" greek manuscripts without naming which? I don't know but I always thought they "updated" some of the new testament with the critical greek edition but I could be wrong

>>14132252
>implying there are no catholic biases

>>14132250
Looks like the NKJV is not based on TR/Byzantine Type

Gen. 2:7 KJV: "... and man became a living SOUL."
NKJV: "... and man became a living being."
What the fuck were they thinking. Not an update but a totally different source. I'm Catholic so I could be more "relaxed" about translations but that kind of thing is bad even for the protestants. You cannot simply add/modify text and put KJ name on it just because people would buy it

It's quite possible they didn't use TR at all

Matt 20:20 KJV: "Then came to him the mother of
Zebedee's children with her sons, WORSHIPPING him ..."
NKJV: "Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Him with her sons, kneeling down ..."

Absolutely not TR/KJV
Maybe worse than New International Version

>>14132271
nah it is based off the textus receptus

>>14132258
Catholic biases aka "The actual scripture"

>>14132280
It isn't
Vulgate: Matthew 20:20: "adorans" = worship
Greek: "προσkυνοῦσα" = Adore, worship.
http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/4352

>>14132183
based

Acts 17:29-31

Almost every new translation destroyed this. Even Revised Standard Version which is based on the Nestle-Aland does not destroy it like modern "King James" updated versions

Textus Receptus is embellished post-authorship anyway