/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13214319]

I have NIV, NKJV, and NASB. Which one should I read?

[Anonymous No.13214325]

KJV

[Anonymous No.13214336]

JKV

[Anonymous No.13214344]

>>13214319
NRSV

[Anonymous No.13214364]

>>13214319
KJV

[Anonymous No.13214759]

>>13214319
American Kang Jim version

[Anonymous No.13214793]

Why are there so many in the first place

[Anonymous No.13214794]

>>13214319
Just KYS

[Anonymous No.13214831]

>>13214319
KJV just for the poetry.

[Anonymous No.13214845]

>>13214319
Read KJV and NIV. Doesn't hurt to read the bible twice

[Anonymous No.13214860]

>>13214319
You can read wahaever you want but it ain't ressurect motherfucking dead bitch of a God.

[Anonymous No.13214945]

>>13214319
unfortunately all of them do a mediocre translation of the most insightful piece of literature in history:

john 1.1

“In the beginning was logos, and logos was with God, and logos was God. "HE" was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men”

translating the greek word "logos" as "word" is just so mediocre (the original was writen in greek) even heidegger goes deep into understanting this concept of "logos" in his book "time and being" because theres no good translation in just one word, it can better be describe as a concept meaning: order, conscious, truth, reason, word-language- etc... modern words like logic or bio-"logy" techno-"logy" this terms comes from logos....the beginning phrase in the gospel of john must be one of the most brilliant pieces of literature ever created, the insight into the understanding of the natural world it just breathtaking, its very clear that whoever this john person (or persons) was, he knew a lot about the natural world.

[Anonymous No.13215106]

>>13214945
It's all derived from a basal sense of "saying". 'léxis' (λέξῐς) which more properly denotes a single word is from the same source. For what it's worth Syriac texts use melthā (ܡܠܬܐ) and the Vulgate 'verbum'. "reckoning" is one of the meanings given to logos and "kinreckonness" happens to be one of the Anglish renditions created for "genealogy". Maybe "kinreckoning" would also work for that. "word" probably fit the gospel context best.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%BB%CF%8C%CE%B3%CE%BF%CF%82
http://cal.huc.edu/oneentry.php?lemma=mlh+N%20&cits=all

[Anonymous No.13216115]

>>13215106
I get the idea but it really loses a huge lot of meaning because many people think that it means "in the beginning was the word (of the bible)" and thats not the sole meaning at all. the whole "verbo" thing is also a simplistic view.

[Anonymous No.13217095]

Why does everyone always recommend the KJV? It's shit compared to the rest of them take this passage as an example:
https://biblehub.com/revelation/18-2.htm

The King James version is patently inferior and redundant.

[Anonymous No.13217251]

not meme james

[Anonymous No.13217262]

KJV. See pic related.

[Anonymous No.13217266]

>>13217095
Because of the poetic language and it's influence on so much other literature, like Milton, Doestoevsky, The Waste Land, Dante, etc.

[Anonymous No.13217608]

>>13217095
In early modern English "be" was often used to form the past perfect for intransitive verbs. That's why there's the phrase of "Christ is risen" and "the Lord is come".
https://www.quora.com/Is-he-is-risen-grammatically-correct

Most of the translations of this verse are probably inaccurate since the original Greek is in the aorist tense which expresses a simple past action i.e. "fell"
https://biblehub.com/text/revelation/18-2.htm

[Anonymous No.13217773]

>>13217266
>Dante and Dostoevsky were Englishmen

[Anonymous No.13217949]

>>13214319
Read the NIV or the ESV, they are some of the best translations you can get your hands on.

[Anonymous No.13218002]

>>13214319
RSV

[Anonymous No.13218010]

>>13217949
>NIV
Jehovah's Witness detected

[Anonymous No.13218027]

>>13218010
You mean the NWT. Back in the days they would use the top tier ASV.

[Anonymous No.13218056]

>>13218027
You are correct too. They also hand out NIV occasionally though because it still lines up with their beliefs.

[Anonymous No.13218162]

The World English Bible is an underrepresented translation that is a revision of the RSV and unlike some of the other modern translations is in the public domain. Apocrypha translations were also made for it.

Like the ASV it renders the tetragrammaton but as Yahweh this time, which in my opinion disputable since the debate on the exact vocalization of it is not agreed. I feel the best way to go about it would be to transcribe the consonants as YHWH and put "Lord" (or "God" depending on the reading) in parenthesis each time after it. Sure it might look clunkier but it's less questionable.

[Anonymous No.13218166]

The World English Bible is an underrepresented translation that is a revision of the ASV and unlike some of the other modern translations is in the public domain. Apocrypha translations were also made for it.

Like the ASV it renders the tetragrammaton but as Yahweh this time, which in my opinion disputable since the debate on the exact vocalization of it is not agreed. I feel the best way to go about it would be to transcribe the consonants as YHWH and put "Lord" (or "God" depending on the reading) in parenthesis each time after it. Sure it might look clunkier but it's less questionable.

[Anonymous No.13218168]

>>13217095
that passage is beautifully written anon, you just have bad taste

[Anonymous No.13218266]

>>13217262

>Anabaptists are the spiritual descendants of Donatists and Waldensians? I'd love to see a source for that, especially since it's BS.

[Anonymous No.13218454]

>>13218168
>And he cried mightily with a strong voice,
Are you joking? This is 3 times redundant.

[Anonymous No.13218483]

>>13218168
>>13218454

Guys, the redundancy on the KJV's part is not a translation decision but stems from a difference in the greek manuscript tradition they were using compared with more modern version.

Scrivner's Textus Receptus 1894 (roughly the greek text KJV was using):

kαὶ ἔkραξεν ἐν ἰσχύϊ, φωνῇ μεγάλῃ λέγων

Nestle's 1904:

kαὶ ἔkραξεν ἐν ἰσχυρᾷ φωνῇ λέγων

[Anonymous No.13218498]

>>13218168
>>13218454

Guys, the redundancy on the KJV's part is not a translation decision; rather, it stems from a difference in the greek manuscript tradition they were using compared with more modern versions.

Scrivner's Textus Receptus 1894 (roughly the greek text KJV was using circa 1611):

kαὶ ἔkραξεν ἐν ἰσχύϊ, φωνῇ μεγάλῃ λέγων

Nestle's 1904 (most modern versions are still essentially Nestles 1904)

kαὶ ἔkραξεν ἐν ἰσχυρᾷ φωνῇ λέγων

KJV's sources had the extra μεγάλῃ

[Anonymous No.13219069]

And he cried out in a great strong voice, saying, it fell, Babylon the great fell, and became an inhabitation of daimons, and a ward of every unclean spirit, and a ward of every bird unclean and having been hated.

[Anonymous No.13219200]

>>13214319
Good News

[Anonymous No.13219367]

>>13214319
NKJV