Comments on The Amplified Bible

Go to Religion in the Modern WorldAdd a commentGo to The Amplified Bible

Re: FineYoungSinger - Yes, you do win a prize
In this winter wonderland, it will probably arrive frozen solid.

posted by FineYoungSinger on February 29, 2008 at 11:23 AM | link to this | reply

Xeno-x - that's the problem with any work that is supposedly divinely

inspired.

The obvious is so easily overlooked simply because the words were supposedly given to the author via divine inspiration.

posted by gomedome on February 28, 2008 at 10:37 AM | link to this | reply

actually what gets me is another holy book
written in the 19th century

you'd suppose it would in 19th century prose

but no

it's in prose resembling King James, with the thee's and thou's and such

it's the Book of Mormon -- the prose itself tells me of its Inauthenticity.


posted by Xeno-x on February 28, 2008 at 6:12 AM | link to this | reply

cheugon - the old standbye of giving credit to Satan comes in handy
I wonder if people like that actually think that the citizens of the ancient middle east wandered around speaking in Elizabethan era English prose?  

posted by gomedome on February 27, 2008 at 7:52 PM | link to this | reply

I got one even better!
Independent Baptist Fundamentalists swear by the King James Version of the Bible, while claiming that all other versions are "The Devils Bible," apparently, completely unaware that the King James is itself a translation. I call them, The Cult of King James. It wouldn't surprise me if they voted for King James in November.

posted by metalrat on February 27, 2008 at 6:29 PM | link to this | reply

Xeno-x - it really is unbelievable that so many people can overlook the

history and the obvious changes made over the years.

To insist that a modern day bible is the word of God, truly is the sum total of mankind's wishful thinking.

posted by gomedome on February 27, 2008 at 1:51 PM | link to this | reply

FineYoungSinger - Yes, you do win a prize
We will carve a trophy for you out of jello - - hope it survives shipping via UPS?

posted by gomedome on February 27, 2008 at 1:48 PM | link to this | reply

problem is every translation takes most of its construction from KJV

which took from previous Latin translations which were skewed toward Church dogma.

KJV was a 16th c Anglican document; subsequent translations are simply extensions of the same.

And the construction of the original works was of human device.

OT -- about 6 different artists compiling & narrating, all put together so as to appear as one work;  NT -- letters written 15 or more years after the main events, narratives written 30  and more years after, taken from fragmentary tales;  all of these -- canonized 2 - 400 yrs after the latest events by people who weren't there and had made up their minds already as to the nature of things.

the whole structure is built on sand.  unbelievable.

posted by Xeno-x on February 27, 2008 at 10:53 AM | link to this | reply

Well the only reason I can think of is that they're actually words of men.
Do I win the prize?

posted by FineYoungSinger on February 27, 2008 at 10:06 AM | link to this | reply

sam444 - that is the inevitable problem
All of the differences in the examples I give in this post are admittedly minor but over time and countless translations or edits, entire phrases can have their meanings changed. Then we must consider that some phrases simply do not translate well from one language to another.

posted by gomedome on February 27, 2008 at 8:06 AM | link to this | reply

It is difficult when it says not to alter or change. Yet it happens. I have worked with more than 25 bibles to see what is happening and it is amazing how the meaning can be skewed.  sam

posted by sam444 on February 27, 2008 at 7:56 AM | link to this | reply