OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 19, 2014, 02:22:40 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What translation of the Holy Bible do/did you use?  (Read 7266 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,887



« Reply #45 on: March 24, 2010, 07:22:38 PM »

But "thou" would be the informal, since it's the second person singular pronoun; all european languages reserve the plural second person as the polite form of addressing somebody . That, in English would be "you", or no? It's just that the polite plural form became general and displaced the familiar, singular "thou", "thee".

If this is true, then my hat is off to you sir. You possess a superior knowledge of English and its history than I do. My rationale was simply: outdated archaism = increased reverence.  Cheesy
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,009


"My god is greater."


« Reply #46 on: March 24, 2010, 07:22:44 PM »

As an aside, I don't like how the OCA uses the informal "you" in reference to the Mother of God. It seems almost like a Protestant denigration of sorts.

Actually, in Elizabethan times, "you" was more formal than "thou", because "you" is plural while "thou" is singular, just like in French you might still say "vous" to a respectable person instead of "tu." "Thou" is informal and intimate, whereas "you" is polite.

The reason why "you" completely supplanted "thou" in contemporary speech is because nobody wanted to appear disrespectful of anyone. This is why the early Quakers insisted on addressing everyone as "thou" to indicate equality... It didn't catch on, obviously.  We only think of "thou" as formal today because of its association with classic literature.

When it comes to the liturgy and scripture translations, the difference between thou and you is important, not so much for retaining a sense of formality but in making clear the distinction between plural and singular. There are, for instance, in the Gospels where it is unclear whom Jesus is addressing unless you have a clear distinction between singular and plural second person pronouns. One might also argue that addressing God as "thou" expresses intimacy/ familiarity, though I don't think this was the original intention.

As for the OCA practice, I don't like it either. I think they inherited this silly practice from the RSV Bible. I would have rather have a consistent contemporary translation than this inconsistent "Revised Liturgical English" (as the people of St. Tikhon's are calling it).

I think ROCOR and the Antiochians have the best texts at the moment.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2010, 07:29:35 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #47 on: March 24, 2010, 08:05:25 PM »

As an aside, I don't like how the OCA uses the informal "you" in reference to the Mother of God. It seems almost like a Protestant denigration of sorts.

Actually, in Elizabethan times, "you" was more formal than "thou", because "you" is plural while "thou" is singular, just like in French you might still say "vous" to a respectable person instead of "tu." "Thou" is informal and intimate, whereas "you" is polite.

The reason why "you" completely supplanted "thou" in contemporary speech is because nobody wanted to appear disrespectful of anyone. This is why the early Quakers insisted on addressing everyone as "thou" to indicate equality... It didn't catch on, obviously.  We only think of "thou" as formal today because of its association with classic literature.

When it comes to the liturgy and scripture translations, the difference between thou and you is important, not so much for retaining a sense of formality but in making clear the distinction between plural and singular. There are, for instance, in the Gospels where it is unclear whom Jesus is addressing unless you have a clear distinction between singular and plural second person pronouns. One might also argue that addressing God as "thou" expresses intimacy/ familiarity, though I don't think this was the original intention.

As for the OCA practice, I don't like it either. I think they inherited this silly practice from the RSV Bible. I would have rather have a consistent contemporary translation than this inconsistent "Revised Liturgical English" (as the people of St. Tikhon's are calling it).

I think ROCOR and the Antiochians have the best texts at the moment.
Indeed. Perhaps it would be better to use the Southern practice of y'all (singular) and all y'all (plural). I'm awaiting the new translation.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,287



WWW
« Reply #48 on: June 18, 2010, 07:40:14 PM »

I much prefer the NKJV to the KJV with all the thees and thous and archaic terminology. Elizabethan/Jacobean English is great when enjoying Shakespeare, but I think more easily understood English is better, especially when encouraging young people to read the Bible. However, don't the comments in the OSB help to understand an Orthodox pov, especially for converts?

Personally, I like KJV the best. Originally I did not because my evangelical school required it, and that seemed extreme. However, now I think it is very good when I learn about some technical meanings of Hebrew and compare them with the Jewish Publication Society's translation and with other Bibles. The JPS version is interesting to get another point of view, but I think KJV is best.

The THEES and THOUS sound goofy, but are actually better because they are used in the other languages and help to understand who is being referred to. Also, apparently the KJV language was not completely normal English when the book was made- the authors changed words to make them closer to the Latin sources, but after many years it appears the made-up words became accepted in our language.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #49 on: June 21, 2010, 12:02:14 PM »

I prefer the Revised Standard Version. I'm still waiting for an acceptable Orthodox all-purpose translation. The OSB is, IMO, a hastily-done job. I question the value and, in some cases, the Orthodoxy, of much of the annotations. The translation also leaves much to be desired. Anyway, there is not yet an official Orthodox translation of the Scriptures. Not even the OSB has any kind of episcopal blessing.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,576


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #50 on: June 21, 2010, 12:26:54 PM »

The New Jerusalem Bible. Un-surpassed.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,191


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #51 on: June 21, 2010, 02:14:37 PM »

The New Jerusalem Bible. Un-surpassed.
What about the original Jeruslam Bible, before the update? I have heard that it was much better, though very hard to aquire.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,009


"My god is greater."


« Reply #52 on: June 24, 2010, 01:16:47 PM »

Michael Asser's complete translation of the Septuagint, in the style of the KJV, is now available online:

http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/zot.htm
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Nazarene
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaism
Jurisdiction: Messianic
Posts: 520


David ben Yessai


« Reply #53 on: June 24, 2010, 01:33:54 PM »

The New Jerusalem Bible. Un-surpassed.

Except by the Revised English Bible. The British just know how to get the right combination of formality and understandability.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #54 on: June 24, 2010, 01:34:13 PM »

Asser's translation doesn't have 3/4 Esdras, unfortunately.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
thetraditionalfrog
Traditional Frog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 197



« Reply #55 on: June 24, 2010, 04:44:50 PM »

I use the Authorised (KJV), and the Douay-Rheims.
Logged

“For the honorable Cross and golden freedom!” -Sv Lazar

 “Give up everything for Christ, but Christ for nothing!” -Sv Sava
Nazarene
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaism
Jurisdiction: Messianic
Posts: 520


David ben Yessai


« Reply #56 on: June 24, 2010, 06:59:51 PM »

I just found this gem: http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Parallel-Bible-Apocryphal-Deuterocanonical/dp/019528318X/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277420128&sr=1-8
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,287



WWW
« Reply #57 on: August 15, 2010, 11:41:41 PM »

As an aside, I don't like how the OCA uses the informal "you" in reference to the Mother of God. It seems almost like a Protestant denigration of sorts.

Actually, in Elizabethan times, "you" was more formal than "thou", because "you" is plural while "thou" is singular, just like in French you might still say "vous" to a respectable person instead of "tu." "Thou" is informal and intimate, whereas "you" is polite.

The reason why "you" completely supplanted "thou" in contemporary speech is because nobody wanted to appear disrespectful of anyone. This is why the early Quakers insisted on addressing everyone as "thou" to indicate equality... It didn't catch on, obviously.

When it comes to the liturgy and scripture translations, the difference between thou and you is important, not so much for retaining a sense of formality but in making clear the distinction between plural and singular. There are, for instance, in the Gospels where it is unclear whom Jesus is addressing unless you have a clear distinction between singular and plural second person pronouns. One might also argue that addressing God as "thou" expresses intimacy/ familiarity, though I don't think this was the original intention.

King James Version is best

Yes, I prefer the King James Version as more accurate, the words thou and you being one reason. The KJV was intentionally made with rare words, invented by the translators to find a closer meaning to the Latin. Now these invented words are part of English and we understand what they mean. But these 10+ newer translations of the Bible don't understand this and just pick the most often used English meaning, and in doing so lose or confuse the Bible's meaning.

Russian Language and English Language
Yes in Russian language they still have you and thou like in America a few centuries ago.

Quote
The reason why "you" completely supplanted "thou" in contemporary speech is because nobody wanted to appear disrespectful of anyone.

Are you sure this is the reason?? In Russia actually I say "you" to acquaintances sometimes by accident, and they can be confused. Sometimes they ask "Why do you say you to me? We are friends!"
They get upset as if I am now putting distance between us as strangers.

Perhaps in modern, more independent and prosperous America, friends are often not as close in relations as centuries before, when they had to rely on eachother, and this explains it? How else to explain that the Quaker method of friendly egalitarian informality (which I like) lost out to the more formal way of expression?
Logged
wynd
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 501


Transfiguration


« Reply #58 on: August 16, 2010, 10:47:05 AM »

Yes, I prefer the King James Version as more accurate, the words thou and you being one reason. The KJV was intentionally made with rare words, invented by the translators to find a closer meaning to the Latin. Now these invented words are part of English and we understand what they mean. But these 10+ newer translations of the Bible don't understand this and just pick the most often used English meaning, and in doing so lose or confuse the Bible's meaning.

Interesting. Can you give some examples?
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #59 on: August 16, 2010, 01:40:38 PM »

Quote
The reason why "you" completely supplanted "thou" in contemporary speech is because nobody wanted to appear disrespectful of anyone.

Are you sure this is the reason?? In Russia actually I say "you" to acquaintances sometimes by accident, and they can be confused. Sometimes they ask "Why do you say you to me? We are friends!"
They get upset as if I am now putting distance between us as strangers.

Perhaps in modern, more independent and prosperous America, friends are often not as close in relations as centuries before, when they had to rely on eachother, and this explains it? How else to explain that the Quaker method of friendly egalitarian informality (which I like) lost out to the more formal way of expression?

This linguistic tendency has nothing to do with modern America. It developed many centuries ago in England.

Even in Old English, "Thou" could be used in a pejorative sense by placing it in apposition to a noun in the vocative. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) has the first such attestation in King Ælfred's Old English translation of Boethius' De consolatione philosophiae. So, things start in that direction in the year 888 A.D.

There are other such examples throughout the centuries, especially after the French influence on English, until 1530 A.D., when the OED records this great line, which turns thou into a verb: "Avaunt, caitiff, dost thou thou me! I am come of good kin I tell thee!" So, by the 1530s, calling someone "thou," or "thouing" them, could be seen as disparaging their lineage.

That's why Sir Edward Coke in 1603 could mock Sir Walter Raleigh in court by saying: "All that Lord Cobham did was by thy instigation, thou viper; for I thou thee, thou Traitor!"

After the KJV, one doesn't find many uses of "thou" in the OED that aren't from poetry or in some work that is imitating the speech of ill bred/uneducated folk. The Quakers, of course, had to make an intentional practice of saying "thou." In other words, even in the 1650s, it was not normal speech to do so.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2010, 01:50:13 PM by pensateomnia » Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,287



WWW
« Reply #60 on: August 16, 2010, 04:30:08 PM »

Quote
The reason why "you" completely supplanted "thou" in contemporary speech is because nobody wanted to appear disrespectful of anyone.

Are you sure this is the reason?? In Russia actually I say "you" to acquaintances sometimes by accident, and they can be confused. Sometimes they ask "Why do you say you to me? We are friends!"
They get upset as if I am now putting distance between us as strangers.

Perhaps in modern, more independent and prosperous America, friends are often not as close in relations as centuries before, when they had to rely on eachother, and this explains it? How else to explain that the Quaker method of friendly egalitarian informality (which I like) lost out to the more formal way of expression?

This linguistic tendency has nothing to do with modern America. It developed many centuries ago in England.

Even in Old English, "Thou" could be used in a pejorative sense by placing it in apposition to a noun in the vocative. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) has the first such attestation in King Ælfred's Old English translation of Boethius' De consolatione philosophiae. So, things start in that direction in the year 888 A.D.

There are other such examples throughout the centuries, especially after the French influence on English, until 1530 A.D., when the OED records this great line, which turns thou into a verb: "Avaunt, caitiff, dost thou thou me! I am come of good kin I tell thee!" So, by the 1530s, calling someone "thou," or "thouing" them, could be seen as disparaging their lineage.

That's why Sir Edward Coke in 1603 could mock Sir Walter Raleigh in court by saying: "All that Lord Cobham did was by thy instigation, thou viper; for I thou thee, thou Traitor!"

After the KJV, one doesn't find many uses of "thou" in the OED that aren't from poetry or in some work that is imitating the speech of ill bred/uneducated folk. The Quakers, of course, had to make an intentional practice of saying "thou." In other words, even in the 1650s, it was not normal speech to do so.

In Russian, if you refer to someone in a work environment, or a person of authority as "thou", they find it disparaging too. It's not like in English it is pejorative and informal for family members, but only family-informal in other languages.

The difference is that for some reason around the Quaker period it was in decline in English, while remains in other languages. I am curious what the reason is, but it seems to me what I said earlier about English culture being more commercial, consumerist, independent, prosper, and more distance therefore coming between people than in more "backwards", "illbred" people. I don't agree with calling the lower classes "ill-bred", and don't think they would use "thee" just because they are uneducated.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2010, 04:33:14 PM by rakovsky » Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,287



WWW
« Reply #61 on: August 16, 2010, 04:39:21 PM »

Yes, I prefer the King James Version as more accurate, the words thou and you being one reason. The KJV was intentionally made with rare words, invented by the translators to find a closer meaning to the Latin. Now these invented words are part of English and we understand what they mean. But these 10+ newer translations of the Bible don't understand this and just pick the most often used English meaning, and in doing so lose or confuse the Bible's meaning.

Interesting. Can you give some examples?

I came across this for example when learning about passages that are key in differences between Judaic and Christian ideas of OT Messianic prophecies. I was surprised to see that the KJV turned out to be more technically correct when it came to analyzing the exact meaning of the Hebrew words in the passage.

I think Zechariah's passage about a holy one(s) being killed and people mourning about it as for a son, and Isaiah 53 (the Suffering servant passage) turned out to be better than the Jewish Publication Society version (which adds that the servant was stricken "with sickness") or other American versions.

The KJV even seems better than our Russian Synodal version sometimes, which says for example "May God Resurrect, May His enemies be Scattered", rather than the KJV's "May God Arise, May His enemies be scattered." (Unless I am wrong and the Hebrew, which I can't read, actually says "Resurrect")
« Last Edit: August 16, 2010, 04:40:57 PM by rakovsky » Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,287



WWW
« Reply #62 on: September 25, 2010, 12:51:12 AM »

I use the Authorised (KJV), and the Douay-Rheims.

It's kind of weird. The English Protestants and Catholics made their two Bible translations, the King James and Douay-Rheims at about the same time, with the KJV drawing from the Douay-Rheims in terms of translation.

Traditional protestants use the KJV, and traditional Catholics still use the Douay-Rheims version.

Is one really better than the other?

The Orthodox Church in America I think traditionally used the KJV, but its most recent translation is now based on the New King James Version. I suspect that the main reason is because America is a protestant country. If the Douay Rheims version was the main version in use, I assume they would use that.

What do you think?

Two Bible versions made by two competing sects at the same time with closely-related styles and translation methods.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,009


"My god is greater."


« Reply #63 on: September 25, 2010, 09:31:47 AM »

I use the Authorised (KJV), and the Douay-Rheims.

It's kind of weird. The English Protestants and Catholics made their two Bible translations, the King James and Douay-Rheims at about the same time, with the KJV drawing from the Douay-Rheims in terms of translation.

Traditional protestants use the KJV, and traditional Catholics still use the Douay-Rheims version.

Is one really better than the other?

The Orthodox Church in America I think traditionally used the KJV, but its most recent translation is now based on the New King James Version. I suspect that the main reason is because America is a protestant country. If the Douay Rheims version was the main version in use, I assume they would use that.

What do you think?

Two Bible versions made by two competing sects at the same time with closely-related styles and translation methods.

I think the KJV translation overall reads better than the Douay-Rheims, poetically speaking. If we ever have an "official translation", I think it should be Michael Asser's LXX revision of the KJV (http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/zot.htm). The Douay Rheims may have been preferable to the old KJV insofar as it was translated from the Latin Vulgate rather than the Masoretic, but now that there is an LXX based KJV it's a moot point.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Gamliel
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 2,165



« Reply #64 on: September 25, 2010, 10:34:33 AM »

People shouldn't get too hung up on translations.
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 13,421


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #65 on: September 25, 2010, 10:46:22 AM »

I'm now using the Orthodox Study Bible.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.093 seconds with 47 queries.