Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

neh.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 245 posts

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#181

Post by shawabawa3 »

kozak wrote: post #164

Could someone please explain to a non-English speaker why is it considered correct (in non-religious context, as many of the commenters here do) to write "the bible" instead of "the Bible" and "new testament" instead of "New Testament"? Aren't they proper names of the books? We don't say "the art of computer programming" instead of "The Art of Computer Programming" when we reference Donald Knuth's book, do we? Looks…

Because this is an informal context and capital letters aren't all that meaningful in english

It wouldn't be weird at all to say "the art of computer programming by donald knuth"

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#182

Post by gilgoomesh »

kozak wrote: post #164

Could someone please explain to a non-English speaker why is it considered correct (in non-religious context, as many of the commenters here do) to write "the bible" instead of "the Bible" and "new testament" instead of "New Testament"? Aren't they proper names of the books? We don't say "the art of computer programming" instead of "The Art of Computer Programming" when we reference Donald Knuth's book, do we? Looks…

Lowercase is wrong for these titles, they should be title case. Anyone who writes them lowercase is likely being lazy.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#183

Post by eivarv »

mindcrime wrote: post #113
sjwright wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is almost impossible to imagine that the writings of any long-lived society would not have ample quantities of "timeless wisdom". In fact it would be striking and unusual if it were otherwise. Much wisdom can be difficult to stumble upon but is self-evident once known. Long-lived societies are sure to import all such wisdom from around them, then discover more for themselves over time.

Exactly. I'm pretty sure one can find "lots of timeless wisdom" in the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Norse Prose Edda and Poetic Edda, the Necronomicon, etc., etc.

Yes. But the Necronomicon is one of two things (depending on what you're talking about): A fictional grimoire, or a piece of fiction (a hoax, even).

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#184

Post by vixen99 »

ginko wrote: post #158
haskal wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bible is by far the most translated text (and a reasonably sized one). I just wish it wasn't written in a weird way. I learned a little bit of Korean by reading the bible as the primary source and when I tried to speak, I only got weird looks. I get why. It is like someone asking you "How art thou?"

I find it a bit weird that people stick with such antiquated translations of the bible in English. The German translations are pretty much standard German. Even the Luther Bible is quite readable to this day.

Didn't Orwell have a point when he contrasted a verse from the KJ version (antiquated!) bible with his own modern (' a parody but not a very gross one') version.

"I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all."

"Objective considerations of contemporary phenomena compel the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account."

Doubtless someone can provide a much better modern version but why bother?

Amazing that the original was the product of fifty people.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#185

Post by goto11 »

RaiseProfits wrote: post #167
goto11 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, the oldest texts unambiguously condemns male-on-male sex under penalty of death: "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." (NIV translation https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+20%3A... ) The translation just doesn't use the specific word "homos…

Male on male sex was also a fact of life across many Christian communities, including/especially with monks, eunuchs, and other segregated communities, and people were certainly not frequently put to death for this. You can look up medieval crimes and punishments around the 12th century I think for a decent record of this. Note I am being super reductive, lmk if you want better sources.

I'm just pointing out the biblical prohibitions against male-on-male sex is not a recent invention as the GP comment suggested.

Of course people did it anyway.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#186

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #174
ginko wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it a bit weird that people stick with such antiquated translations of the bible in English. The German translations are pretty much standard German. Even the Luther Bible is quite readable to this day.

There's always some friction when it comes to updating translations (source: I used to have to go to church, there was much debate whether or not to replace the archaic translation with a modern version). A lot of debate is about whether the translation is correct (compared to the old version), and people read the bible so often they are used to the old translation - if the new one changes some words, or even changes…

The KJV version of the Ten Commandments is still easily comprehensible. You only need to know a few archaic constructions ("spake" instead of "spoke," "thou" instead of "you"), which most native speakers of English are probably reasonably familiar with.

Looking at the Luther Bible, it has a similar number of archaic constructs as the KJV. For example, it uses archaic forms of the genitive case extensively (compare Luther's "der Väter Missetat" with the modern German equivalent, "die Missetat der Väter").

The reason people like these old translations, in my view, is that the slightly archaic language separates them from the common language we use in our everyday lives. That separates the book from the "profane" or mundane everyday world, and makes it something special. Even as a cynical atheist, I appreciate the feeling that this sort of slightly archaic language creates.

1. The Ten Commandments in the Luther Bible: https://www.bibel-online.net/buch/luther_1912/2_mose/20/#1

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#188

Post by gwd »

DEADBEEFC0FFEE wrote: post #148
stOneskull wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also has a lot of timeless wisdom

Such as? I'm struggling to imaging something recorded in this draft that is useful, and not already known? A lot of timeless wisdom is also obvious.

> A lot of timeless wisdom is also obvious.

As another commenter said, it seems obvious to you because it's been incorporated into our culture.

For instance, I lived in Turkey for a few months, and I had a Turkish roommate who was a devout Muslim. He gave me an English translation of the Qur'an to read, and I gave him a Turkish translation of the New Testament. He decided he would come and show me the places where it must have been changed (since Islam teaches that Jesus was a prophet, but what he says in the New Testament obviously doesn't match what Mohammad said).

What was the first place he found that was obviously changed? Matthew 5:38-39: "You have heard it said, 'Eye for eye, tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them on the other cheek also."

Well, there's a good example for you: Either that seems like good advice, in which case you certainly got that from your culture; or it doesn't, in which case it's worth chewing over to get some wisdom out of it. :-)

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#189

Post by maxlybbert »

jlos wrote: post #145
maxlybbert wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My “to-read” list is too long, so I haven’t actually read it, but personally I’m interested in “The Art of Bible Translation” by Robert Alter.

Robert Altar's book "The Art of Biblical Poetry" is mandatory reading for understanding Old Testament poetry. Hebrew poetry is based primarily on parallelism, as opposed to meter or rhyming as in English. Wonderful part about that is that parallelism, as opposed to rhyming or word-plays, translates well across languages.

I’ll put that on my “to-read” list as well. Thank you.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#190

Post by shatnersbassoon »

simonh wrote: post #155
nemosaltat wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC Tyndale was burned at the stake for his efforts.

Strangled to death and then burned, apparently. For those not familiar with the period, Tyndale was executed during the reign of Henry VIII, while England was still at least nominally a Catholic nation (Henry's relationship with Catholicism is complicated). At that time Catholicism was opposed to translations of the Bible into local languages and translation was a politically and theologically charged issue. In this…

>>> King James was a protestant ruling about 70 years later I think it was people's doubts about his protestantism that led him to commission the bible - James' mother was Mary Queen of Scots, a catholic who was executed for a supposed plot to depose his predecessor Elizabeth I.
Post reply on HN