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

Seven books I keep close because I love them

blog.plover.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 205 posts

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#71

Post by ntdef »

judah wrote: post #45
cvoss wrote: post #35

> knowing full well that [Delilah] will betray [Samson] It is not clear from the text that Samson is aware of the presence of Philistines the first three times. We are told they are lying in ambush in an inner chamber. We are not told that they make themselves known, attempt to subdue Samson, or interact with him in any way. Instead, we are told that Delilah announces their imminent presence, with no follow-through.…

Having just finished the book of Judges last week, this is fresh on my mind. Finishing the story of Samson, my first reaction, like the author of the post, is that Samson is just stupid. Delilah is likely a Philistine, the nemesis of Samson and the Israelites. Her intention to betray and destroy Samson is hardly hidden in her questioning him. How can Samson be so dumb? But I thought about it deeper and how some men c…

I think it's a bit of both/and. The Samson story within the context of Judges is about people doing what "that which was right in [their] own eyes," and the people of Israel devolving into madness and dumbness because of their rejection of Yahweh and his law.

I think he's purposefully supposed to come off as a buffoon, but maybe a relatable one?

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#72

Post by agaj-nimm »

ntdef wrote: post #69

The New International Version (NIV) translation of the Bible is by far the worst translation on almost any metric you can think of, except maybe understanding how evangelical Christians read the Bible in the 90s and 2000s. The NIV has so many inexcusable translations that reinforce a theological worldview that matched the conversation on atonement and justification that was happening in the 90s and 2000s. There's a g…

It's been eye opening to read books from the Old Testament in the word-by-word translation of ancient Hebrew. A lot of the semantic accretion over the millennia comes off and you get a more raw iron age tribal wisdom glowing through.

One example is that often Exodus goes from narrative to descriptions of genealogy tree in modern translations. It happens that words interpreted as names of people are also abstract nouns and these passages can also be read as aphorisms. I haven't looked deep into that but it makes way more sense to me that narrative is punctuated by such reflections on "Wisdom unites with Patience and beget Lasting Wealth than breaking into describing marriages and lineages then going back to the story...

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#73

Post by IncreasePosts »

jabl wrote: post #18

We read some passages from Decameron back in high school. Lovely book really, I should take the time to really read it cover to cover.

A great feature of The Decameron is that it's easy to read and the chapters are short and largely self contained. It's not one of those books that you need to be in the right head space for, and have a big chunk of time where you can sit down and dig in. I read The Decameron over 6 months or so in random little moments, a chapter sitting on the subway, a chapter during lunch, while laying in bed, etc.

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#74

Post by rurp »

Ardren wrote: post #58
ivrit-tirvi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always look it up in the original Hebrew if I really want to understand, and the difference is sometimes really HUGE (or simply wrong in modern translations). It's also worth noting that some books of the Hebrew Bible are poetry (Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Song of Songs), which doesn't show at all after translation. Hebrew poetry is unique! As they say, reading the Bible in translation is like "kissing your spouse thro…

> I always look it up in the original Hebrew if I really want to understand Why do you assume a entire team of biblical scholars, working for years to translate the Old Testement for the NIV didn't know what they were doing? But you do?

Translations are inherently lossy, especially for cases like the bible that use less common dialects and have conflicting source versions. Are any biblical translators claiming that their work is a 100% reproduction of the original? I doubt it. Most I'm familiar with readily acknowledge that it's a very messy process and two experts acting in good faith will produce different translations in many cases.

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#76

Post by ntdef »

agaj-nimm wrote: post #72
ntdef wrote: post #69

The New International Version (NIV) translation of the Bible is by far the worst translation on almost any metric you can think of, except maybe understanding how evangelical Christians read the Bible in the 90s and 2000s. The NIV has so many inexcusable translations that reinforce a theological worldview that matched the conversation on atonement and justification that was happening in the 90s and 2000s. There's a g…

It's been eye opening to read books from the Old Testament in the word-by-word translation of ancient Hebrew. A lot of the semantic accretion over the millennia comes off and you get a more raw iron age tribal wisdom glowing through. One example is that often Exodus goes from narrative to descriptions of genealogy tree in modern translations. It happens that words interpreted as names of people are also abstract noun…

Yes! In that vein, The Five Books of Moses by Robert Alter[1] is great for folks who want to get a better sense of what the original Hebrew might feel like rendered in English.

[1]: https://www.amazon.com/Five-Books-Moses-Translation-Commenta...

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#78

Post by ButlerianJihad »

agaj-nimm wrote: post #72
ntdef wrote: post #69

The New International Version (NIV) translation of the Bible is by far the worst translation on almost any metric you can think of, except maybe understanding how evangelical Christians read the Bible in the 90s and 2000s. The NIV has so many inexcusable translations that reinforce a theological worldview that matched the conversation on atonement and justification that was happening in the 90s and 2000s. There's a g…

It's been eye opening to read books from the Old Testament in the word-by-word translation of ancient Hebrew. A lot of the semantic accretion over the millennia comes off and you get a more raw iron age tribal wisdom glowing through. One example is that often Exodus goes from narrative to descriptions of genealogy tree in modern translations. It happens that words interpreted as names of people are also abstract noun…

I've become intensely interested in the meanings of Biblical names. Of course, names are the words least likely to be translated into a plain meaning, and knowing a name's translation and connotations gives the opportunity to pierce the veil on some very important meanings, meanings that were patently obvious to anyone who actually spoke those languages.

Discovering that "Jonah" can mean "dove" was certainly eye-opening. And re-reading that book in light of knowing this, quite interesting!

In fact, the OT and NT alike sometimes even drop in-line translation/explanation of a name that they really want us to know. In that case, why not know all of them?

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#79

Post by astral_drama »

judah wrote: post #45
cvoss wrote: post #35

> knowing full well that [Delilah] will betray [Samson] It is not clear from the text that Samson is aware of the presence of Philistines the first three times. We are told they are lying in ambush in an inner chamber. We are not told that they make themselves known, attempt to subdue Samson, or interact with him in any way. Instead, we are told that Delilah announces their imminent presence, with no follow-through.…

Having just finished the book of Judges last week, this is fresh on my mind. Finishing the story of Samson, my first reaction, like the author of the post, is that Samson is just stupid. Delilah is likely a Philistine, the nemesis of Samson and the Israelites. Her intention to betray and destroy Samson is hardly hidden in her questioning him. How can Samson be so dumb? But I thought about it deeper and how some men c…

I think it's more of a desire to be loved by the woman he falls in love with and not accepting that she is not going to love him back. His refusal to acknowledge the truth sets him on a course of self abandonment, he simps after a wife that treats him bad to use the parlance of our time. I think it shows physical strength can't guard you from a broken heart.

Re: Seven books I keep close because I love them

#80

Post by ejtaal3 »

dev_dan_2 wrote: post #59
vehemenz wrote: post #56

> This of course is the cornerstone of Western culture and no well-educated person can be without a knowledge of what is in [the Bible]. Knowing what's in the Bible isn't sufficient. You need to understand the full genealogy of the Judeo-Christian tradition. You need to understand Canaanite cults, the broad influence of both Zoroastrianism (via the Achaemenid Empire) and Hellenism, and how these cultures converged to…

That is quite a bold claim you make there! Since you seem to hold a strong conviction, could you please make more explicit what concretely one would not know / missinterprete regarding the Western culture, not knowing anything about those concepts you listed, but knowing the bible itself back and forth? And to what excent one would need to dive deep into those concepts? Or in other words: What fundamental concepts in…

Whoosh ;)
Post reply on HN