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

61–70 of 245 posts

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#61

Post by tyingq »

emmelaich wrote: post #59
tyingq wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roman Catholic raised, agnostic. Irish descent and dissolutioned might be more interested in the historical source than the destination.

Similar. Fascinating to me was that some Catholics consider the "Roman" a bit of slur. But to me it was a common, unremarkable description.

Your profile says "greybeard", "skeptic" and "computers" so probably VERY similar backgrounds. Skimming your comments now to confirm :)

Edit: Early, but see Apollo/HP, SunOS/Solaris already. Small world. Any chance of early 1990s Linux, Kermit, Windows packet drivers, KA9Q, Unicos, Mosaic, AT&T 3B2, Pyramid OSX, Usenet, UUCP, C, Perl, TCL, etc?

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#62

Post by maxlybbert »

Crontab wrote: post #15

This may be off-topic but is there any consensus on what is the most accurate translation of the bible into English?

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.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#63

Post by RandomTisk »

schoen wrote: post #46
RandomTisk wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a small but very convinced group that believes that the King James Bible is "perfect", preserved by God to be the only true scripture for Christians. This is just my opinion, after many hours of researching this phenomenon myself: They mean well, but they're very wrong. The translators of the King James Bible themselves, specifically and without ambiguity stated in the introduction to the KJV that it's impor…

> The translators of the King James Bible themselves, specifically and without ambiguity stated in the introduction to the KJV that it's important for scholars to update the texts from time to time to allow current culture to understand what ancient writers meant. Wow, I don't think I had seen this before. I think you're probably referring to this section: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/Preface#%C.…

Yeah the KJV was and is still a very good translation, and it was very controversial in it's day. The Catholic church didn't want the Bible in a "vulgar" or common tongue or even being able to read the Bible without their approval and guidance. The Latin Vulgate existed for the learned, and those who knew Latin objected also. I think that's why they felt the need to explain why they made the translation.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#64

Post by chrismorgan »

gerbilly wrote: post #51

Does anyone know whether or not the language of the king James bible was typical of early 17th century English? I heard that the translators use archaic expressions no longer commonly used in 1604 for stylistic reasons.

Compare it with Tyndale’s translation from about eighty years earlier (normalising the spelling of both), and, where they vary, Tyndale’s is normally the easier to read and understand. Tyndale intended that the ploughboy could understand the Scripture, while the KJV was “appointed to be read in Churches”.

(Most of the time they do not differ substantially, as the KJV drew most heavily from Tyndale’s translation.)

See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version#Style_and_c....

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#65

Post by ars »

Crontab wrote: post #15

This may be off-topic but is there any consensus on what is the most accurate translation of the bible into English?

> most accurate translation of the bible into English?

It's not really possible to do that. First of all many of the Hebrew words have multiple meanings, and all the meanings are intended.

So how do you translate that? Pick one for the main translation, and add notes maybe on alternate meanings? Some translations do that.

But there's more. Jews have a long history of what the words in the bible mean, but Christians don't. So when Christians translate the bible they will do so in a way that's different from what Jews do.

Now you have a complicated question to answer. Who's right? Who has the correct translation? Christians will typically go by their best understanding of the Hebrew, but Jews will use their tradition.

Next you have questions of intent. Take an idiom in English - if you translate it to another language it makes no sense. So what do you do with similar situations? Translate word for word? Try to understand that intent? How do you do that? Use the Jewish tradition on the intent? Something else?

In summary: If your translation doesn't have an associated commentary almost as long as the main text you can be pretty sure it's not going to be accurate.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#66

Post by srl »

sb057 wrote: post #17
BuildTheRobots wrote: post #13

"Good evening. Here is the news on Friday, the 27th of Geldof. Archaeologists near Mount Sinai have discovered what is believed to be a missing page from the Bible. The page is currently being carbon dated in Bonn. If genuine it belongs at the beginning of the Bible and is believed to read "To my darling Candy. All characters portrayed within this book are fictitious and any resemblance to persons living or dead is p…

What a farce! Pontius Pilate and Herod should sue for defamation of character!

I know this is meant as an empty joke, but... there's a particular type of article I enjoy, where in order to describe concept X, the author applies it in some unusual (and perhaps absurd) context, being very careful to keep all the usual logic of X intact.

I would greatly enjoy reading an article explaining libel law with the bible as an example. (Particularly as someone who's never read the bible very carefully -- I could learn about both!) I know, for instance, that (at least in some jurisdictions) if a claim is so absurd that it's obviously false, so that any reasonable reader would assume it's meant as hyperbole, then you can't be liable for it. Would that apply to the horrid things claimed of Nebuchadnezzar? There's some nasty stuff written about Saul, but then, he's a public figure. I think the author of the bible can't be sued for that unless it was written with "actual malice", right?

If there are any theologians-turned-libel-lawyers reading this... please!

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#67

Post by xamuel »

sysbin wrote: post #48
xamuel wrote: post #27

It's a pity so few people realize that beside all the usual stuff (love or hate it) that society associates with the Bible, the Gospels contain discourses of Jesus which are genuinely brilliant purely in their own right as philosophical works. "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of me…

The brilliance exists. Indeed, anyone can witness the psychological nature of influence upon people "born into low social status" and who become docile & obedient from the "word" while disregarding their birth status because just wait until death. :)

People misunderstand that old saying, 'Religion is the opium of the masses'. They think it means religion is meant to pacify and control. And maybe that's what Marx intended it to mean, I don't know. But it has a truer and infinitely more subversive meaning. The words of Jesus will get you high as a kite, if you study them and meditate upon them.

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34)

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#68

Post by chrismorgan »

sdegutis wrote: post #5

The Douay-Rheims is actually a decade or two older and the first English translation, if memory serves.

Tyndale’s was the first printed Bible in English; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_Englis... has more information.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#69

Post by whoopdedo »

xamuel wrote: post #21
burlesona wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's widely trusted. Translations are hotly debated, but I think most people consider the KJV to be a poor quality translation, besides the fact that even if it had been a quality translation at some point the language has changed enough that it's no longer very helpful for a modern english speaker seeking to understand the original greek and hebrew texts.

Something subtle that's easy to miss is the fact that the original text did not contain quotation marks, and neither does the KJV. There are places where by introducing quotation marks, the translator necessarily must make decisions which the original text does not support. Take for example one of my favorite sayings, Matthew 24:15-16. ESV: "So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Danie…

My personal and completely unfounded speculation on the gospels is that they're a script for actors. (Thus the confusion about whether certain names refer to two people or one person appearing multiple times. It's one person but different roles.) So that part of the verse is a stage direction for the performer.

Re: Earliest known draft of the King James Bible discovered

#70

Post by emmelaich »

tyingq wrote: post #61
emmelaich wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar. Fascinating to me was that some Catholics consider the "Roman" a bit of slur. But to me it was a common, unremarkable description.

Your profile says "greybeard", "skeptic" and "computers" so probably VERY similar backgrounds. Skimming your comments now to confirm :) Edit: Early, but see Apollo/HP, SunOS/Solaris already. Small world. Any chance of early 1990s Linux, Kermit, Windows packet drivers, KA9Q, Unicos, Mosaic, AT&T 3B2, Pyramid OSX, Usenet, UUCP, C, Perl, TCL, etc?

All those and more. Except for the 3b2. Not much Tcl.
Post reply on HN