Subject: Understanding The Bible |
Bible Note: We need new translations (or at least revisions of old ones) for essentially the same reason we need (I say need, not want!) new cars. Language, not unlike cars, tends to wear out and change, and new translations, like new models of cars, are needed from time to time. The King James Version was a fine translation for its time, and it's still a fine translation, but has outlived its ability to communicate effectively and accuractly to most modern readers of English. If you doubt that statement, get a copy of Chaucer in his original language (which predates the KJV) or, better yet, try to read Beowulf in the original. Both Chaucer and Beowulf were written in the English tongue, but you can't read them unless you are trained in the English of their times. As a matter of curiosity, what is your source for reporting that a translator of the NASB was unhappy with it, and what reason did he give for his unhappiness? --Hank |
Up | Down View Branch | ID# 65913 | ||
Questions and/or Subjects for Bible general Archive 1 | Author | ||
|
Mae64 | ||
|
Mommapbs | ||
|
tetelestai46 | ||
|
FreeGrace | ||
|
BradK | ||
|
Reformer Joe | ||
|
Hank | ||
|
kristi4252725 | ||
|
Protestant | ||
|
dltlshines | ||
|
Protestant | ||
|
Protestant | ||
|
prayon |