Active Topics
-
Extra softwares in Sailfish using CLI, repositories, etc (117)
to SailfishOS by nieldk - 6 hrs, 42 mins ago -
Firefox with Leste (6)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 1 day, 3 hrs ago - more...
vi_ |
2011-04-08
, 07:15
|
|
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanked: 3,685 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
|
#531
|
Originally Posted by lschumanfcoe
LOLS, research from only one source.
__________________
N900: One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.
 |
|
2011-04-12
, 04:07
|
|
Posts: 963 |
Thanked: 626 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Connecticut, USA
|
#532
|
Originally Posted by vi_
What an ignorant comment. If you want to seriously discus the merits of studying the Bible send me a PM. I was already banned from one forum for falling into the trap of discussing religion in a forum that is not meant for it. See here if you want to see where I'm coming from.
LOLS, research from only one source.
http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/2...e-been-banned/
I'll be waiting for your PM.
__________________
-- Worse than not knowing is not wanting to know! --
http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/
-- Worse than not knowing is not wanting to know! --
http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/
 |
|
2011-04-15
, 03:00
|
|
Posts: 861 |
Thanked: 734 times |
Joined on Jan 2008
@ Nomadic
|
#533
|
Originally Posted by Addison
Sure you can pay for it, but not in a (data file) format that will work for your N900. You are better off using a web service (bible.logos, youversion.com, etc.) for that translation.
So there's no way to even pay for the NIV?
Poops.
 |
|
2011-04-15
, 03:25
|
|
Posts: 3,811 |
Thanked: 1,151 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
@ East Lansing, MI
|
#534
|
^ What would be the best way to have it available offline?
A giant .pdf or .chm file or ripping some specific site?
I really don't have a clue on this.
Thank you!
A giant .pdf or .chm file or ripping some specific site?
I really don't have a clue on this.
Thank you!
|
|
2011-08-02
, 20:29
|
|
Posts: 10 |
Thanked: 2 times |
Joined on May 2011
@ United States
|
#535
|
Where does Katana store Bible data in the device?
|
|
2011-08-28
, 21:11
|
|
Posts: 37 |
Thanked: 3 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Polska
|
#536
|
Originally Posted by peplamb
/home/user/.sword
Where does Katana store Bible data in the device?
|
|
2011-08-28
, 21:34
|
|
Posts: 37 |
Thanked: 3 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
@ Polska
|
#537
|
Hi!
I have a question?
- Is the katana is still being developed?
- What other reader to the Bible?
- Are people willing to write another reader?
My dream!
- Possibility to enter the various modules and formats.
- Ability to edit textu, tagging verses
- Notebook, pinning the verse
- Figure, pinning the verse
- Video and audio recording of the verse pinning
-Shortcuts to www.
Combine the study of the Bible.
All who support the development please write (or perhaps assume a new topic)
Thank you greet
I have a question?
- Is the katana is still being developed?
- What other reader to the Bible?
- Are people willing to write another reader?
My dream!
- Possibility to enter the various modules and formats.
- Ability to edit textu, tagging verses
- Notebook, pinning the verse
- Figure, pinning the verse
- Video and audio recording of the verse pinning
-Shortcuts to www.
Combine the study of the Bible.
All who support the development please write (or perhaps assume a new topic)
Thank you greet
|
|
2011-10-11
, 23:03
|
|
Posts: 963 |
Thanked: 626 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Connecticut, USA
|
#538
|
Originally Posted by cjsegninir
Well, looks like you won't have to worry about the issue any more. There is now a NWTBible application available. And it seems like the developer was very smart about how to obtain the text. Each user has to download the text for himself, with a button click. And there is a copyright notice in the about. This seems like a good way to go about it.
Oh! I see now. Well, I'm one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and we actually distribute printed copies free of charge (we accept contributions, if the person wants to give). I will find out, but I don't think there will be any problem with sharing an electronic copy.
Thanks for the advice anyway. Cheers,
For those that don't know the New World Translation of the Bible, it is a translation made by Jehovah's Witnesses. The book "Reasoning on the Scriptures" also published by Jehovah's Witnesses says this about it:
As a basis for translating the Hebrew Scriptures, the text of Rudolf Kittel’s Biblia Hebraica, editions of 1951-1955, was used. The 1984 revision of the New World Translation benefited from updating in harmony with the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia of 1977. Additionally, the Dead Sea Scrolls and numerous early translations into other languages were consulted. For the Christian Greek Scriptures, the master Greek text of 1881 as prepared by Westcott and Hort was used primarily, but several other master texts were consulted as well as numerous early versions in other languages.
[...]
What kind of translation is this? For one thing, it is an accurate, largely literal translation from the original languages. It is not a loose paraphrase, in which the translators leave out details that they consider unimportant and add ideas that they believe will be helpful. As an aid to students, a number of editions provide extensive footnotes showing variant readings where expressions can legitimately be rendered in more than one way, also a listing of the specific ancient manuscripts on which certain renderings are based.
Some verses may not read the same as what a person is accustomed to. Which rendering is right? Readers are invited to examine manuscript support cited in footnotes of the Reference edition of the New World Translation, read explanations given in the appendix, and compare the rendering with a variety of other translations. They will generally find that some other translators have also seen the need to express the matter in a similar manner.
http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Translat.../dp/0761825568
A bit expensive, but highly recommended for those interested on the issue of accurate translation.
As for the NWTBible app. I just discovered it yesterday. It seems to work very well. No problems so far. No excuses for not reading a bit of the good book every day.
If any one has any questions about this, you are welcome to PM me so as not to send this thread off topic.
__________________
-- Worse than not knowing is not wanting to know! --
http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/
-- Worse than not knowing is not wanting to know! --
http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/
Last edited by rm42; 2011-10-12 at 18:15.
|
|
2011-10-12
, 04:05
|
|
Posts: 64 |
Thanked: 24 times |
Joined on Aug 2007
@ Germany ...
|
#539
|
http://www.bible.ca/Jw-NWT.htm
What leading Greek scholars say about the NWT:
1. Dr. Bruce M.
2. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the NWT "a frightful mistranslation," "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature) Dr. William
3. Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest." British scholar H.H. Rowley stated, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible
4. should not be translated." "Well, as a backdrop, I was disturbed because they (Watchtower) had
5. misquoted me in support of their translation." (These words were excerpted from the tape, "Martin and Julius Mantey on The New World Translation", Mantey is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Kingdom interlinear Translation) Dr. Julius
6. Mantey , author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the NWT "a shocking mistranslation." "Obsolete and incorrect." "It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'" "I have never read any New Testament
7. so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures.... it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of passages to state what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and teach. That is a distortion not a translation." (Julius Mantey , Depth Exploration in The New Testament (N.Y.: Vantage Pres, 1980), pp.136-137) the
translators of the NWT are "diabolical deceivers." (Julius Mantey in discussion with Walter Martin)
What leading Greek scholars say about the NWT:
1. Dr. Bruce M.
2. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the NWT "a frightful mistranslation," "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature) Dr. William
3. Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest." British scholar H.H. Rowley stated, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible
4. should not be translated." "Well, as a backdrop, I was disturbed because they (Watchtower) had
5. misquoted me in support of their translation." (These words were excerpted from the tape, "Martin and Julius Mantey on The New World Translation", Mantey is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Kingdom interlinear Translation) Dr. Julius
6. Mantey , author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the NWT "a shocking mistranslation." "Obsolete and incorrect." "It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'" "I have never read any New Testament
7. so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures.... it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of passages to state what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and teach. That is a distortion not a translation." (Julius Mantey , Depth Exploration in The New Testament (N.Y.: Vantage Pres, 1980), pp.136-137) the
translators of the NWT are "diabolical deceivers." (Julius Mantey in discussion with Walter Martin)
| The Following User Says Thank You to michaelxy For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2011-10-12
, 04:51
|
|
Posts: 963 |
Thanked: 626 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Connecticut, USA
|
#540
|
Originally Posted by michaelxy
Yes, defenders of the trinity doctrine have expressed displeasure when they see the way the New World translation renders John 1:1. But, the truth is that there is no dishonesty in the translation, and there are strong grammatical reasons for considering the inclusion of the indefinite article "a" as the proper thing to do in order to communicate to the English reader the same idea that the original Greek text gave to Greek readers. Please note that there was no explicit indefinite article in the Koine Greek. When translators include one (any where in the NT), it is because they see it implicit in the text. John 1:1 should be a clear example of this to all, if it were not for the fact that the Trinity doctrine creates such a strong cognitive dissonance in many otherwise capable translators. (Mr. BeDuhn explains this fact with great care and detail.)
http://www.bible.ca/Jw-NWT.htm
What leading Greek scholars say about the NWT:
1. Dr. Bruce M.
2. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the NWT "a frightful mistranslation," "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature) Dr. William
3. Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest." British scholar H.H. Rowley stated, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible
4. should not be translated." "Well, as a backdrop, I was disturbed because they (Watchtower) had
5. misquoted me in support of their translation." (These words were excerpted from the tape, "Martin and Julius Mantey on The New World Translation", Mantey is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Kingdom interlinear Translation) Dr. Julius
6. Mantey , author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the NWT "a shocking mistranslation." "Obsolete and incorrect." "It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'" "I have never read any New Testament
7. so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures.... it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of passages to state what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and teach. That is a distortion not a translation." (Julius Mantey , Depth Exploration in The New Testament (N.Y.: Vantage Pres, 1980), pp.136-137) the
translators of the NWT are "diabolical deceivers." (Julius Mantey in discussion with Walter Martin)
Furthermore, the New World translation is neither the only nor the first translation to do this. In fact, one of the earliest translations of the Greek scriptures, one that may actually predate the establishment of the Trinity doctrine as official church doctrine (which took place in the fourth century CE) is particularly interesting. This is the Sahidic Coptic text (available for viewing in the Chester Beatty Library). The Coptic language was spoken in Egypt in the centuries immediately following Jesus’ earthly ministry, and the Sahidic dialect was an early literary form of the language. Regarding the earliest Coptic translations of the Bible, The Anchor Bible Dictionary says: “Since the [Septuagint] and the [Christian Greek Scriptures] were being translated into Coptic during the 3d century C.E., the Coptic version is based on [Greek manuscripts] which are significantly older than the vast majority of extant witnesses.” Coptic grammar is relatively close to English grammar in one important aspect. The earliest translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures were into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Syriac and Latin, like the Greek of those days, do not have an indefinite article. Coptic, however, does. Moreover, scholar Thomas O.*Lambdin, in his work Introduction to Sahidic Coptic, says: “The use of the Coptic articles, both definite and indefinite, corresponds closely to the use of the articles in English.”
Hence, the Coptic translation supplies interesting evidence as to how John 1:1 would have been understood back then. What do we find? The Sahidic Coptic translation uses an indefinite article with the word “god” in the final part of John 1:1. Thus, when rendered into modern English, the translation reads: “And the Word was a god.” Evidently, those ancient translators realized that John’s words recorded at John 1:1 did not mean that Jesus was to be identified as Almighty God. The Word was a god (a divine being), not Almighty God.
Keep searching and you shall find.
__________________
-- Worse than not knowing is not wanting to know! --
http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/
-- Worse than not knowing is not wanting to know! --
http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/
Last edited by rm42; 2011-10-12 at 05:08.
| The Following User Says Thank You to rm42 For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
| Tags |
| bible, maemo 5, rapier, reference browser, religious apps, scripture reader, sword |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:48.