COMPLETE: Bible Selections, American Standard Version- SW/ll

LibraryLady · Post by **LibraryLady** » February 3rd, 2006, 12:38 am

You're quite welcome.

Yes, do browse through and see how you like the texts and I'm sure Steve can offer some guidance as well.

RobertG · Post by **RobertG** » February 3rd, 2006, 12:54 am

I've taken a quick glance at Ecclesiastes in the Douay-Rheims and the World English Bible. I prefer the style and flavor of the latter. It reminds me of the NKJV in some ways. I would still be interested in hearing Steve's view of the translation accuracy.

But I think this is the one I will choose. I can handle only so many sayeth's before going crazy. Errr... crazier.

I also glanced at the reference Book for the People. It's a quite lengthy treatise but interesting. I had to put it aside or I'd be up all night but I'm definitely going to read it through. It will no doubt help fill many gaps in my understanding of Bible history. I already spotted some inaccuracies in my earlier posting!

Ahhh! Off to bed with me! I have to teach tomorrow!

Rev. Steve · Post by **Rev. Steve** » February 3rd, 2006, 2:39 am

There is also the ASV http://www.ebible.org/bible/asv/ It is ? not as bad as the KJV, it is far more modern than the KJV ? but still not a modern translation. Understand that the KJV was intended to sound archaic when it was new. The ASV was not intended to sound archaic ? and it is several hundred years newer than the KJV. The World English Bible seems to be a misguided attempt at modernizing the ASV rather than creating a fresh new translation. Not the best idea for sound scholarship, but it does boast modern English ? though from the parts I scanned ? I remain unimpressed. Whooptiedo.

The WEB is supposedly already available, as an audio book, for free download at http://www.ebible.org/ ? though I couldn?t make it work.

A quick check of the title page of the Douay-Rheims offers lots to be concerned with:

Translated from the Latin Vulgate
Diligently Compared with the Hebrew, Greek,
and Other Editions in Divers Languages

So the whole thing was translated, not from the ancient texts ? but from the Vulgate. This means it was translated from the ancient texts, into Latin, and then into English. Not what one hopes for. It?s damn near a rumor.

I wouldn?t use ANY of these for study. With that in mind ? the KJV has a nice folksy, prosy style that sounds nice to listen to, provided you are not trying to understand it. It is a fine version for quoting pithily... The ASV is probably the all around best translation from the point of view of scholarship (It would be hard to do worse than the Douay-Rheims, the KJV is not a BIG improvement ? the scholarship in the KJV IS atrocious, and the WEB seems to be designed to keep the original errors of the ASV, and introduce new ones) but I am not particularly familiar with the scholarship involved in the translation of the ASV; it does appear to be of the highest order for 100+ years ago. The thing is that, as asinine as I know it seems, biblical research has made quantum leaps in the last 100 years ? due in no small part to some particularly miraculous finds of ancient texts in and around the Holy Land ? even though access to them has been spotty at times.

Anyway ? out of the 4 options... if I wanted to memorize verses, or just sound pithy, I would use the KJV; otherwise I would probably use the ASV, and not like it; if I wanted to have a good laugh with my colleagues I would drag out a copy of the Douay-Rheims. I still don?t know what I would use the WEB for.

Unfortunately there is no modern language version worth reading in the public domain. My personal choice is for the NRSV first, but that is because the Lutheran church unofficially endorses the NRSV as the unofficial official version of the church. It IS a good translation, though I am annoyed with the political subtext of the NRSV translation committee. My next choice recently has been the TNIV, but that is because it is brand spanking new and I am trying to get a feel for it, again it IS a good translation ? but I don?t see it replacing the NIV any time soon, if at all. After that is probably the NKJV. Solid scholarship, and modern language like the NRSV, and the TNIV. Its the version I use when I am not on duty... but that is because it is also the one that has all my margin notes and hi-lighting in.

Rev. Steve · Post by **Rev. Steve** » February 3rd, 2006, 2:48 am

Aramaic is the language of Christ. It is startlingly similar to biblical Hebrew, to the extent that generally, a Hebrew lexicon will also contain an Aramaic addendum, at least my two do.

If you can recognize a waw or a mem, you would recognize Aramaic if it fell from the sky ? though you might well mistake it for Hebrew.

Rev. Steve · Post by **Rev. Steve** » February 3rd, 2006, 3:22 am

LibraryLady wrote:
When I said "translation" I meant that the New King James Version is like a translation of the Original King James Version. Based on your post, it looks like I may have been mistaken on that point, but anyway, I described it as a "sort of" translation because I was thinking that something from English to English isn't technically a translation.

As for the ID3 tags, I'm not sure if you're saying that you agree with my suggestion or not. Or are you saying that a project of the whole bible in its modern bound together form would not be true to the original intention of the writers? Could you clarify?

Thanks!

The NKJV, along with ANY respectable modern translation is not a brushed off repackaging of an older English version, but a brand new translation. Scholars, folks with PhDs in biblical languages, and faculty positions at leading seminaries and universities, get together in surprisingly large groups and spend hours translating painfully short passages. They squabble over individual words on a pretty regular basis (usually not the ones you would expect either). And that is after they decide which source texts they are going to accept as authoritative in any particular instance (?These three include the kai ? but this one is older, and omits it ? but that could be a copying error from an older common source text...? and around and around and around it goes ? you can buy books explaining the decisions that were made ? great for insomnia) As you can imagine, it takes years to finish a translation. These guys are smart, through, and devoted to their work, work they have often devoted their entire careers, if not lives to.

The reason why you end up with names like ?New King James Version? is two fold ? first is that sometimes committees will try to follow in the tradition of an earlier, well received, and respected text ? they will try to use similar criteria and principles for translating, sometimes even having a preference for a certain group of source texts or theological affiliation that led the original translator, and sometimes they will have a preference for verbiage found in the original. The second reason is marketing, and name recognition. People know the KJV, or the RSV, or NIV, or whatever else, they trust those names ? getting them to buy a ?New? one is easier than explaining that the translators are not heretics, and not writing a whole new Bible to fit their own agenda. People get WIERD about their bibles ? mostly due to epic proportions of ignorance.

About ID3 tags.

Yes.

But let me explain:

I doubt the original authors of the texts would be upset to find that their texts had been put in the canon (Those who?s texts were left out might be upset ? but there is generally an obvious reason for such things ? and generally one that is less devious reasons than some would have you believe). At the same time they don?t need to be a part of the canon to be legitimate.

I guess my thought is to treat the texts on their own terms, instead of part of this fetishized thing called the Bible.

But you do what you like ? either way is good ? and frankly, I usually just piss people off when I suggest things like this. Almost like when I point out that Moses didn?t write the ?Books of Moses? and Matthew didn?t write Matthew. But that is a different issue.

RobertG · Post by **RobertG** » February 3rd, 2006, 7:39 am

This is some really great information and background, Steve. Thank you very much for taking the time to provide it. I didn't have a chance to look at the two Gutenberg examples last night except cursorly. The Douay-Rheims did leave me feeling vaguely uneasy, though. I'll take a look at the ASV tonight but it sounds like your recommendation for public domain listening of a volunteer reader is KJV. So sayeth the Preacher.

But you do what you like ? either way is good ? and frankly, I usually just piss people off when I suggest things like this. Almost like when I point out that Moses didn?t write the ?Books of Moses? and Matthew didn?t write Matthew. But that is a different issue.

I think it would be very interesting to listen to one of your sermons or attend one of your studies!

Robert

RobertG · Post by **RobertG** » February 3rd, 2006, 2:20 pm

Annie:

I took a look at the American Stadard Version from the link Steve provided. I guess my mind is too fatigued after a week of teaching engineering and design-- it didn't click that ASV = American Standard Version!

I've read this version in prior years and it flows more easily than KJV, as Steve indicated. So I've decided to use ASV and not KJV for the readings that I do. You might want to change the title of this thread to reflect that or else we can simply start a new thread.

I'll post Ecclesiastes this weekend. I'm not going to commit to dates for other readings right now but I have in mind to read Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon and the Letters to the Corinthians from the New Testament over the coming months. Beyond that, we'll see how it goes.

Robert

LibraryLady · Post by **LibraryLady** » February 3rd, 2006, 2:32 pm

Wow, fascinating stuff, Steve. One of my all time favorite books is East of Eden, partly because of the concept of "timshel" and the lengths the character Lee goes to to understand a certain passage. He discovers that two different translations have two different meanings and so decides to learn Hebrew himself to figure out how he would interpret it. Good stuff.

I'm also reminded of the movie Stigmata, are you familiar? I don't know how much there is to the whole story line, probably not much, but I still found it fascinating. It's all about there being hidden scriptures written by Jesus himself.

As you can probably see, a lot of my knowledge of the history of the bible comes not from scholarly studies but from pop culture, so it's great to hear the perspective of someone truly qualified on the subject!

Robert - I will update the title of the thread. No need for deadlines, you can just post things here as you do them.

RobertG · Post by **RobertG** » February 5th, 2006, 2:07 am

Annie,

Here's the first biblical installment:

Ecclesiastes (ASV) -- Book 21 of the Holy Scriptures

file size: 38.3 MB
sample rate: 128kbps
read time: 40:52 min.
credit: Robert Garrison - climber53.com

If you need me to write a description for these books as I produce them, let me know and I'll do it.

I did change the mp3 id tags a bit from what you earlier outlined:

Title: Ecclesiastes
Artist: Unknown (The Preacher)
Album: The Bible ASV

If that doesn't meet the standard, feel free to change it. Unless I hear otherwise, I'll stick to the above format for future readings.

Next in line is the book of Job.

ChipDoc · Post by **ChipDoc** » February 5th, 2006, 2:23 am

Though we can't read it here, you might consider checking out Robert Heinlein's 1984 work Job; A Comedy of Justice. It's an incisively satirical look at Religion (all faiths skewered equally) which demonstrates that quality so often missing in modern satire - a comprehensive knowledge of the subject at hand. Truly one of the most thought-provoking works ever to come from Heinlein's mind.

LibraryLady · Post by **LibraryLady** » February 5th, 2006, 8:25 am

Great, Robert, I'll get started on cataloging this. The ID3 tags look fine to me.

As for the description, unless you want to write one yourself, I'll use this from wikipedia:

Wikipedia wrote:Ecclesiastes, Kohelet in Hebrew, is a book of the Hebrew Bible. The author represents himself as the son of David, and king over Israel in Jerusalem. The work consists of personal or autobiographic matter, largely expressed in aphorisms and maxims illuminated in terse paragraphs with reflections on the meaning of life and the best way of life. There is a long discourse on death.

I'm listening now and it sounds great. One question, am I crazy or is did that classic Byrds song borrow heavily from part of this?? "For every thing, turn, turn, turn, there is a season...."

LibraryLady · Post by **LibraryLady** » February 5th, 2006, 8:33 am

From wikipedia:

"The poem about times in Eccl. 3:1-8 is also well known as the inspiration for the Pete Seeger song, "Turn, Turn, Turn", recorded by The Byrds."

Good to know I'm not crazy! I love how I learn so many different things from this project.

RobertG · Post by **RobertG** » February 5th, 2006, 10:15 am

ChipDoc wrote:...you might consider checking out Robert Heinlein's 1984 work Job; A Comedy of Justice.

As Annie, said-- LibriVox also provides a forum for us to continue our learning. I thought I knew Heinlein, as I have read many of his books. I remember when it came out but never got around to reading it. I will make a point "grokking" it now!

Thanks Chip!

On another note, I find it somewhat amusing that I have volunteered to read Scriptures here for I have never considered myself religious or devout. In my mind, spirituality is one thing and organized religions are another. To me, spirtuality represents peace, love and mental clarity while religion brings forth the face of war, anger and confusion. Religion seems to be clannish while spirituality encompasses the All.

I'm disappointed that I cannot read for the public the more modern translations of the Scriptures but I suppose many will not mind the more archaic flow of the words in my readings. The trouble is that the meaning also is more obscure. I think that Rev. Steve made a good point on this.

Spiritual writings of any sort can bring comfort and edification to the individual. For this, they have a place even around the fires of barbarians.

They can even inspire rock and roll bands, eh Annie?

RobertG · Post by **RobertG** » February 5th, 2006, 10:24 am

LibraryLady wrote:Good to know I'm not crazy!

It takes years of discipline and hard work to attain perfect craziness, so do not despair. Stay your foot to the path and turn not your face away. The Kingdom of Craziness can be yours!

The Wikpedia description is fine, though if you invite the preachers and priests into the fray-- well, we will never resolve it!

Thanks for your work in cataloging the piece, Annie!

LibraryLady · Post by **LibraryLady** » February 5th, 2006, 10:53 am

Oh, I'm well on my way to perfect craziness to be sure.

I also consider myself quite spiritual but not at all religious. I must admit there is a lovely irony in a nonreligious person recording Bible scriptures, whilst our resident Reverend is coordinating Darwin's Origin of Species!

I'm not entirely satisfied with the Wikipedia description. What if we went with something simple and neutral like this:

Ecclesiastes is the 21st book of the Bible. This reading is from the American Standard Version translation.