Bible translated into Jamaican Creole Patois

A project to translate the Bible into Jamaican Creole Patois is excepted to come to and end very shortly.

There has gone on always a lot of discussion if a Bible can be translated in a dialect. Some do find the dialect not a proper language worthy of the Word of God. There is the matter to consider when something may be looked at as 'slang' or when something should be considered as a deviation of or as an other language.

Do you consider American a dialect form of Queens English or as a different language? Is Scottish an acceptable language to translate a Bible to?

As some people think that Scots isn’t a real language, creoles aren’t seen as a language because they have a lot of similar features to English and to French.

A creole language, or simply a creole, is a stable natural language developed from the mixing of parent languages; creoles differ from pidgins (which are believed by scholars to be necessary precedents of creoles) in that they have been nativized by children as their primary language, with the result that they have features of natural languages that are normally missing from pidgins.

Its parent languages are the Colonial European Roman languages (French, Spanish and Portuguese) and Germanic languages (German, Dutch and English). The terms criollo and crioulo were originally qualifiers used throughout the Spanish and Portuguese colonies to distinguish the members of an ethnic group that were born and raised locally from those who immigrated as adults.

As a consequence of colonial European trade patterns, most of the known European-based creole languages arose in the equatorial belt around the world and in areas with access to the oceans, including the coastal regions of the Americas, western Africa, Goa and along the west coast of India, and along the coast of Southeast Asia up to Indonesia, Macau, the Philippines, Malaysia, Seychelles and Oceania.

Today the Bible is being translated in a language that is speaking to the locals.

Some example:

Luke 1:26-28

26 Wen Ilizibet did prignant fi siks mont, God sen ienjel Giebrel go a wan toun iina Gyalalii niem Nazaret, 27 fi kyari wan mesij go gi wan yong uman niem Mieri we neva slip wid no man yet. Mieri engiej fi marid Juozif, we kom from di siem famblili we King Dievid did bilang tu. 28 Di ienjel go tu Mieri an se tu ar se, “Mieri, me av nyuuz we a go mek yu wel api. Gad riili riili bles yu an im a waak wid yu aal di taim

While this is easy to understand, other extracts are less like English.

Luke 1:1-4

Tiyafilas Sa, Uol iip a piipl chrai fir ait dong di sitn dem wa apm mongks wi. Dem rait it dong siem wie ou dem ier it fram di piipl dem we did de de fram di staat, si di sitn dem wa apm an we priich di wod.

+

Read more and see a video: Gad wod iina fi wi langwij!

Accuracy, Word-for-Word Translation Preferred by most Bible Readers

Survey: Bible Readers want Accuracy, Word-for-Word Translation

A new study from LifeWay Research reveals some key findings on what distinctives Bible readers desire for their Bible. A total of 2,000 Bible readers participated through a demographically representative online panel, but to qualify, participants had to read the Bible in a typical month either by themselves or as part of a family activity and not merely in a church or corporate group setting.

Most American Bible readers prefer word-for-word translations of the original Greek and Hebrew over thought-for-thought translations and value accuracy over readability.
That is the finding of a new LifeWay Research study of a total of 2,000 Bible readers who participated through a demographically representative online panel. To qualify, participants had to read the Bible in a typical month either by themselves or as part of a family activity and not merely in a church or corporate group setting.
When asked whether they prefer “word-for-word translations, where the original words are translated as exactly as possible” or “thought-for-thought translations, where the translators attempt to reproduce the intent of the original thought rather than translating the exact words,” 61 percent chose word-for-word.
That includes 33 percent who strongly prefer word-for-word translation and 28 percent who somewhat prefer it. In contrast, 20 percent prefer thought-for-thought, including 6 percent with a strong preference and 14 percent who somewhat prefer it. Fourteen percent say both translation philosophies are equally fine, and 5 percent are not sure.
Regarding accuracy, respondents were asked, “In general, what is more important to you in a Bible: total accuracy to the original words, or easy readability?” Three out of four (75 percent) opt for total accuracy, with 43 percent saying accuracy is much more important and 32 percent saying it is somewhat more important.
Fourteen percent say easy readability is somewhat more important, and 8 percent say it is much more important. Three percent are not sure.
“It is interesting to note that Bible sales do not necessarily follow these preferences,” said Scott McConnell, director of LifeWay Research. “Those reading the Bible each month represent only a portion of all Bible purchasers.
“Bible readers can share their preferences for different translation principles but may not be aware of which characteristics are present in specific translations – even the ones that they own. Without specific instruction most readers will not notice when a translation moves away from a literal or word-for-word translation.”
Respondents hold a variety of opinions regarding the style of language they prefer in a Bible translation for personal reading. Among them:
– 68 percent want language to be simpler to understand while 7 percent want it to be more difficult to understand.
– 81 percent say it should be more enjoyable to read while 4 percent prefer it to be more of a chore to read.
– 27 percent favor contemporary language while 46 percent want traditional language.
– 36 percent want more modern language while 37 percent favor more old-fashioned language.
– 19 percent feel understanding the language should require a higher level of education while 49 percent say it should not require a higher level of education.
– 63 percent believe it should be simple for anyone to understand while 14 percent say the language should be meant more for people who have a lot of experience with the Bible.
– 40 percent prefer more formal language while 26 percent say should be more informal.
– 22 percent want language more for casual reading while 44 percent say it should be designed more for in-depth study.
“In the same way drivers want big, powerful, fuel-efficient vehicles, Bible readers want word-for-word translations that are easy to understand,” said McConnell. “As translators try to cross the globe and two millennia, fully accomplishing both is not always possible.”
The survey also asked about translation of God’s name. Though many Bible versions translate God’s name in the Old Testament as “the LORD,” others prefer using what is believed to be the original pronunciation, “Yahweh.”
Nearly eight in 10 Bible readers (79 percent) prefer the traditional translation “the LORD” over the original pronunciation “Yahweh.” That includes 51 percent who strongly prefer “the LORD” and 27 percent who somewhat prefer it. Seven percent somewhat prefer “Yahweh” while 6 percent strongly prefer it. Eight percent are not sure which they favor.
The vast majority of Bible readers do not prefer gender-inclusive translation approaches. A full 82 percent prefer a literal translation of masculine words that describe people in general rather than a more inclusive translation like “humankind” or “person.”
Study participants were told: “Bible translators have to make choices regarding gender issues. For example, the original Greek and Hebrew often uses masculine words such as those literally meaning ‘man’ to describe people in general. Some translators think these should be translated literally as ‘man’ while others think they should be translated into gender-inclusive terms such as ‘humankind,’ ‘human being,’ ‘person’ or ‘one.’ Which do you prefer?”
A majority (53 percent) strongly prefer literal translation while 29 percent somewhat prefer the literal rendering. Only 9 percent somewhat prefer gender-inclusive translation, and 3 percent strongly prefer it. Six percent are not sure.
Bible readers are even more adamant about not making references to God gender-inclusive.
They were told, “Another issue Bible translators face relates to references to God as ‘father’ in the Greek and Hebrew. Some translators think these should be translated literally as ‘father’ while others think they should be translated into gender-inclusive terms such as ‘parent.’ Do you prefer the literal or more gender-inclusive?”
In response, 89 percent want a literal translation of gender-specific references to God, including 68 percent who strongly prefer literal translation and 21 percent who somewhat prefer literal translation. Five percent somewhat prefer gender-inclusive translation, and 2 percent strongly prefer gender-inclusive translation. Four percent are not sure.
“The places in the Bible in which the inspired writers used masculine words for God, a large majority of Bible readers want translators to use masculine words as well,” noted McConnell. “This is true regardless of whether the reader describes their own spiritual beliefs as liberal or conservative.”
Methodology: The LifeWay Research survey was conducted in August 2011 via online panel. A representative sample of U.S. adult population was invited to participate. Two thousand people who read the Bible once a month or more qualified for the study. Only people who read the Bible personally (outside of group activities) or as part of a family activity were included. The sample of 2,000 provides 95 percent confidence that the sampling error does not exceed + 2.2 percent.
- Nashville, Tenn. - PRWEB -  October 03, 2011

Hebrew, Aramaic and Bibletranslation

Every academic year we do like to swap Bibletranslation to keep our minds alert to what is written and meant in the Holy Scriptures.

Most of us do not speak Hebrew or even do not know to speak or read the language. Having no knowledge of the language in which most of the Books of the Bible are written does not make it easy to come to the full understanding of those Hebrew words.

We do have to depend on translations which can be very strict in their translation or take a lot of freedom to translate what is written with a few words but gives a whole (long) meaning. Having no vowels or "the" "a" or "an" at certain places can create a certain confusion.


The Hebrew language  (/ˈhiːbruː/) (עִבְרִית, Ivrit,  Hebrew pronunciation (help·info)) is a Semitic language of the Northern Central (also called Northwestern) group or Afroasiatic language family, closely related to Phoenician and Moabite, with which it is often placed by scholars in a Canaanite subgroup.
Culturally, is it considered by Jews and other religious groups as the language of the Jewish people, though other Jewish languages had originated among diaspora Jews, and the Hebrew language is also used by non-Jewish groups, such as the Samaritans. Most of the Samaritans went to use modern Hebrew or Arabic as their vernacular.

Spoken in ancient times in Palestine, Hebrew was sup­planted by the western dialect of Aramaic which Jeshua (Jesus) also spoke, during the 3rd century BCE; the language con­tinued to be used as a liturgical and literary language, however. It was revived as a spoken language in the 19th and 20th centuries CE and is the official language of Israel.

The history of the Hebrew language is usually divided into three major periods:
 1.Biblical Hebrew is often looked at as a dialetic form of Classical Hebrew The Biblical Hebrew according to scholars flourished around the 6th century BCE, around the time of the Babylonian exile. Classical Hebrew was used until c. 3rd century BCE, in which most of the core of the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible) or Old Testament is written. For this reason, Hebrew has been referred to by Jews as Leshon HaKodesh (לשון הקודש), "The Holy Language", since ancient times.
 2. Mishnaic or rabbinic Hebrew, the language of the Mishna (a collection of Jewish traditions), written c. CE 200 (this form of Hebrew was never used among the people as a spoken language);
 and 3. Modern Hebrew, derived from the word "ʕibri" (plural "ʕibrim") one of several names for the Jewish people, the language of Israel in modern times.

In the Bible, the Hebrew language is called Yәhudit (יהודית) because Judah (Yәhuda) was the surviving kingdom at the time of the quotation, late 8th century BCE (Isaiah 36, 2 Kings 18). In Isaiah 19:18, it is also called the "Language of Canaan" (שְׂפַת כְּנַעַן).

Scholars generally agree that the oldest form of He­brew is that of some of the Old Testament po­ems, especially the "Song of Deborah" in chapter 5 of Judges. The sources of borrowed words first appearing during this period include the other Canaanite languages, as well as Akkadian and Aramaic. Hebrew also con­tains a small number of Sumerian words borrowed from an Akkadian source. Few traces of dialects exist in Biblical Hebrew, but scholars believe this to be the result of Masoretic editing of the text. In addition to the Old Tes­tament, a small number of inscriptions in He­brew of the biblical period are extant; the earliest of these is a short inscription in Phoenician characters dating from the 9th century BC. During the early Mishnaic period, some of the guttural consonants of Biblical Hebrew were combined or confused with one another, and many words, among them a number of adverbs, prepositions, and conjunctions, were borrowed from Aramaic. Hebrew also borrowed a number of Greek, Latin, and Persian words. Use of the language declined from the 9th century until the 18th century. Modern Hebrew, based on the biblical lan­guage, contains many innovations designed to meet modern needs; it is the only colloquial speech based on a written language. The pronunciation is a modification of that used by Jhe Sefardic (Hispano-Portuguese) Jews rather than that of the Ashkenazic (East European) Jews. The old guttural consonants are' not clearly distinguished or are lost, except by Oriental Jews. The syntax is based on that of the Mishna. Characteristic of Hebrew of all stages is the use of word roots consisting of three consonants, to which vowels are added to derive words of different parts of speech and meaning. The language is written from right to left in a Semitic script of 22 letters.

Hebrew alphabet, either of two distinct Semitic alphabets-the Early Hebrew and the Classical, or Square, Hebrew. Early Hebrew was the alphabet used by the Jewish nation in the period before the Babylonian Exile -i.e., prior to the 6th century BCE - although some inscriptions in this alphabet may be of a later date.

Several hundred inscriptions exist. As is usual in early alphabets, Early Hebrew exists in a variety of local variants and also shows development over time; the oldest example of Early Hebrew writing, the Gezer Calendar, dates from the 10th century BCE, and the writing used varies little from the earliest North Semitic alphabets. The Early Hebrew alphabet, like the modern Hebrew variety, had 22 letters, with only consonants represented, and was written from right to left; but the early alphabet is more closely related in letter form to the Phoenician than to the modern Hebrew. Its only surviving descendant is the Samaritan alphabet, still used by a few hundred Samaritan Jews.

Between the 6th and 2nd centuries BCE, Classi­cal, or Square, Hebrew gradually displaced the Aramaic alphabet, which had replaced Early Hebrew in Palestine. Square Hebrew became established in the 2nd-1st centuries BCE and developed into the modern Hebrew al­phabet over the next 1,500 years. It was ap­parently derived from the Aramaic alphabet rather than from Early Hebrew but was nonetheless strongly influenced by the Early Hebrew script.

Classical Hebrew showed three distinct forms by the 10th century CE: Square Hebrew, a formal or book hand; rabbinical or "Rashi-writing," employed by medieval Jewish scholars; and various local cur­sive scripts, of which the Polish-German type became the modern cursive form.

Dead Sea Scroll Hebrew from the 3rd century BCE to the 1st century CE, corresponding to the Hellenistic and Roman Periods before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and represented by the Qumran Scrolls that form most (but not all) of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Commonly abbreviated as DSS Hebrew, also called Qumran Hebrew. The Imperial Aramaic script of the earlier scrolls in the 3rd century BCE evolved into the Hebrew square script of the later scrolls in the 1st century CE, also known as ketav Ashuri (Assyrian script), still in use today.

The son of Myriam (Mary/Maria) and Joseph (Josef/Jozef) from the tribe of Daniel, also known as Jeshua, Jesus Christ the Messiah, spoke the Aramaic language which also belongs to the Semitic languages of the Northern Central or Northwestern group or to the Afroasiatic language phylum.The name of the language is based on the name of Aram,  an ancient region in central Syria.(Oxford English dictionary, http://oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/10127)

During its 3,000-year written history, Aramaic has served variously as a language of administration of empires and as a language of divine worship. It was the day-to-day language of Israel in the Second Temple period (539 BCE – 70 CE) The difficulty with this language is that Aramaic's long history and diverse and widespread use has led to the development of many divergent varieties which are sometimes called as dialects, though they are quite distinct languages. Therefore, there is no one singular Aramaic language.

In the 7th and 6th centuries BCE, it gradually supplanted Akkadian as the lingua franca of the Near East and later became the official language of the Persian Empire. Aramaic replaced Hebrew as the language of the Jews; portions of the Old Testament books of Dan­iel and Ezra are written in Aramaic, as are the Babylonian and, Jerusalem Talmuds.

Jesus and the Apostles also spoke this language. Its period of greatest influence extended from c. 300 BC until c. AD 650; it was supplanted by Arabic.

In the early Christian era, Aramaic divided into East and West varieties. West Aramaic dialects include Nabataean (formerly spoken in parts of Arabia), Palmyrene (spoken in Palmyra, which was northeast of Damascus), Palestinian-Christian, and Judeo-Aramaic. West Aramaic is still spoken in a small number of villages in Lebanon. East Aramaic includes Syriac, Mandaean, Eastern Neo-Assyrian, and the Aramaic of the Babylonian Talmud.

One of the most important of these is Syriac, which was the language of an extensive literature between the 3rd and 7th centuries. Mandaean was the dialect of a Gnostic sect centred in lower Mesopotamia. East Aramaic is still spoken by a few small groups of Jacobite and Nestorian Christians in the Middle East.

Modern Aramaic is spoken today as a first language by many scattered, predominantly small, and largely isolated communities of differing Christian, Jewish and Mandean ethnic groups of West Asia. (Heinrichs 1990: xi–xv; Beyer 1986: 53.)
Today we can find it by the Assyrians (also known as Chaldo-Assyrians) in the form of Assyrian Neo-Aramaic and Chaldean Neo-Aramaic.

Looking into those ancient languages we do want to follow their way of thinking, understanding how the thoughts are blended into words and phrases full of verbatim and proverbs which we do have to try to see and understand in the light of the way of thinking at that time.

To give a simple example, a few weeks ago when somebody said he was "mad about his apartment" the American listener thought he had become crazy or out of mind because of his apartment. Though the speaker meant just the opposite, namely that he was in love with his apartment. He did not detest it in such a way that he became insane of it, but he came into the clouds living there. (Not meaning that he really went up into the clouds, high in sky.) I use this simple example in the hope everyone can understand how we have to follow the way of saying and have to be careful not to take a proverb literally. Because that happens a lot today when folks read the Bible. As Bible readers we have to transpose ourselves in the time when it was written and how the people thought at that time.

Further we have to take into account how we are going to or how Bible-translators did  translate the The Hebrew alphabet (Hebrew: אָלֶף־בֵּית עִבְרִי‎‎, Alephbet 'Ivri).

By using the Jewish script, square script, block script, or more historically, the Assyrian script, it has to be taken into account how it is spoken out and how one word is written against an other. Best it can be compared to other Jewish languages, most notably Yiddish, Ladino, and Judeo-Arabic.

There have been two script forms in use. The original old Hebrew script is known as the paleo-Hebrew script (which has been largely preserved, in an altered form, in the Samaritan script), while the present "square" form of the Hebrew alphabet is a stylized form of the Aramaic script, which has its alphabet adapted from the Phoenician alphabet and became distinctive from it by the 8th century BCE. The letters all represent consonants, some of which are matres lectionis, which also indicate long vowels.
The Aramaic alphabet is historically significant, since virtually all modern Middle Eastern writing systems use a script that can be traced back to it, as well as numerous Altaic writing systems of Central and East Asia. This is primarily due to the widespread usage of the Aramaic language as both a lingua franca and the official language of the Neo-Assyrian, and its successor, the Achaemenid Empire. Among the scripts in modern use, the Hebrew alphabet bears the closest relation to the Imperial Aramaic script of the 5th century BCE, with an identical letter inventory and, for the most part, nearly identical letter shapes.
Aramaic alphabet, major writing system in the Near East in the latter half of the 1st mil­lennium BC. Derived from the North Semitic script, the Aramaic alphabet was developed in the 10th and 9th centuries BC and rose into prominence after the conquest of the Aramaean states by Assyria in the 9th and 8th centuries BC. The Aramaic language and script were used as a lingua franca over all of the Near East, and documents and inscriptions in the Aramaic alphabet have been found in Greece, Afghanistan, India, northern Arabia, and Egypt. The oldest inscription in Aramaic script yet discovered dates from approximately 850 BC.
The Aramaic alphabet is a writing system of 22 letters, all indicating consonants, and it is written from right to left. It is ancestral to Square Hebrew and the modern Hebrew al­phabet, the Nabataean and modern Arabic scripts, the Palmyrene alphabet, and the Syriac, as well as hundreds of other writing sys­tems used at some time in Asia east of Syria. Aramaic also has been influential in the devel­opment of such alphabets as the Georgian, Armenian, and Glagolitic.
Various "styles" (in current terms, "fonts") of representation of the letters exist. There is also a cursive Hebrew script, which has also varied over time and place.

When we want to use names of persons and places we should carefully look how they are written and spoken. When we transfer certain letters into our language into a consonant we should do that for all the words the same way. In English translations we can often find irregularities in that. For example do we not find Yona, but Jonah, Joshua, and Jeruzalem for Yerusalem, but for Yeshua they write Jesus and for Yahuhwah they suddenly go from three syllables to two syllable and write for the Yod an Ypsolom giving God the Name Yahweh instead of the better translation, keeping to the three original syllables, Jehovah and speaking it better not as Americans with an "Dzee" but with an "Yea".

This year we shall become more confronted with those Aramaic names and also will see that in the original writings of the Scriptures they used different words for slightly different things. In such a way we shall wonder if we not better take those different meanings also in our language as different words so that we clearly shall be able to see if there is been spoken off of a direct pupil of Jeshua (Jesus),  or one of the many disciples or the special pupils or sent ones (Shlichim) or one of the seventy.

By checking if the Beth, Daleth, Gimel Heth, Kaf, Qof and the vowels tërë and bireq are translated into the other languages we shall see where there was no consistency and which one we better should follow.

We do know that within a Hebrew name the aleph represents a smooth breathing, and for practical purposes may be considerd a 'silent' letter, but because it gives a softer sound than without putting the 'h' on top of it we do prefer to use the 'h' as well in Dutch, though the Language Commision gives it without an 'h'. The Governemental Dutch language regulation, by the Dutch Language Union and the Spellingraad (Spelling Committee and Dutch Spelling Council) indicate that we should write Jehova in Dutch for the Hebrew Name of God, but there we prefer to use the International used form of Jehovah to have uniformity on our websites in the different languages (and giving more possibilities to have it spoken out as in Hebrew with the soft h-ending. )

For this article is made use of the Encyclopaedia Britannica where you can find more:

Encyclopaedia Britannica Macropaedia: Major re/. 1:621 b ·alphabetical order antiquity 1:619d . Semitic calligraphy development 3:662b . signs and English equivalent, table 3 8:594 . vowel indication methods 19: 1038c; table 1035 . Yiddish adaptation 8:26c

 alphabet origins and standardization 1:621 b; table 620 . alphabet and English equivalent, table 3 8:594 'alphabetical order antiquity 1:619d ·English vocabulary borrowings 6:879a ·Hamito-Semitic languages map 8:590 ·Israel's revival of common language 9: 105ge ·Jewish liturgical use and status 10:297c . Karaite impetus to 9th-century studies 10:318f ·medieval belief in aboriginality 10:643h ·naming patterns 12: 818f ·origins, development, and literary use 10: 196d 'preservation and educational respect 6: 322f 'punctuation and pointing since 800s 15:276g 'relationships, writing, and phonology 8:592d passim to 595c . sacral status as biblical language 7:60h 'U.S. parochial education curriculum 6:42ge ·Yiddish formative influences 8:25h
 
See also Syriac language. 'ancient spread and influence 17:942g +
 Major re/. 1:619h . calligraphy style and development 3:662b ·Iranian varieties and adaptations 9:456d . origins, spread, and influence 17:942g ·vowel indication methods 19: 1038c; table 1035

RELATED ENTRIES in the Ready Reference and Index: Armenian alphabet; Brahml; Georgian alphabets; Greek alphabet; Hebrew alphabet; Kharo~!l; Klik Turki alphabet; Nabataean alphabet; Pahlavi alphabet; Palmyric alphabet; Samaritan alphabet; Syriac alphabet

Obstacles to effective evangelism

Dave Burke his twin brother has compiled a list of obstacles to effective evangelism which currently plague the Christadelphian community:

* Use of the KJV or any Bible translation earlier than the 1970s
* Failure to demonstrate practical positive life benefits to believing and living the gospel
* Failure to demonstrate practical outcomes of doctrinal differences between ourselves and other Christian groups
* Failure to differentiate between the needs of Christians and non-Christians
* Failure to understand what non-Christians are looking for

+ David adds:

 Failure to understand why other Christians go to church
* Use of jargon in our literature
* Lack of literature for non-English speaking people
* Lack of literature for people with English as a second language
* Lack of attention to pressing social issues
* Insistence that visitors adhere to specific in-group rules
* Failure to demonstrate that we actually care about the community in which we live

These problems have been perpetuated for decades, largely because they are not recognised as problems.

+
Effective evangelism has wider implications than the conversion of non-Christadelphians. It also improves the health of our community by building up our young people (themselves a prime audience for Christadelphian evangelism) and our 'less comely members' (I Corinthians 12:14-25). For some Christadelphians the internet is seen as a viable alternative to real life community. This is inherently problematic and potentially damaging.

***
Luckily there are also ecclesiae which use contemporary versions of the Bible.

Some Restored Name Versions

While the HalleluYah Scriptures is based on the 1993 version of Dr. Chris Kostner "The Scriptures", the IRS or Institute for Scripture Research in 2009 updated their 1998 version of the same basic work.They tried to have some Improvements to the text - seeking a yet closer equivalent to the literal meaning of the original language. Hebrew names of Book Titles they now placed on right hand pages with corresponding traditional English names on the left hand pages - making it easier for you to find the place, and easier to learn the Hebrew titles. (Hebrew names are also used where possible for annual festival days, as well as being used, minimally, for ambiguous words).
The books in the Tanakh are arranged according to the original order of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings.Words and names, as far as possible, have been corrected in order to eliminate any names of idolatrous origin.

The Hebraic Roots Version Scriptures HRV => The HRV Scriptures formerly known as the Hebraic Roots Version Complete Messianic Study Bible is published by the Institute for Scripture Research.

The new Messianic Bible

"The Ketuvim Netzarim" ("Writings of the Nazarenes") => a Messianic Sacred Name Edition  translated from the original Aramaic and Hebrew.

The Word of Yahweh <= The basic text of the Word of Yahweh is based upon standard English language versions of the scriptures, which in turn are built upon the oldest available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. This version has retained much of the old English grammatical structure used by many English translations.
The personal name of the Heavenly Father, Yahweh, was inspired into the Hebrew and Aramaic texts of the Old Testament nearly 7000 times. This includes 134 instances where the Masoretic scribes admittedly changed Yahweh to the more common Hebrew adonai. In all instances where Lord, or God was substituted for the Sacred Name in the English text they have properly inserted Yahweh. In addition to the many times the Father’s name is rendered as Lord or God, there are many more instances where these terms were used as translations of the Hebrew words elohim and adonai. Because there is no accurate translation of elohim they have transliterated that title into the English. As for adonai, sovereign or master serves as an adequate translation in most cases.

The Scriptures is by some presented as an exciting new literal translation of the Bible in English. This translation differs significantly from most common English translations in that it has restored the original book order of the Tanakh (Old Testament) and arranged them according to the original order of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Torah, the Prophets and the Writings.

The traditional rendering of the word "Law" has been restored with "Torah" throughout the translation, retaining the richness and full meaning of this word in the Hebrew language.

Words and names, as far as possible, have been corrected in order to eliminate any names of idolatrous origin.

The Names of all the books in the Tanakh and the Messianic Scriptures are now restored to the original Hebrew names, including the books of the Torah: Bereshith (Genesis), Shemoth (Exodus), Wayiqra (Leviticus); the books of the Nevi'im: Yeshayahu (Isaiah), Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah), Zakaryah (Zachariah); the books of the Kethuvim: Tehillim (Psalms), and Mishle (Proverbs); and last but not least the books of the Messianic Scriptures: Mattithyahu (Matthew), Yohannan (John), Kepha (Peter), and many more.

+

In the article Heer, Yahuwah, Yeshua of Yahushua I go deeper in on the difficulties of using the Hebrew signs and wonder how far we do have to go in a Bible translation to stay true to the original.

Do you think we have to use all the Hebrew names everywhere for all the persons and book-names? Do we also have to go so far to take out all the heathen or describing words when there is the one Hebrew word? To use Ruah for Spirit looks all right but Shabbatoth for weeks?

+++

2016 linkupdate 

Related articles

• World's Oldest Stone Tablet Containing Ten Commandments Up for Auction
• We never give up hope
• A tablet with the earliest known inscription of the Ten Commandments has sold for $850,000
• Earliest 10 Commandments?
• Ancient Ten Commandments tablet sold at auction for $850,000
• Thou shalt not covet: Earliest known chiselled inscription of Ten Commandments sells at auction for $850,000
• Spiritual heroes, mentors help shape our lives: Ethics and Religion Talk
• Rewriting the Biblical 'Curse' on Womankind
• Looking at notes of Samuel Ward and previous Bible translation efforts in English
• Lord in place of the divine name

New American Bible Revised Edition

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has announced it has canonically approved the publication of New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE).
The first edition of the New American Bible (NAB), published in 1970, immediately became familiar to Catholics in the United States because of its use in the lectionary at Mass.
A revised translation of the New Testament, which appeared in the NAB’s second edition (1986), included more traditional diction (“blessed” replaced “happy” in the Beatitudes) but made concessions to horizontal and vertical inclusive language (the Holy Spirit in places was referred to as “it,” rather than “he”).
In the third edition (1991), a revised translation of the Psalms appeared that systematically introduced inclusive language to the Psalter. Thus, “blessed the man” (Ps. 1:1)-- a literal translation of the Hebrew-- was replaced by “happy those.” In 1994, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments rejected the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ request to include the new edition of the Psalter in a revised lectionary.
Under the Congregation’s direction, a committee of bishops and scholars made changes to the revised New Testament before its use was permitted in the revised lectionary. The Holy Spirit, for instance, is rendered as “he” in the revised lectionary; “rejoice, O highly favored daughter” (Lk. 1:28, 1970 edition), which had become “hail, favored one” (1986 edition), in turn became “hail, full of grace” (revised lectionary). The revised lectionary appeared in two stages (1998 and 2002).
The forthcoming fourth edition, according to the USCCB, aims

at making use of the best manuscript traditions available, translating as accurately as possible, and rendering the result in good contemporary English. In many ways it is a more literal translation than the original New American Bible and has attempted to be more consistent in rendering Hebrew (or Greek) words and idioms, especially in technical contexts, such as regulations for sacrifices. In translating the Psalter special effort was made to provide a smooth, rhythmic translation for easy singing or recitation and to retain the concrete imagery of the Hebrew. The NABRE is approved for private use and study. It will not be used for the Mass.

Source(s): these links will take you to other sites, in a new window.

• Revised Edition of New American Bible Approved for Publication, Will Be Available in Variety of Formats March 9 (USCCB)
• Bibles and Lectionaries (Adoremus Bulletin)
• Lectionary - New Edition for U.S. (EWTN)

What English Bible do you use?

Do you have a Bible at home? Do you read it regularly?

Have you more then one Bible version in the house? Which translation do you prefer?

Though the major religions of the world are founded upon the writings of men, we as Christians do believe that we have the Word of God brought to us by worldly man, but those writers say it are not their words, but the Holy Words of the Creator of this universe.

The Bible exists among us as one book and maintains one view of human nature from beginning to end. Yet it is in fact composed of more than 60 books, written by over 40 different authors, and its compilation extended from the days of Moses (1400 BC) to the days of the apostle John (end of 1st Century AD), a period of 1,500 years. Its writings are not just philosophical predictions. They are rooted in human history, dealing with actual nations and real people.

Consistently we do find in it the exposure of the natural tendencies of man, national pride, corrupt kings, self-indulgent desire for power and possessions, readiness to adopt other nations' idolatries, allied with a persistent rejection of the enlightened commandments of their God, the good but also the bad things they did, even of the writers. Everything was written down to educate the people of this world.

Those writings became translated in many languages so that everybody could read it in a tongue they could understand. But as men we have our preferences. So "what is your favourite?", is the question of this month.

Free Bible study, online or by mail. 
For more information, Click here! 

---

This month's survey question on This is your Bible.com:

What English Bible do you use?

KJV / AV The 1611 Authorised King James Version
NIV New International Version
ESV English Standard Bible
RSV / NRSV Revised Standard Bible
NLT - New Living Translation
Other
No preference

x  close

To find out why and how Christianity is different from all other religious belief systems in the world, click here to read: "The Divine Origin of the Bible"

Appointed to be read

There has never been such a choice of what to read and indeed how to read it. Either by means of the printed page or electronically, everybody wants our attention and usually our money. There is only one place where we can read about the unbreakable promises of God, and that is in the Bible. There is a special reason why English readers should seize the opportunity to read through the Bible in 2011.

Appointed to be read in the Churches is what was written in 1611 in a book that shook the world.
Barker’s printing house in Aldersgate Street, London, brought a major work on the market which opened a total new world for many people. Nobody could trick them in things which were not really written in that volumes work.
400 years ago in England the landmark was set for the Holy Bible containing the Old and New Testaments to be read over the many years by so many people of different tongues. Translated out of the original tongues: and with the former translations diligently compared and revised by His Majesty’s special command – Appointed to be read in the Churches it became a major working tool for many Bible students.

presents a year long a series tracing the the process of Bible translation through the ages, so you can see how the King James Version came about, and why it is important that you read the Bible for yourself. By the exposition readers can see the way in which God has worked through the centuries to preserve the gospel  message. It looks at the many translations in the light of time. Free and authoritative Latin translations, Anglo-Saxon versions, the inhibited free access to reading the Bible up to the liberation of the Word of God.



Please do find : Inspiration and Early Translations; Part One: The Bible, Appointed to be Read … in the Glad Tidings of January 2011.

“Glad Tidings” is not a newspaper devoted to tracking and reporting newsworthy events.
If it was it would need to be renamed “Bad Tidings!”, for newspapers do not allow much space for good news stories.
The purpose of that Christadelphian magazine is to draw attention to God’s plan and purpose for the world, which is longestablished, as His promise to Abraham makes clear.

NWT and what other scholars have to say to its critics

Example of appendix from New World Translation of The Holy Scriptures, study edition, Danish Dansk: Eksempel på tillæg i Ny-Verden Oversættelsen af De Hellige Skrifter, studieudgaven, dansk (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The NWT has its many critics, but time and again, these criticisms by biased opposers, who propagate half baked truths and even resort to out right lies at times, have been silenced many times, but they keep on coming back, as it there is absolutely no one who supports the NWT! To silence these lies, here below is a short list of scholars to recognise the truth worth of the NWT!
Below is a list of well qualified professionals, that the critics of the NWT will not show or admit to or show their flocks...!

Prof. Jason David BeDuhn:

"While it is difficult to quantify this sort of analysis, it can be said the NWT emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared."

-Greek Scholar in his book: "Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament"

Steven T. Byington:

Of the NWT, "If you are digging for excellent or suggestive renderings, this is among the richer mines."

-Christian Century, "Review of the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures"

Frederick Danker:

"Not to be snubbed is the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, Rendered from the Original by the New World Bible Translation Committee"

-"Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study"

Alan S. Duthie:

The "Jehovah's Witnesses' NWT,. .is certainly not 'filled with the heretical doctrines'...even though a few aberrations can be found...but the percentage of the whole Bible thus affected... does not reach even 0.1% of the whole, which is very far from 'full'.

-"How To Choose Your Bible Wisely"

Prof. Rolf Furuli:

"I read the English text of the NWT against the Hebrew text, word for word...the translators of the NWT have been extremely faithful both to their own translation principles and to the Hebrew text"

-lecturer in Semitic Languages at Oslo University

S. Maclean Gilmore:

"The New Testament edition was made by a committee...that possessed an unusual competence in Greek." -Andover Newton Quarterly

Edgar Goodspeed:

"I am...much pleased with the free, frank, and vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can testify." -Scholar and Bible Translator

Samuel Haas:

"This work indicates a great deal of effort and thought as well as considerable scholarship."

-Bible Scholar in "Journal of Biblical Literature"

C. Houtman:

"The New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses can survive the scrutiny of criticism."

-"Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrifl", [Dutch Theological Magazines]

Prof. Benjamin Kedar:

"I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that [the OT] reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible... Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language. .1 have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain."

-Professor of Jewish History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and has a Phd from Yale

Robert M. McCoy:
"The translation of the New Testament is evidence of the presence in the movement of scholars qualified to deal intelligently with the many problems of Biblical translation."

-"Andover Newton Quarterly"

Dr. [Prof.] Bruce Metzger:

"On the whole, one gains a tolerably good impression of the scholarly equipment of the translators."

-Professor at Princeton Theological Seminary and Scholar in Greek, OT Studies and NT Studies in "The Bible Translator"

James Parkinson:

"The Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation otters a relatively accurate translation from a different theological perspective." -Author of "How To Choose a Bible Translation"

J. D Phillips:

"Last week I purchased a copy of your New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures of which I take pride in being an owner. You have done a marvelous work...but you have made a marvelous step in the right direction, and I pray God that your Version will be used to His glory. What you have done for the Name alone is worth all the effort and cost!"

-J D. Phillips was a Church of Christ Minister who knew Hebrew and Koine Greek

Charles Francis Potter:

In "the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures...the anonymous translators have certainly rendered the best manuscript texts...with scholarly ability and acumen."

-The Faith Men Live By

William Carey Taylor:

The NT of the NWT contains "considerable scholarship"

-"The New Bible Pro and Con"

Alexander Thomson:

"The translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever scholars, who have sought to bring out as much of the true sense of the Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing."

-in "The Differentiator" (a private, published journal)

Prof. Allen Wikgren:

It is "independent reading of merit."

-Scholar on the NRSV committee, as well as on the committee which produced the UBS Greek text

Thomas N. Winter:

"The translation by the anonymous committee is thoroughly up to date and consistently accurate,..ln sum, when a witness comes to the door, the classicist, Greek student, or Bible student alike would do well to place an order." -Professor of Koine Greek at the University of Nebraska.

+++

2016 update (placement of related articles)

Related articles

• Written and translated by different men over thousands of years
• John 10:30 is the Best Verse Ever
• Can we trust the Gospel of John?
• The Jewish Messiah is the Antichrist (i.e. Satan)
• My life in cults
• Dissident, Not Devout, Catholic Tim Kaine Rejects the Revealed Truth About Marriage
• Old and newer King James Versions and other translations #4 Steps to the women&#8217;s bibles
• Old and newer King James Versions and other translations #5 Further steps to women&#8217;s bibles
• Authority from the One God to one mediator between God and men

The Divine name of the Creator

The Name of the Creator.
Do you know him?





Look at the comparison.

The NIV Leaving out the Divine Name of God for monetary reasons.

Brief introduction to translator preferences to the interpretation and use of the "Divine Name" (JWHW/YHWH) and, or use of surrogates within the Hebrew Bible, and Christian Greek Scriptures. New World Translation NWT, New International Version NIV Comparison.

The Metaphorical language of the Bible

To become a good Christian and to reach holiness it is essential to read the bible and to try to understand it. For some is the language of the Bible to old-fashioned. But for those we can only advise to look for a more contemporary translation. Today nobody in our Western world can bring in the excuse that he cannot find a Bible in a language he or she cannot understand. Everybody should be able to find several Bible translations on the market and one in a smoothly readable language which should be acceptable for that person. But one must take the biblical language used into account at reading the Holy Book.

On Saturday March 13 2010, god willing, the Dutch speaking Brethren in Christ shall keep their annual studies and meeting day in ‘t nieuw Kerkehuis, at the corner Daltonstraat/Leusderweg in Amersfoort. During that day we will take one of the most striking characteristics of biblical language use under eyes. It is the language which deters many people undeserved and where some have difficulty to come in to it.

Striking at the different denominations in Christianity is also how diverse people wish to approach those Biblical texts. Also the statements of the church communities lie sometimes far from each other, with the one which find that we need everything to take literally and the other one which find that it must be taken all figurative or as a tale.

On the study day the Dutch Brethren want show that it is a pity in fact that the figurative language and metaphors, which are characteristic for the Bible, are insufficiently recognized. Because it is just that metaphorical language that lets us to penetrate into the core of the biblical message. It is just the imagery language which that revives the book.

In the seminar the Brethren want to show three frequently used forms of picture language: the Parable, personalisation and the foreshadowing. It are the two last forms that ensure most problems in the church. Personalisation lets, as it happens, many believe that there is spoken of real people whereas it concerns individual characters, characteristic properties or situations. One gets also pictures which convert abstract terms into easily to understand (and recognisable!) key words. One must recognise them however. By personalisation, as it happens, many persons are confused or to found to mix the personages. Many cannot see or do not want to see the red wire which runs through the whole book.

The three forms of pictorial language can give us a deeper insight in truth and in the person of Christ Jesus. That are live pictures which provide the highest necessary insights, which we have necessary for a pure term of Jesus' position with respect to his Father and with respect to us as His children. But also for a pure insight in the real intention of the Mosaic law on the one hand, and the shortcomings of the Old Treaty on the other side. An insight that is necessary to be able to recognise what now exactly is the added value (and what not!) of the New Treaty in Christ, where our salvation eventually nevertheless depends on.

The Dutch Christadelphians want be supervisors of trainees who want to help us on getting a better insight to Bible reading.
 

It is, as it happens, this way only that we can become good bible readers when one has insight in the language use of those 66 books of the Holy Scriptures.

Everyone we would like to invite to attend a captivating study day and chance of making contact with other believing Christians and to gather sociably with bible study and two meals.

Dutch text / Nederlandse tekst >Studiedag rond Bijbelse Beeldtaal

Dutch aricles about this subject:

Zeggingskracht van beelden in de Bijbel #1 Uitnodiging
Zeggingskracht van beelden in de Bijbel #2 Vorm van beeldtaal
Zeggingskracht van beelden in de Bijbel #3 De Gelijkenis
Zeggingskracht van beelden in de Bijbel #4 Verpersoonlijking
Zeggingskracht van beelden in de Bijbel #5 Voorafschaduwing