|
|
Post by zionlion on Sept 1, 2009 17:56:31 GMT -8
I've been thinking about getting one of these or both but have heard bad things about each. Would appreciate any advice members here would care to share. Thanks  Shalom |
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 2, 2009 7:20:55 GMT -8
i have a CJB- i was very disappointed with Stern's work. I dont like his JNT at all, with the exceptions of the names he gives peopole, and things like naming the "tzitzit" instead of "hem." but other than this, i am kindof  . the main reason is because of how he translateds (upo nomon) " under the law" and (erga nomou) "the works of the Law." He translates it with this lengthy phrase that is does not even explain what Shaul was saying! just as Yeshua chose the phrase "kingdom of god" to embody his teachigs, so Shaul chose to embody his teachings in those two phrases. its just like me going in and writing what i think the meaning of kingdom of God is! as for the HRV, never heard of it. but i will look it up, and when/if i buy one, i will tell you what i think about it. i say stick to the Message or NLT for paraphrase. Or JPS. and if you want literal, use KJV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, or the old JPS. i suggest NRSV and NASB. maybe all these MJBI UJCI, etc can put together a team of messianic scholars to translate the bible. shalom- john |
|
|
|
Post by zionlion on Sept 2, 2009 17:51:53 GMT -8
Thanks John,
The HRV is the Hebraic Roots Version.
I've used the NASB for many years but I want a Bible that transliterates
Hebrew names to English. For example, instead of Mary - Miriam, or James - Jacob. I've been told that the HRV does this. And I do want literal.
Appreciate your input.
Shalom
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 3, 2009 15:32:27 GMT -8
than HRV would be the best choice. I used Bible gateway and christianity dot com to look at it. it is very good.
i wish to make a bible translation when i get older, a literal one because Stern already provided a praphrse. Illl make sure you have one when i publish it, lol. really.
shalom- john
|
|
|
|
Post by zionlion on Sept 3, 2009 19:12:41 GMT -8
I'll look forward to it, John. Just remember; I'm not getting any younger.  Shalom |
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 7, 2009 14:15:03 GMT -8
lol. okay.
what do you think would make a good translation? parashot readings with haftarot and aliyot? transliterations? words like "tzitzit" instead of "hem"? etc.
shalom- john
|
|
|
|
Post by zionlion on Sept 7, 2009 16:16:27 GMT -8
I'll get back with you on that. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 8, 2009 2:32:18 GMT -8
lol okay...
|
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Sept 8, 2009 12:47:08 GMT -8
lol. okay. words like "tzitzit" instead of "hem"? etc. shalom- john Just don't fall into the silliness that the CJB fell into. Here is an "outsiders" view. I looked at a couple of verses in the CJB and saw the ridiculous usage of Yiddish terms that did not even exist in the time of Jesus ("shmooze", "nudnik", etc.). It looked just plain silly. Also, if one is translating "hem" as "tzitzit" just to make it appear more "authentically" Jewish, that is improper. Translate it as it appears in the original text. To me, trying to impose a "flavor" into scripture that is not there is not a wise idea. |
|
|
|
Post by zionlion on Sept 8, 2009 20:27:50 GMT -8
Hi tonga, Somehow, I get the feeling that you'd advise me not to waste my money on a CJB. Am I right?  Shalom |
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Sept 9, 2009 8:15:25 GMT -8
Hi tonga, Somehow, I get the feeling that you'd advise me not to waste my money on a CJB. Am I right? Shalom Like I said, I've only read a couple of verses from it, and if that is any indication of how it's been translated, I'd be just a littlebit suspicous of it...but then again, I'm an "outsider" looking in... |
|
|
|
Post by zionlion on Sept 9, 2009 10:50:20 GMT -8
Well, you've read more of it than I have so your opinion is helpful. |
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 9, 2009 11:14:11 GMT -8
i agree on the yiddish terms- thats not just silly, i would go so far as to call it stupid. but the fact that it is a paraphrase changes the expectations for me. i want to go for a "flavor" on a paraphrase, but a literal translation would be the first thing that i present. i am interested (tonga) on what verses you rely on CJB for? also, what does everyone thing about David sterns translation in hebrews 8:6: "given as  "... i do not know greek, but what he says sound convincing... but again, i need another voice- from a scholar. shalom |
|
tonga
Full Member
Posts: 243
|
Post by tonga on Sept 9, 2009 12:28:27 GMT -8
i am interested (tonga) on what verses you rely on CJB for? Oh, I rely upon it for absolutely nothing. I don't hold by the NT, and I wouldn't trust it's translation of the Tanach for anything. I saw several verses from it posted on line somewhere, including the use of yiddish, and I couldn't believe what I read. So I just looked at a couple of places on line to verify that those verses were correctly quoted from the CJB, which they were. I thought originally it was a joke |
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 9, 2009 14:36:44 GMT -8
for the most part it is, and i wish he wouldnt have used yiddish- thats unscholarly; yes it is a paraphrase, but come on! plus, his PhD is in business, not semetic studies or such. and i would rather have a team of translators.
but yeah... its still okay.
shalom- john
|
|
and one ordinance for you and for the alien who sojourns with you. [Numbers 15:16]
. the main reason is because of how he translateds (upo nomon) " under the law" and (erga nomou) "the works of the Law." He translates it with this lengthy phrase that is does not even explain what Shaul was saying! just as Yeshua chose the phrase "kingdom of god" to embody his teachigs, so Shaul chose to embody his teachings in those two phrases. its just like me going in and writing what i think the meaning of kingdom of God is!
