The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

For those deep thinkers out there.
User avatar
Jocose
a very large Chinese lizard man named Wu
a very large Chinese lizard man named Wu
Posts: 22547
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Moonbase Alpha
Contact:

The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by Jocose » Tue Dec 11, 2018 8:59 pm

The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Wowza
"And for Freds sake, DO NOT point anyone towards CPS or you'll put them off of both Christianity and pipe smoking forever." ~ FredS

"Other vessels will work, but the idealality of the Spam can cannot be contested." ~ JimVH

"The yutz is silly Jocose. I have him foed yet still have to view his stupid and annoying thread titles." ~ Goose55

User avatar
Jocose
a very large Chinese lizard man named Wu
a very large Chinese lizard man named Wu
Posts: 22547
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Moonbase Alpha
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by Jocose » Tue Dec 11, 2018 9:01 pm

I thought that we've been over this before [the meaning of lead us not into temptation]
"And for Freds sake, DO NOT point anyone towards CPS or you'll put them off of both Christianity and pipe smoking forever." ~ FredS

"Other vessels will work, but the idealality of the Spam can cannot be contested." ~ JimVH

"The yutz is silly Jocose. I have him foed yet still have to view his stupid and annoying thread titles." ~ Goose55

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19281
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by hugodrax » Tue Dec 11, 2018 9:30 pm

He isn’t the greatest Latin scholar. Have some fun and look at all the possibilities for translation of Amoris laetitia. One of them is “the joy of lust.”
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
DepartedLight
Likes Licking Guns
Likes Licking Guns
Posts: 28896
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Tobacco Fairy HQ, North Carolina

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by DepartedLight » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:11 pm

The Article wrote:According to the Daily Express, experts have been studying the biblical text for 16 years and recently concluded, “from a theological, pastoral and stylistic viewpoint,” the centuries-old wording used in English translations of the Bible is incorrect.
God forbid the Bishop of the Latin Rite attempt to mold ancient teaching into a better understanding for us lowly English speaking dorks; who just also happen to be part of The Church.Really?
DL Jake

Feel free to use that quote in your signature. Stanley76 » 22 Feb 2019 21:50

User avatar
Jocose
a very large Chinese lizard man named Wu
a very large Chinese lizard man named Wu
Posts: 22547
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Moonbase Alpha
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by Jocose » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:13 pm

DepartedLight wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:11 pm
The Article wrote:According to the Daily Express, experts have been studying the biblical text for 16 years and recently concluded, “from a theological, pastoral and stylistic viewpoint,” the centuries-old wording used in English translations of the Bible is incorrect.
What else in "incorrect?"
"And for Freds sake, DO NOT point anyone towards CPS or you'll put them off of both Christianity and pipe smoking forever." ~ FredS

"Other vessels will work, but the idealality of the Spam can cannot be contested." ~ JimVH

"The yutz is silly Jocose. I have him foed yet still have to view his stupid and annoying thread titles." ~ Goose55

User avatar
coco
Uniquely Duggish
Uniquely Duggish
Posts: 29756
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Sweet Home Alabama
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by coco » Wed Dec 12, 2018 6:23 am

It is possible for a translation to be incorrect. It is also possible for a translation to need rewording for greater clarity.
"Like a gold ring in a pig's snout is a cob with a forever lucite stem." (Pipverbs 1:1)
"No more signatures that quote other CPS members." - Thunk

User avatar
Winton
Minister of Dad Jokes
Minister of Dad Jokes
Posts: 1485
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2014 3:23 pm

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by Winton » Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:10 am

Language change is real. Words change meaning over time. "GET OFF MY LAWN!" has a slightly different meaning now. I believe that scholars have figured out what the autographs (original documents) said. But we no longer talk in that language (Greek, Hebrew or Aromatic). Thus, it is necessary, every generation or two, to update the translation, to make sure that it still communicates the original message to the present generation.

Obviously, we can still expect Baptists and Presbyterians to continue to argue over what BAPTIZO means, until our Lord returns in the clouds. But that is interpretation, not translation.

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19281
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by hugodrax » Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:31 am

Pay no attention to Jo. Coming from a religion that uses a 9th century dialect of a bunch of Thessalonian Greeks, Old Church Slavonic, he knows that the literal translation of the Lord’s Prayer from Old Church Slavonic to English goes like this:

Our Father
Thou who art in heaven,
May become thy empire,
As in heaven, also on earth
Our super substantial bread give us this day
And release us of our debts
As we release our debtors
And do not lead us to the temptation,
But deliver us from the evils.

And that’s the version he uses, each and every day. Jocose is nothing if not a traditionalist.

My own belief is that he’s just trying to distract from the fact the Orthodox are schisming again. This article in
The Atlantic suggests it might become a world wide phenomenon:

Ukraine’s Spiritual Split from Russia Could Trigger Global Schism

I mean, you’d think that earthly politics wouldn’t cause a break in spiritual communion, would you? I mean, this is God we’re talking about. Moscow doesn’t want to be the new Rome.

Oh. Russia Breaks Communion With Ukraine, Everybody Else In Awkward Position

Jo, our very own Russian planter of fake news. You know why he’s so weird? He works for the Kremlin. :lol:
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14084
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by tuttle » Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:14 am

Jocose wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:13 pm
DepartedLight wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:11 pm
The Article wrote:According to the Daily Express, experts have been studying the biblical text for 16 years and recently concluded, “from a theological, pastoral and stylistic viewpoint,” the centuries-old wording used in English translations of the Bible is incorrect.
What else in "incorrect?"
coco wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 6:23 am
It is possible for a translation to be incorrect. It is also possible for a translation to need rewording for greater clarity.
We have been over this before, when the story came out that the pope was considering a change.

I have no issue with translations being updated for clarification, but I do have a problem if it's done on the basis of whether or not the translation is correct. Here we have a translation (lead us not into temptation) that, while it may or may not be in need of some clarity, is not incorrect.

An article by a Catholic Italian and English translator Anthony Esolen (Why We Shouldn't Change the Lord's Prayer) more or less reveals why the translation is not an incorrect translation.

If they spent 16 years studying this specific text and if it's true that they have come to the conclusion that the translation is 'incorrect', it's a bunch of crap. And if they simply mean that it is more clear for modern ears, then don't say it's incorrect. You'd think a group that spent 16 years studying to clarify wouldn't be so careless with how they word their reasoning.

The other reasons they might conclude it is incorrect has nothing to do with the translation and more to do with the theology, which seems to be more along the lines that the pope is pushing. He reasons that God doesn't lead people to temptation and therefore the request to God not to lead us into temptation doesn't quite fit with what we know of God's character. But even still, if the text specifically says as much, shouldn't the burden be on the teachers rather than the translators? If it's a text we should wrestle with rather than change to fit our scruples. Translating it away from the correct text to fit our theology is a dangerous path, even if the theology is sound.

Point is, "lead us not into temptation" is not incorrect. If anyone says otherwise, they are either mistaken, lying, or have another agenda (motives may be pure or not). In this case, it's rather eyebrow raising.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 20363
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by wosbald » Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:24 am

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:14 am
Jocose wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:13 pm
DepartedLight wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:11 pm
The Article wrote:According to the Daily Express, experts have been studying the biblical text for 16 years and recently concluded, “from a theological, pastoral and stylistic viewpoint,” the centuries-old wording used in English translations of the Bible is incorrect.
What else in "incorrect?"
coco wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 6:23 am

It is possible for a translation to be incorrect. It is also possible for a translation to need rewording for greater clarity.
[…]

If they spent 16 years studying this specific text and if it's true that they have come to the conclusion that the translation is 'incorrect', it's a bunch of crap. And if they simply mean that it is more clear for modern ears, then don't say it's incorrect. You'd think a group that spent 16 years studying to clarify wouldn't be so careless with how they word their reasoning.

[…]

Point is, "lead us not into temptation" is not incorrect. If anyone says otherwise, they are either mistaken, lying, or have another agenda (motives may be pure or not). In this case, it's rather eyebrow raising.
AFAICT through a cursory googling, only CBN (the linked article's source) has used the term "incorrect".

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14084
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by tuttle » Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:39 am

wosbald wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:24 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:14 am
Jocose wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:13 pm
DepartedLight wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:11 pm
The Article wrote:According to the Daily Express, experts have been studying the biblical text for 16 years and recently concluded, “from a theological, pastoral and stylistic viewpoint,” the centuries-old wording used in English translations of the Bible is incorrect.
What else in "incorrect?"
coco wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 6:23 am

It is possible for a translation to be incorrect. It is also possible for a translation to need rewording for greater clarity.
[…]

If they spent 16 years studying this specific text and if it's true that they have come to the conclusion that the translation is 'incorrect', it's a bunch of crap. And if they simply mean that it is more clear for modern ears, then don't say it's incorrect. You'd think a group that spent 16 years studying to clarify wouldn't be so careless with how they word their reasoning.

[…]

Point is, "lead us not into temptation" is not incorrect. If anyone says otherwise, they are either mistaken, lying, or have another agenda (motives may be pure or not). In this case, it's rather eyebrow raising.
AFAICT through a cursory googling, only CBN (the linked article's source) has used the term "incorrect".
Well bad on CBN then.

But I did go back and read the original article when this first came out last year that prompted me to start a similar thread (article: Pope Francis calls for Lord’s Prayer translation to be changed and while he doesn't say it's incorrect, he does say it isn't a good translation.
the Pope said the traditional phrasing is “not a good translation”.

“I am the one who falls. It’s not him pushing me into temptation to then see how I have fallen,” he said. “A father doesn’t do that, a father helps you to get up immediately. It’s Satan who leads us into temptation, that’s his department.”
I guess we could quibble whether 'not a good translation' is on par with 'incorrect', though I'd be generous enough to say you can have one and not the other. This does lend credence to my illustration that it might not have much to do with the actual translation itself as much as it does the theology. I still say that translating away from a more correct translation in order to fit a certain theology (good or bad) is bad form.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 20363
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by wosbald » Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:59 am

+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:39 am
[…]

… I still say that translating away from a more correct translation in order to fit a certain theology (good or bad) is bad form.
So, would that be your Godded-up way of saying "I don't like that."?

:dance:

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19281
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by hugodrax » Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:02 am

wosbald wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:59 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:39 am
[…]

… I still say that translating away from a more correct translation in order to fit a certain theology (good or bad) is bad form.
So, would that be your Godded-up way of saying "I don't like that."?

:dance:
I don't know about tuttle, but that's my thought about my initial reaction. Am I attached to the way I learned it and have said countless times, or do I actually have a doctrinal problem with it. I fear it's the former.
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14084
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by tuttle » Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:13 am

wosbald wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:59 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:39 am
[…]

… I still say that translating away from a more correct translation in order to fit a certain theology (good or bad) is bad form.
So, would that be your Godded-up way of saying "I don't like that."?

:dance:
How so? Seems like a reasonable way to say I don't like that.

It's the same reaction I have when Reverend BillyJoeBob from yer local Independent Baptist Church only uses his own translation of grape juice even though the Greek says otherwise in order to say Jesus didn't drink intoxicating beverages.

It's the same reaction I have when Pastor Deloris Sheman from yer local rainbow allied Freelove Presbyterian Church uses updated translations to niggle away all of that awful outdated patriarchal language that rears its ugly head throughout Scripture.

BillyJoeBob and Deloris are wrong to move away from the correct translation to fit their theology. The pope is wrong. It's not a bad translation. It's the words of Christ in all their glorious mystery.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19281
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by hugodrax » Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:18 am

tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:13 am
wosbald wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:59 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:39 am
[…]

… I still say that translating away from a more correct translation in order to fit a certain theology (good or bad) is bad form.
So, would that be your Godded-up way of saying "I don't like that."?

:dance:
How so? Seems like a reasonable way to say I don't like that.

It's the same reaction I have when Reverend BillyJoeBob from yer local Independent Baptist Church only uses his own translation of grape juice even though the Greek says otherwise in order to say Jesus didn't drink intoxicating beverages.

It's the same reaction I have when Pastor Deloris Sheman from yer local rainbow allied Freelove Presbyterian Church uses updated translations to niggle away all of that awful outdated patriarchal language that rears its ugly head throughout Scripture.

BillyJoeBob and Deloris are wrong to move away from the correct translation to fit their theology. The pope is wrong. It's not a bad translation. It's the words of Christ in all their glorious mystery.
Christ spoke English?

You're a lot more legalistic than you let on to be, brother.
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14084
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by tuttle » Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:21 am

hugodrax wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:18 am
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:13 am
wosbald wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:59 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:39 am
[…]

… I still say that translating away from a more correct translation in order to fit a certain theology (good or bad) is bad form.
So, would that be your Godded-up way of saying "I don't like that."?

:dance:
How so? Seems like a reasonable way to say I don't like that.

It's the same reaction I have when Reverend BillyJoeBob from yer local Independent Baptist Church only uses his own translation of grape juice even though the Greek says otherwise in order to say Jesus didn't drink intoxicating beverages.

It's the same reaction I have when Pastor Deloris Sheman from yer local rainbow allied Freelove Presbyterian Church uses updated translations to niggle away all of that awful outdated patriarchal language that rears its ugly head throughout Scripture.

BillyJoeBob and Deloris are wrong to move away from the correct translation to fit their theology. The pope is wrong. It's not a bad translation. It's the words of Christ in all their glorious mystery.
Christ spoke English?

You're a lot more legalistic than you let on to be, brother.
:lol:

With that pasty white mouth of his, of course he spoke English!

King James English only, mind you.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19281
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by hugodrax » Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:44 am

tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:21 am
hugodrax wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:18 am
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:13 am
wosbald wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:59 am
+JMJ+
tuttle wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:39 am
[…]

… I still say that translating away from a more correct translation in order to fit a certain theology (good or bad) is bad form.
So, would that be your Godded-up way of saying "I don't like that."?

:dance:
How so? Seems like a reasonable way to say I don't like that.

It's the same reaction I have when Reverend BillyJoeBob from yer local Independent Baptist Church only uses his own translation of grape juice even though the Greek says otherwise in order to say Jesus didn't drink intoxicating beverages.

It's the same reaction I have when Pastor Deloris Sheman from yer local rainbow allied Freelove Presbyterian Church uses updated translations to niggle away all of that awful outdated patriarchal language that rears its ugly head throughout Scripture.

BillyJoeBob and Deloris are wrong to move away from the correct translation to fit their theology. The pope is wrong. It's not a bad translation. It's the words of Christ in all their glorious mystery.
Christ spoke English?

You're a lot more legalistic than you let on to be, brother.
:lol:

With that pasty white mouth of his, of course he spoke English!

King James English only, mind you.
:lol: I suspected as much.

Like I said, I'm torn. Before I can take a side, I need to be doggone sure my own preferences are removed from the situation.

No matter what happens, it's safe to say I'll probably subconsciously say the old version like I do now most times with the Nicene Creed, the Dominus Vobiscum, the Non Sum Dignes and the St Michael's Prayer. I doubt whether I'll shout the old version like Tolkien.

Remember:

Early Christian's Hated the Vernacular Latin Mass, Preferred Original Greek
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
Del
Hot Legs
Hot Legs
Posts: 39113
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by Del » Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:45 pm

Simplest solution: Pray the Lord's Prayer in Latin.

The specific line is: Et ne nos inducas in tentationem

It's not hard to learn. We pray (chant) the Pater Noster together in our parish, every Mass.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19281
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by hugodrax » Wed Dec 12, 2018 2:22 pm

Del wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:45 pm
Simplest solution: Pray the Lord's Prayer in Latin.

The specific line is: Et ne nos inducas in tentationem

It's not hard to learn. We pray (chant) the Pater Noster together in our parish, every Mass.
Do you prefer the supersubstantialum of the Latin Vulgate or the quotidianum of the 1962 Roman Missal?

Translations have always differed, folks. :lol:
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
Del
Hot Legs
Hot Legs
Posts: 39113
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The Pope can re-translate the Bible now?

Post by Del » Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:16 pm

hugodrax wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 2:22 pm
Del wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:45 pm
Simplest solution: Pray the Lord's Prayer in Latin.

The specific line is: Et ne nos inducas in tentationem

It's not hard to learn. We pray (chant) the Pater Noster together in our parish, every Mass.
Do you prefer the supersubstantialum of the Latin Vulgate or the quotidianum of the 1962 Roman Missal?

Translations have always differed, folks. :lol:
Oh wow! I didn't know about that!

Supersubstantialum is a heckuva lot better than quotidianum!

Who wants daily bread when he can have super-substantial bread?
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

Post Reply