uhh...I'm still confused

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Hi Fidelity Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by cav on June 29, 2005 at 18:50:38:

In Reply to: Play by play posted by PS on June 29, 2005 at 15:17:36:

So a new king deflowered James and a libertine scholar sent a flowery message that someone put down in a bag?

Who's James, and what happened to the bag?

: : : : : What about Flowery New King James?

: : : : : I don't see the NKJ as flowery. It still has some thee here and there, but over all it is very readable. It is the version I use. When I pray I pray as me. I don't change my wording to make me sound more holy. God knows what I am. I've tried to fool Him, and it just doesn't work.

:
: : : I agree. The NKJV has no "thee" or "thou" anywhere that I remember; it is decidedly de-flowered and is a pretty tight translation all the way around. It is written in modern language without any flowery flourish untrue to the original. The Message Bible, on the other hand, is not a translation, but a very, VERY loose paraphrase in which the author takes great liberties with the original texts as he sees fit. No serious scholar would ever use it for anything. Now if the message bible inspires you, fine--you can surely use it. But don't bag on REAL translations, please. Thanks.

:
: : I don't get it. Did I miss anyone putting down the NKJ?

: Yes, Ken did. He called the NKJV "flowery," referring to the KJV flowery speech you mentioned in the previous post, and he clearly meant it in a similarly derogatory way. My reference to the Message Bible was because that is the paraphrase his church uses, and nobody who uses that kind of loose and inaccurate paraphrase has any business criticizing any real modern language translation.

: : I thought the thread was on prayer.

: Ken's comment wasn't.

: : Sorry if I gave the wrong impression. I don't think I have ever seen The Message Bible. I am in the dark here.

: That part wasn't directed at you.

: Hope this clears it up:

: Ken's commented on the NKJV being flowery, and you said it wasn't. I agreed with you (see my 1st sentence above). I was then responding to you in adding that the NKJV has no thee's and thou's (2nd sentence). I then went on to talk about the NKJV in relation to the paraphrase RLC regularly uses.

: Is this clearer?

: Are you having a hard day that makes it hard to focus? I have those regularly. ;-)

Follow Ups:

Oh yeah, how about now? PS 20:22:35 06/29/05 (5)
- Re: Oh yeah, how about now? tim o 08:46:52 06/30/05 (0)
- Insert Mel Brooks Reference Here kle2 08:04:46 06/30/05 (3)
  - obscure movie quote of the moment cav 08:11:57 06/30/05 (2)
    - Re: obscure movie quote of the moment PS 13:28:56 06/30/05 (1)
      - I knew you'd get it right off...any other guessers? cav 19:32:00 06/30/05 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: So a new king deflowered James and a libertine scholar sent a flowery message that someone put down in a bag? : Who's James, and what happened to the bag? : : : : : : : What about Flowery New King James? : : : : : : I don't see the NKJ as flowery. It still has some thee here and there, but over all it is very readable. It is the version I use. When I pray I pray as me. I don't change my wording to make me sound more holy. God knows what I am. I've tried to fool Him, and it just doesn't work. : : : : : : I agree. The NKJV has no "thee" or "thou" anywhere that I remember; it is decidedly de-flowered and is a pretty tight translation all the way around. It is written in modern language without any flowery flourish untrue to the original. The Message Bible, on the other hand, is not a translation, but a very, VERY loose paraphrase in which the author takes great liberties with the original texts as he sees fit. No serious scholar would ever use it for anything. Now if the message bible inspires you, fine--you can surely use it. But don't bag on REAL translations, please. Thanks. : : : : : I don't get it. Did I miss anyone putting down the NKJ? : : Yes, Ken did. He called the NKJV "flowery," referring to the KJV flowery speech you mentioned in the previous post, and he clearly meant it in a similarly derogatory way. My reference to the Message Bible was because that is the paraphrase his church uses, and nobody who uses that kind of loose and inaccurate paraphrase has any business criticizing any real modern language translation. : : : I thought the thread was on prayer. : : Ken's comment wasn't. : : : Sorry if I gave the wrong impression. I don't think I have ever seen The Message Bible. I am in the dark here. : : That part wasn't directed at you. : : Hope this clears it up: : : Ken's commented on the NKJV being flowery, and you said it wasn't. I agreed with you (see my 1st sentence above). I was then responding to you in adding that the NKJV has no thee's and thou's (2nd sentence). I then went on to talk about the NKJV in relation to the paraphrase RLC regularly uses. : : Is this clearer? : : Are you having a hard day that makes it hard to focus? I have those regularly. ;-)

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Hi Fidelity Message Board ] [ FAQ ]