Comment by godDLL | Hacker News Reader

Comment by godDLL | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Really? Not to offend the persuasion of any attendees (I do mean that, stop reading if your rage is easily focused), but did you try the Hebrew version? I have studied it, as part of my education, along with ancient Hebrew laws and such. The writing is unclear, terrible at times, poetic at times; the language is so simple as to appear broken. And nearly all of the story, morals, message, or poetic meaning you take away is your own,– because of how broken Biblical Hebrew is. Whatever you take away will end up being a by-product of you studying it, not a direct product.

Some 10+ years since, I can still read Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic, and I'm still not sure there was any direct product in there. So much so, that I call modern spoken Hebrew which is somewhat loosely based on Biblical Hebrew, – I call it Jibberish in my own mind, with a `j'. Like the one in Jihad, or "sacred struggle"; something inspired by—but completely unrelated—to the original scripture.

And the King James is even better still, having been translated to English from Greek by a German man. Particularly the Revelations is—at times—absolutely 4chan material, I find.

EDIT: ^holy\ war^sacred\ struggle

And the King James is even better still, having been translated to English from Greek by a German man

What? That's not true at all. It was translated by a committee of English scholars and clergy. It is also a landmark of literature and history that contains some of the finest English ever written.

Ooh, look, I am being wrong on the Internet. I am now ashamed to have remembered this incorrectly. Thank you for pointing out my error, I'll be sure to double check things I have only passing familiarity thereof in the future.

But you could have provided a link, like this one: http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html

EDIT: I'm not being sarcastic up there. I'm being sarcastic below here.

EDIT: and the historical/literary value remark is just plain balls.

"And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions. And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle. And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five months."

If that's not balls I don't know what is.

Nitpick - Jihad does not translate (in its original arabic) to "holy war". It translates to "struggle".

For someone who studied Scripture in its original language, you've still managed to hit my pet peeve of pluralizing the title of the scroll of Disclosure.

That's the part that I didn't study, it's the Christian part. It has no Hebrew source/prototype; the original is in Greek (AFAIK), and not taught in the Migdal Emeq boarding school for boys (as it is a jewish school).

EDIT: I read some King James for the shear lulz. And lulz to deliver it has.

I find the theory by Rene Girard to be quite rational explanation of what product the Bible contains. He is an apologist of Christianity - but what he writes is completely convincing for an agnostic like me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com