Getting off topic, but what the heck... (Re: [sword-devel] some more new Bible modules)

[Paul Gear]

Jerry Hastings wrote:

> >SNIP
> >Concordant Literal New Testament (locked) -- I'm not actually sure about
> >this one.  It has a 1926 copyright, so could it be in the clear?
> >SNIP
>
> First, this is one that will raise some eyebrows if it is not in the
> questionable section. See http://www.1john57.com/literalerror.htm .

I'm not sure that citing that URL is the most convincing way of
demonstrating that the CLV is unorthodox.  ;-)

> ...
> Third, it is an intriguing translation for comparisons, but the doctrinal
> bias and some translation method warts need to be taken into account when
> using.

This is the more serious problem with the CLV, IMO.  The very basis of the
translation is the idea that words can be simply transferred from one
language to another with (almost) absolute consistency, which is a
proposition that is very difficult to support from a linguistic perspective.

(I thought about rambling on here with examples that support the above
statement, but i think i'll refrain for now.  Very unlike me, i know - i
mustn't be well.  :-)

Paul
http://www.bigfoot.com/~paulgear