Resurrexi Posted April 4, 2006 Author Posted April 4, 2006 Anyone going to respond? Oh, and by the way, the choice "Protestant Inclusive Bible" was meant to be "Protestant Inclusive Language Bible".
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 basically i (like any trad) would chose the Clementine Vulgate.
Aloysius Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 #1 Protestants don't make bibles in Latin #2 Inclusive Language has never been a latin language problem, because latin has a precise neutral gender
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 [quote name='Aloysius' date='Apr 3 2006, 08:18 PM']#1 Protestants don't make bibles in Latin #2 Inclusive Language has never been a latin language problem, because latin has a precise neutral gender [right][snapback]934667[/snapback][/right] [/quote]
Era Might Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 (edited) The Greek is better than both of them. Edited April 4, 2006 by Era Might
Resurrexi Posted April 4, 2006 Author Posted April 4, 2006 [quote]The Greek is better than both of them.[/quote] no, the Clementine Vulgate is better than the Greek, Hebrew and all other languages combined! :
Paladin Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Apr 3 2006, 09:34 PM']no, the Clementine Vulgate is better than the Greek, Hebrew and all other languages combined! : [right][snapback]934738[/snapback][/right] [/quote] How ya figure?
Brother Adam Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Apr 3 2006, 09:34 PM']no, the Clementine Vulgate is better than the Greek, Hebrew and all other languages combined! : [right][snapback]934738[/snapback][/right] [/quote] St. Paul? Yes? I'm sorry, but the language that the Holy Spirit is guiding you to write the Sacred Writ in is not good enough. Says who? A phatmasser. A who? -- Moses? Yes? ...
Resurrexi Posted April 4, 2006 Author Posted April 4, 2006 Actually, I would consider myself more of a Fisheater than a Phatmasser, but I hold dual citizenship
Brother Adam Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 [url="http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/gettext.html"]http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/gettext.html[/url]
Brother Adam Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 (edited) [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Apr 3 2006, 09:45 PM']Actually, I would consider myself more of a Fisheater than a Phatmasser, but I hold dual citizenship [right][snapback]934755[/snapback][/right] [/quote] regardless, the Bible was not penned in Latin. Jesus did not speak Latin. The early Church did not say mass in Latin, nor did they pray in Latin. Latin was the vulgar language that the Bible was translated to later on. Edited April 4, 2006 by Brother Adam
Resurrexi Posted April 4, 2006 Author Posted April 4, 2006 [quote]regardless, the Bible was not penned in Latin. Jesus did not speak Latin. The early Church did not say mass in Latin, nor did they pray in Latin. Latin was the vulgar language that the Bible was translated to later on.[/quote] Jesus was/is omnipotent, so of course he knew Latin and may have spoken it to the Roman dudes at during his Passion (as he did in the movie with the same name). The Church had switched to Latin by AD 300. Latin was one of the lauguages by Christ as he died, which sanctified it and made it non-vulgar.
Brother Adam Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 (edited) [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Apr 3 2006, 10:03 PM']Jesus was/is omnipotent, so of course he knew Latin and may have spoken it to the Roman dudes at during his Passion (as he did in the movie with the same name). The Church had switched to Latin by AD 300. Latin was one of the lauguages by Christ as he died, which sanctified it and made it non-vulgar. [right][snapback]934789[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Do you know what a KJVO is? Btw, vulgar means common. You know. Vulgate. And did you see the link I gave you? Don't say I ain't ever give folks in schism nothing, for those that are. Edited April 4, 2006 by Brother Adam
Resurrexi Posted April 4, 2006 Author Posted April 4, 2006 I'm not in schism! I am not an any way, shape or form affiliated with the SSPX. Thnx for the link tho.
Brother Adam Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Apr 3 2006, 10:21 PM']I'm not in schism! I am not an any way, shape or form affiliated with the SSPX. Thnx for the link tho. [right][snapback]934815[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I didn't say you were. But there are some here who are.
Akalyte Posted September 27, 2006 Posted September 27, 2006 Why does Stthomasmore have the "hello I dont rep the church" sign but Eutychus doesnt? Another proof that protestant are being treated better than traditionalists. perhaps? I think someone might want to fix that.
Cam42 Posted September 27, 2006 Posted September 27, 2006 [quote name='Akalyte' post='1076453' date='Sep 27 2006, 07:47 AM'] Why does Stthomasmore have the "hello I dont rep the church" sign but Eutychus doesnt? Another proof that protestant are being treated better than traditionalists. perhaps? I think someone might want to fix that. [/quote] Or perhaps dUSt just hasn't gotten around to the latest round of phishys......but it could be me......
Akalyte Posted September 27, 2006 Posted September 27, 2006 Yeah but I thought other moderators could fix those things? Stthomasmore says he's not schismatic, yet he is still "seperated brehren". ok well sorry for the thread hijack. I'll go with the newly, newly revised and revisable, new american liberal edition. lol
Didymus Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 how was this threads last post listed as Sep.27th?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now