http://www.cinematical.com/2008/01/15/the-tom-cruise-recruitment-video-scientology-tried-to-hide/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ol1I3E3-pHY
Sounds a lot like you could insert Christianity wherever they talk about scientology in most parts of this video. I'm sure Cruise leaves a lot out and I'm sure there's a lot they're not telling Cruise.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Sunday, January 6, 2008
Languages of Versions of the Bible
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ConfessionsOfAnUnchurchedBeliever/~3/211888086/something-more-to-share.html
Some say the KJV is better because of its language. It is true that the modern English language seems to be going somewhat downhill with a lot of people - not that that's a bad thing completely - it's just that there won't be so much beauty to words and appreciation for words if the English language eventually turns into text message and IM language where words aren't fully spelled out.
I believe that proper English speech and grammar are very important and should have more importance in schools (even though I'm not the best at practicing them - I wish I were). This said, some people might prefer the KJV because they think of it as proper English and don't like the way newer versions are cutting down the text, like the NLT.
I appreciate the KJV even more for its language because it's part of history and I think the language is beautiful. Besides, I think that reading and interpreting (or gaining understanding from what you read) should not always be easy. If you have a harder time reading the KJV, maybe it will motivate you that much more to look for its meaning and search for God's purpose in it.
A version is not more or less accurate based on its language and whether or not it's more relative to the current day. Much of the Bible seems to be irrelevant to modern day, but it isn't (that's another topic in itself). What we should base the accuracy of a version on is its content. How much of it has been changed? How accurate are the changes? Is it translated or paraphrased? etc.
Some say the KJV is better because of its language. It is true that the modern English language seems to be going somewhat downhill with a lot of people - not that that's a bad thing completely - it's just that there won't be so much beauty to words and appreciation for words if the English language eventually turns into text message and IM language where words aren't fully spelled out.
I believe that proper English speech and grammar are very important and should have more importance in schools (even though I'm not the best at practicing them - I wish I were). This said, some people might prefer the KJV because they think of it as proper English and don't like the way newer versions are cutting down the text, like the NLT.
I appreciate the KJV even more for its language because it's part of history and I think the language is beautiful. Besides, I think that reading and interpreting (or gaining understanding from what you read) should not always be easy. If you have a harder time reading the KJV, maybe it will motivate you that much more to look for its meaning and search for God's purpose in it.
A version is not more or less accurate based on its language and whether or not it's more relative to the current day. Much of the Bible seems to be irrelevant to modern day, but it isn't (that's another topic in itself). What we should base the accuracy of a version on is its content. How much of it has been changed? How accurate are the changes? Is it translated or paraphrased? etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)