Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by UZThD, May 18, 2005.
Acts 28:13, "We fetched a compass." (KJV) Wasn't the compass invented much later?
— that is, proceeded circuitously, or tacked, working to windward probably, and availing themselves of the sinuosities of the coast, the wind not being favorable [Smith]. What follows confirms this.
Why when beating the bush do you fetch a compass? Just go ahead and say what you mean brother, then everyone can get a good hit in and feel spiritual and we can move on to edifying conversations perhaps.
"Go ahead and say what you mean...so we can move on to edifying conversations"
um...yes. But it appears to me that many posts here are not edifying even if one says what he means. And, you certainly are not chained to this one, are you?
Besides, I did encroach on my meaning, "IF they HAD said 'circle' , it would be clearer ; perhaps 'compass' was no miraculous translation."
IMO, one way to learn is to observe, question, gather data, , answer , and apply.
A observation is made: "The KJV in Acts 28 uses the word 'compass. '"
A datum is made: "Compass does not mean the modern instrument , it means 'to circle around '. "
Now, what you are troubled about is : " Where's the question? Where's the answer? Where's the application? Be clear so I can get my 'hit' in."
But these which are lacking in my post are found both in inferential knowledge and in data gathering. Inferentially, IF the translation " compass" is unclear, what does that mean?
IMO, edification is not just by the effects of trying to push our positions down the closed throats of the brethren or by getting quick and easy answers to questions which really are very complex.
Edification can simply be thinking about an observation.
Well, you know what they say about opinions. I'm glad you have one, but I don't see anything in your recent posts other than a subtle attempt to engender strife in a forum that is otherwise free from such disputes. There is a place for it, but it isn't here.
A compas is an instrument containing a freely suspended magnetic element which displays the direction of the horizontal component of the Earth's magnetic field at the point of observation. The magnetic compass is an old Chinese invention, probaly first made in China during the Qin dynasty (221-206 B.C.).
So the magnetic compass could well have been on the ship. Later technology refined it of course, but the problem early navigators always had was measuring distance east - west
Well, here are my recent posts:
In seminaries, I've been urging that accredited programs of study or their equivalents in terms of rigor and utility be chosen. I did not cause strife there between RA and UA. If you deny that, prove it.
In translations, I've joined on the side of MV. But the strife certsainly was there. If you deny that, prove it.
In Bible study, I raised the ques of the begetting of the Son. Where was the strife.
Yes, Carl and I had a go re Greek and so forth. THERE was strife. BUT in another thread Carl and I got along fine.
Now, you claim "This forum w-out me is free from disputes"? I'll meet you in the thread: FREE
The magnetic compass was not used and, for the most part, not known in the Roman World.
This is one of the "sales pitch" passages of the New KJV over the old. When asked, 98% of the 1000 college seniors reading that passage assumed they got a compass for ashore.
That is a perfectly good way for the 21st Century mind to understand 17th Century English. Compass (drawing a circle) is obviously still used today - I assume in math classes.
But the wording of the verse and "test" of this passage PROVED the need for updating the AV into the New KJV. At least, that's what their pitch was . . .
A common use of "compass" as a verb was to encircle, surround, or traverse in a roundabout path which brought one back to his starting point. As a noun, it meant a circular or near-circular path or boundary. This is simply another example of a word used in the AV whose meaning has changed. It's not incorrect to fetch a compass as was used in the AV, but such usage in a modern work would be confusing to say the least.
And let's not forget "fetch". It once meant "to reach by sailing" among other things, so the passage in Acts meant they sailed in a circle. I've seen in more than one book that the Mayflower "fetched up" at what's now Plymouth.
Again, such usage TODAY would confuse almost anyone but a lifelong sailor.
Quite a fetching thread and such "compass"ionate answers, too.
There were tools of nautical navigation in ancient times, one was called a mariner's astrolabe (a star compass) dating back to 150BC or earlier which calculates latitude (longitude requires several known star orientations in the given locale).
They were local to each area such as the Mediterranean Sea.
This may be an explanation of what happened in Acts 28
Here is a beautiful example of the ancient Hawaii star compass:
More: http://nabataea.net/sailing.html (do a "find on this page" for - astrolabe - ).
[ May 31, 2005, 10:08 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]