Hijacking the Language? :(

Discussion in 'History Forum' started by Jeremiah2911, Oct 12, 2011.

  1. Jeremiah2911

    Jeremiah2911
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does it bother anybody else that it seems as though the English language has been hijacked over time? I prefer to use the KJV and I admit I have to have a dictionary at times [my software is keyed with the Websters 1828]--it is here where I first noticed some not so subtle changes to definitions. I first noticed that the word soul has no eternal meaning anymore [according to the new Websters]. This morning I am studying for Church tonight and looked up the word glory in the Websters 1828:

    GLO'RY, n. L. gloria; planus; hence, bright, shining. Glory, then, is brightness, splendor. The L. floreo, to blossom, to flower, to flourish, is probably of the same family.

    1. Brightness; luster; splendor.

    The moon, serene in glory, mounts the sky.

    For he received from God the Father honor and glory,when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory. 2 Pet.1.

    In this passage of Peter, the latter word glory refers to the visible splendor or bright cloud that overshadowed Christ at his transfiguration. The former word glory, though the same in the original, is to be understood in a figurative sense.

    2. Splendor; magnificence.

    Solomon, in all his glory, was not arrayed like one

    of these. Matt.vi.

    3. The circle of rays surrounding the head of a figure in painting.

    4. Praise ascribed in adoration; honor.

    Glory to God in the highest. Luke 2.

    5. Honor; praise; fame; renown; celebrity. The hero pants for glory in the field. It was the glory of Howard to relieve the wretched.

    6. The felicity of heaven prepared for the children of God; celestial bliss.

    Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel,and afterwards receive me to glory. Ps.73.

    7. In scripture, the divine presence; or the ark, the manifestation of it.

    The glory is departed from Israel. 1 Sam.4.

    8. The divine perfections or excellence.

    The heavens declare the glory of God. Ps.19.

    9. Honorable representation of God. 1 Cor. 11.8.

    10. Distinguished honor or ornament; that which honors or makes renowned; that of which one may boast.

    Babylon, the glory of kingdoms. Is.13.

    11. Pride; boastfulness; arrogance; as vain glory.

    12. Generous pride.


    Now notice the new Websters def:

    Definition of GLORY


    1
    a : praise, honor, or distinction extended by common consent : renown
    b : worshipful praise, honor, and thanksgiving <giving glory to God>
    2
    a : something that secures praise or renown <the glory of a brilliant career>
    b : a distinguished quality or asset
    3
    a (1) : great beauty and splendor : magnificence <the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome — E. A. Poe> (2) : something marked by beauty or resplendence <a perfect glory of a day>
    b : the splendor and beatific happiness of heaven; broadly : eternity
    4
    a : a state of great gratification or exaltation <when she's acting she's in her glory>
    b : a height of prosperity or achievement
    5
    : a ring or spot of light: as
    a : aureole
    b : a halo appearing around the shadow of an object

    Do you see this not so subtle change? Glory was an attribute which belonged to God and now it is given in relation to man.....to me glory is a word which belongs to God and we should be careful how we use it--my thoughts are: when did they hijack the English language? Whose idea was it to change it? Notice all the Bible references in the Websters 1828--don't see those anymore do we? I'm just curious, does this bother anyone else? God bless
     
  2. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    The change of language reflects the change in society in culture. Most English speaking cultures are now heavily multi-cultural and no longer have a Judeo-Christian ethos.

    We cannot claim the English language for our own culture or beliefs. We all have to share it.
     
  3. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
  4. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    I disagree - I think most folks with a basic grasp of English can read that vast majority of the KJV and do fine.
     
  5. Jeremiah2911

    Jeremiah2911
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello C4K! I don't know how to debate your answer because I agree with you:); however, my gripe is that somehow our culture has shifted and it happened in such a way most people don't even realize it. Editing books and defaming our founding fathers [George Washington a womanizer, baby killer etc] are some of the reasons why politicians and left wingers can argue we weren't a Christian nation--when we have the 1828 Websters and old history books [I have an 1865 HS history book and the first 25% of it is the Bible] that would say otherwise.

    My gripe is that at some point someone said "we need to change this" and I imagine it happened so that no one really paid attention. This could have been the work of an entire company, could have been the work of one man/woman. When people don't pay attention one person can do a lot of damage [aka Madalyn Murray Ohaire]

    Amen, but I would still argue that Websters should be an American work as it used to be, and changing word definitions [ie removing most references to God]may pacify someones cultural beliefs, but it doesn't alter the truth.
     
  6. Jeremiah2911

    Jeremiah2911
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    0
    I understand your point--you do know that the punctuation and spelling of the 1611 KJV has been changed somewhat in the last 400 yrs, right? BTW, I have a Geneva Bible photocopy edition and it is very challenging to read until you get used to it:) [ESPECIALLY the margin notes!]

    Having said that, I agree with C4K, the KJV is very readable, but like all things worth anything, it takes some time to study and grasp--doesn't matter what version of the Bible a person uses, there is a lifetime of study and learning within God's Word!
     
  7. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,609
    Likes Received:
    157
    Cultures change and languages are dynamic. Think of everything we accept as normal that people in 1611 had never conceived of, could not conceive of and would not understand if they suddenly appeared in our day and time.
     
  8. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    My denomination leaders think the NIV is to hard (as the pew Bible) for 21st century readers to understand. The first congregation to adopt the cartoon Bible will probably grow like Topsy. (can we still say that?)
     
  9. Anastasia

    Anastasia
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    0
    Languages evolve. It is the natural order of things. The only way to change back to older English is to use the media to influence the way that the youth speak. The only language that has not changed over the last centuries is the Icelandic language, and that is because the gov has worked hard to keep it the same. Freezers and TVs have very different names like moving picture boxes because otherwise they would have had to create new words, and other words might be used less.

    FYI, the Lord's prayer is different in the KJV from other versions in the inclusion of "For thine is the kingdom, the glory, and the power forever and ever." This part was supposedly added by the King of England.

    Yes, the KJV does allow for subtly of communication that modern English does not (I learned that from a Greek Orthodox priest). And yes, most versions of the Bible, would in some way be able to be grasped in the basics by most people with a high school education or perhaps even junior high or middle school.
     

Share This Page

Loading...