Vulgar

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Salamander, Oct 3, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was amazed to see some one who promotes other versions due to what they view as that version containing archaic words to argue for modern versions using an "archaic"rendering of the term "vulgar".

    No, I am not trying to continue an arguement, but trying to gain understanding here.

    How does one cry out against something they vehemently use the same thing to argue for that something?

    Antennafarmer made the right claim, yet we understand vulgar to mean something different to day.
     
  2. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Sal,do you think that Bibles (in any language) should be in the common tongue?If not, then you oppose what the KJV team said they were attempting to do with their revision of the Tyndale -- Geneva Bibles.They wanted laypeople to understand God's Word in the vulgar-tongue.Gotta' problem with that?
     
  3. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm glad you understand that the meaning of words change with time.
     
  4. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    I used the older meaning of the word for the benefit of you and AF who appreciate the outdated language.

    I'm surprised you don't use 400 year-old speech in your posts.I thought you believed that languages should remain static and not change.
     
  5. Analgesic

    Analgesic
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    0
    So... someone cannot support the use of a text in the common language if his or her vocabulary extends beyond it?
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    This reminds me of the KJVO argument over the fact that newer versions have replaced the word 'study' in 2 Tim. 2;15 with 'work diligently', and in 1 Thess. 4:11 with 'make it your ambition' or 'seek', due to one of the older meanings of 'study' having become obsolete.
     
  7. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    The useage of "vulgar" as 'common' is not archaic; perhaps infrequent, but not having completely passed out of use yet.

    VULGAR, adj.

    1. Crudely indecent.

    2a. Deficient in taste, delicacy, or refinement.
    2b. Marked by a lack of good breeding; boorish. See synonyms at common.
    2c. Offensively excessive in self-display or expenditure; ostentatious: the huge vulgar houses and cars of the newly rich.

    3. Spoken by or expressed in language spoken by the common people; vernacular: the technical and vulgar names for an animal species.

    4. Of or associated with the great masses of people; common.

    [Middle English, from Latin vulgāris, from vulgus, the common people.]​
     
    #7 franklinmonroe, Oct 4, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 4, 2008
  8. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    44
    Oxford English Dictionary:

    vulgar, a.
    3. Of language or speech: Commonly or customarily used by the people of a country; ordinary, vernacular.
    In common use c 1525-1650; now arch.
     
  9. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bait -n-switch.

    The term "archaic' is one of the silliest arguements in favor of mv's, then one of their proponents uses the arcahic definition to argue against sound teaching!:laugh:
     
  10. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    When applaied appropiately, "vulgar" means the same thing then as it means now. IOW it has NOT changed.:p
     
  11. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    I speak the on the word of God, not speak the words of God, well, unless I'm quoting!:laugh:

    (my mistake - thought I was "quoting" you and messed your original - Grif)
     
    #11 Salamander, Oct 6, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 6, 2008
  12. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like what you use under your name, which the passion flower was once thought of as a "vulgar" variety; which we cal the "May-pop":wavey:

    If one's vocabulary extends beyond the "vulgar" sense, then they would not object to the KJB in the first place! rather they should applaud its use of the sense of the words as to relate the intent of the very heart of God.
     
  13. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    NOW I will post!!

    Remember, even when you are "quoting", you are speaking the words of fallible translators, NOT the actual words that God inspired.

    Have to always emphasize that because of some who hold to a second inspiration in 1611 of a totally new text that God didn't "breath".
     
  14. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok, so you're saying that God cannot speak English.

    I've heard of limiting the Holy One of Israel before, but this is a first! Well, not really, I've read this comment before.

    Your statement makes the audacious requirement that anyone who wants to know what thus saith the Lord must learn the original languages and have access to all the Originals.

    satan couldn't make it any harder than this!

    BTW, when did God quit "breathing"?
     
  15. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    I think God can speak in 17th century english, 21st century english, ebonics, southern drawl and any other kind of english.
     
  16. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    He also speaks Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, American Sign Language, Mexican Sign Language, Navajo,.....

    Cause He invented them all!
     
  17. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, I agree! But wouldn't you agree we need the English standard to revertback to for reference in this day of adversity? Y'know, so even that which is viewed as being vulgar could be expressed with accuracy to refute misconceptions, delineations, and out-right error?

    I already know we have that English standard being nearly no one fully agrees on the explicity of any Greek text. Even the rabbinic order followed causes disagreement on the Hebrew as well.

    I have to rely upon the Spirit of God , and a dictionary, an exhaustive one, to guarentee that I understand what thus saith the Lord.

    I just recently looked into the word "abide", most would be certainly blessed to know just what all the word means as far as our abiding in Him and He abiding in us!!!

    (I'm about to Shout!)

    No amount of intellect can do what the Lord has already done and is doing.:godisgood:
     
  18. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope, man invented them all, God has never invented anything, He creates.:D
     
  19. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    And where is this English standard?What time period?What authors?Does this standard have modern spelling,grammar,punctuation,and typeface?

    What I bracketed is poor English."Explicity" is not a word.Your second sentence isn't much better.Are you following your "English standard"?


    I didn't know that a dictionary was that important to you.
     
  20. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    What doth thou saith? Thy alien tongue spaketh vnder my standard. ;)
     
    #20 Gold Dragon, Oct 8, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 8, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...