Freeware Bible and Genesis Rejuvenated

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
billjemas	Freeware Bible and Genesis Rejuvenated	Lead	[-]
Posts: 1 (12/08/2008 07:20:17) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Tags : None This is my first visit to your community. I hope that this is not an inappropriate use of your forum, but if it is, please let me know and I'll delete this post. I'm here to tell you about an interesting Bible Translation project that I've been working on for four years and to invite you to visit my website freewarebible.com to see the first free online database that anyone can use to read the first words of the Bible in order they were first written - to see the pure and beautiful ideas that our ancestors longed to share with you. If think you'll read the same old story of an omniscient, omnipotent male Super Being creating everything from nothing, I guarantee that you will be surprised by this unfiltered version of Genesis. Personally, I heard a song of diversity and unity, of organization and growth, in which everything in heaven and earth worked together as One. I can't say for sure what you will hear, but would love to hear about it. Freeware Bible Last Edited By: billjemas 12/08/2008 07:24:19. Edited 1 time.
BrianT		#1	[-]
Posts: 1601 (12/08/2008 08:27:16) ezOP Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hi Bill and welcome, You have an interesting project going, but to be honest I have a lot of alarm bells going off. Thousands of scholars (of various faiths) over thousands of years have translated Genesis in a near-identical way, and a new translation that is as drastically different as yours is implies that somehow you, in the last few short years with no formal training in Biblical languages and an admitted goal of making money, have got right what everyone else has gotten wrong. I applaud your desire to look into the Biblical texts, but I believe you are heading in a very dangerous direction both theologically and scholastically. God bless, Brian Brian
StoneMason	Your Site	#2	[-]
Posts: 1 (12/09/2008 20:36:32) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Bill, From what I can tell it is totally appropriate that you have listed your site here. I could not see from your site what is your training in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Could you please let us know what your qualifications are? One interesting point on personal translation projects such as yours is that it brings up the point of the ability for people to "play" with the language, with puns, rhymes, alliterations etc. Having a personal translation will allow you to highlight these areas or alternative readings that just can't make it into the normal mainstream texts but instead show up in study notes. BrianT's comment about heading in a dangerous scholastic direction rings true for me. One of the main reasons I prefer the ESV and NASB types of bibles is that they have a large committee of really smart, really well trained, and really passionate people that want to get the text 100% right. If you can get 60 rocket scientist level folks to agree on this, then you can trust that the translation is solid. Translations done by one or two people just can't compare, because no matter how smart or well trained one person is, they just are not going to be able to produce a translation with less errors then a text produced by a group of 60 highly trained experts.
77		#3	[-]
Posts: 41 (12/11/2008 17:56:17) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	"If think you'll read the same old story of an omniscient, omnipotent male Super Being creating everything from nothing, I guarantee that you will be surprised by this unfiltered version of Genesis." I would be a great deal suprised if you could explain to us how it is that ALL the other translations, from the NLT to the NASB, the ASV to Zondervan's NIV, are "filtered." "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." Groucho Marx
billjemas		#4	[-]
Posts: 2 (12/12/2008 07:34:53) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	BrianT wrote: Hi Bill and welcome, You have an interesting project going, but to be honest I have a lot of alarm bells going off. Thousands of scholars (of various faiths) over thousands of years have translated Genesis in a near-identical way, and a new translation that is as drastically different as yours is implies that somehow you, in the last few short years with no formal training in Biblical languages and an admitted goal of making money, have got right what everyone else has gotten wrong. I applaud your desire to look into the Biblical texts, but I believe you are heading in a very dangerous direction both theologically and scholastically. God bless, Brian Hi Brian, Thank you for welcoming me to Bible Versions - I kind of hold my breath when I approach new people with the Freeware Bible project. You are correct I am not a clergyman or biblical scholar or theologian. I don't have any formal training - just a knack for organizing and analyzing data. And I have kind of an iron butt, so I can sit in a chair and spend one, two, three or four hours per word on the first 1,600 words over the past four years. I have tremendous respect for the clergy, scholars and theologians who have been working on this text for thousands of years. The core of the Freeware Database boils down to a cut and paste of their work. The translation database is designed so that you can look at each word one at a time. When you do that you'll see that most of the synonyms come right from mainstream concordances and and/or from annotations from established translations. No kidding, and no pun intended, the Freeware Bible database is as "by the book" as you can get. If you are not used to reading the Word, word for word, it can be an unsettling experience - but I hope it will prove to be more enlightening than dangerous. My hope is to add light, not heat, to our common search for spiritual and moral guidance through Bible study. Best, Bill J.
77		#5	[-]
Posts: 53 (12/13/2008 06:30:44) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	"No kidding, and no pun intended, the Freeware Bible database is as "by the book" as you can get. If you are not used to reading the Word, word for word, it can be an unsettling experience - but I hope it will prove to be more enlightening than dangerous." And the NASB, Young's Literal, American Standard Version (1901) are also about as literal as one can get - short of reading an interlinear. Yet none of these can be used to make the claim(s) that you do. How is it that you, hailing from the comic book industry, have managed to come up with a translation that is "unsettling?" "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." Groucho Marx
billjemas	Translation as a two-part process	#6	[-]
Posts: 3 (12/13/2008 10:14:41) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	StoneMason wrote: Bill, From what I can tell it is totally appropriate that you have listed your site here. I could not see from your site what is your training in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Could you please let us know what your qualifications are? One interesting point on personal translation projects such as yours is that it brings up the point of the ability for people to "play" with the language, with puns, rhymes, alliterations etc. Having a personal translation will allow you to highlight these areas or alternative readings that just can't make it into the normal mainstream texts but instead show up in study notes. BrianT's comment about heading in a dangerous scholastic direction rings true for me. One of the main reasons I prefer the ESV and NASB types of bibles is that they have a large committee of really smart, really well trained, and really passionate people that want to get the text 100% right. If you can get 60 rocket scientist level folks to agree on this, then you can trust that the translation is solid. Translations done by one or two people just can't compare, because no matter how smart or well trained one person is, they just are not going to be able to produce a translation with less errors then a text produced by a group of 60 highly trained experts. Hello StoneMason: Thank you for visiting Freeware Bible and for responding to my post. Your point is well-taken I should publish my background on the Website so people have a better sense of who compiled the information that they are taking their time to read. Will try to do that next week - in the meantime, here's my resume: Education Mountain High School, West Orange, NJ - Diploma - 1976 Rutgers College, New Brunswick, NJ - Bachelor of Arts 1980 History major, Philosophy Minor, Henry Rutgers Scholar, Magna Cum Laude Harvard Law School, Cambridge MA - Juris Doctor 1983 Experience Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett - 1983-1985 Associate in the Tax and Corporate Departments National Basketball Association and NBA Properties 1985-1992 Staff Attorney, Assistant General Council, Vice President Business Affairs Fleer Corp, a division of the Marvel Entertainment Group 1993-1995 Executive Vice President, Entertainment Cards Division President Fleer Corp., Sports cards and Marvel Cards Odd jobs - 1995-1997 Hearst Entertainment; Black Box sole proprietorship; consultant to G-Vox Software and Lancet Media Madison Square Garden 1997-1999 Executive Vice President, Entertainment; EVP MSG Sports Marvel Enterprises 2000-2004 President, Publishing, Licensing and New Media; Chief Operating Officer Plot writer - Ultimate Spider-Man, Origin of Wolverine 360ep, inc.2004-2008, President As to translation - I agree wholeheartedly with half of what you wrote. The combined work of 60 highly trained, dedicated professionals is immeasurably valuable and there is no way that an individual can bring the same kind of breath and depth - let along objectivity -- to the translation process. Thus, the principle part of the Freeware Bible project is a linguistic database which compiles, organizes and reports the work the best scholars - hundreds of them. It lets you - anyone - see each Word, word for word, and read all of the likely meanings along with annotations that provide historical context. I don't pretend that I am the most qualified person to put together that kind of database. But the fact is that Freewarebible.com is the only place that you are going to find one for free online. Where my opinion differs from yours relates to the creative aspects of translating a great work of art, literature and, especially, spirituality. I do not believe that 60 people are good at writing prose or poetry. The secondary part of the Freeware Bible is new verse that I composed based on the translation database. (I would never have dared to write the verse without researching and publishing the database. And I wouldn't have bothered to compile the database unless I had been inspired to compose the verse._ I did my best to write verse that does a good job at expressing the ideas of the original scripture, but I know I'm not a good poet - or prose writer for that matter. Honestly, I struggle with both. I'm just not good at expressing myself verbally and it takes me forever to scratch out just a few lines. I just looked at the clock and realized I've been working on this letter to you for two hours and (which of course, puts me an hour behind on cleaning up my yard after that crazy storm we had last week - and an hour behind helping my wife keep the kids on track with their chores and schoolwork). One last point, it is my sincere hope that truly gifted poets will who read the Freeware data will be inspired to compose beautiful new Bible verse based on those beautiful ancient ideas. Best, Bill J
mko		#7	[-]
Posts: 397 (12/13/2008 15:21:02) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	My unskilled translations tend to come awful close to the KJV and Geneva in many places. Without trying, even... "Things don't happen together by coincidence, without the hand of God guiding them. Like, say, your ex-girlfriend hunting you down for a date the minute you give up on love, with an eye on the altar."
77		#8	[-]
Posts: 55 (12/13/2008 17:53:45) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	"I do not believe that 60 people are good at writing prose or poetry." Ever heard of the King James Version? "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." Groucho Marx
billjemas		#9	[-]
Posts: 4 (12/15/2008 06:23:33) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	77 wrote: "If think you'll read the same old story of an omniscient, omnipotent male Super Being creating everything from nothing, I guarantee that you will be surprised by this unfiltered version of Genesis." I would be a great deal suprised if you could explain to us how it is that ALL the other translations, from the NLT to the NASB, the ASV to Zondervan's NIV, are "filtered." Hello 77, At any given point in history, most scholars in every discipline believe many things that are not true. In 1492, most Biblical Scholars believed that Moses wrote all of the Old Testament. Now, as you no doubt know, most believe that at least four different writers - working in different eras and regions - wrote or redacted the sacred texts. In 1492, most earth scientists believed that the earth was flat. Even though centuries before Columbus sailed the ocean blue, Eratosthenes knew the earth was spherical and even estimated its circumference. In large groups, the majority scholars somehow ignore material information and the few who point out mistakes dismissed out of hand. Why does this happen? Why do people dismiss dissent? Your guess is as good as mine. With respect to understanding and translating first Chapter of Genesis, I believe we can and should start by let the ancient scripture speak for itself. The Freeware Bible Database is designed to let you - anyone and everyone - do us that. Now, I'm not saying that the Database is perfectly accurate - but I can say that all of the data points come from highly reputable scholarly sources that I that tried to be as objective as possible in deciding what to include and exclude. Anyway, thank you for taking the time to visit freewarebible.com and to follow this thread. These are tough times and it is getting increasingly difficult to find the time read and think, and write. Best, Bill J.
Scott McClare		#10	[-]
Posts: 2888 (12/15/2008 09:53:27) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	In 1492, most Biblical Scholars believed that Moses wrote all of the Old Testament. Now, as you no doubt know, most believe that at least four different writers - working in different eras and regions - wrote or redacted the sacred texts. And today, "most" are working from a particular set of presuppositions - such as an anti-supernatural bias - that may or may not be valid. In 1492, most earth scientists believed that the earth was flat. Even though centuries before Columbus sailed the ocean blue, Eratosthenes knew the earth was spherical and even estimated its circumference. Simply untrue. In 1492, any scholar understood that the earth was a sphere. Simple observation told anyone who observed a ship disappearing over the horizon, that the surface of the sea was curved. The bone of contention between Columbus and his critics was over the size of the sphere - Columbus believing, wrongly, that it was considerably smaller than it actually is. While Eratosthenes' methodology was sound, his accuracy was off, by about 10% as I recall. So . . . what are your presuppositions, apart from apparently buying into a certain number of humanist myths about the state of knowledge in the Middle Ages? Take care, Scott Gutless and Spineless Person #3 Whiny Crybaby Moderator, Bible Versions Discussion Board -- Scott A. McClare, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada mcclare@ncf.ca * ICQ #24034503 * AIM RansomOttawa Stepping Right Up to the KJV-only Sideshow since 2001
billjemas		#11	[-]
Posts: 5 (12/17/2008 11:03:38) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Scott McClare wrote: In 1492, most Biblical Scholars believed that Moses wrote all of the Old Testament. Now, as you no doubt know, most believe that at least four different writers - working in different eras and regions - wrote or redacted the sacred texts. And today, "most" are working from a particular set of presuppositions - such as an anti-supernatural bias - that may or may not be valid. In 1492, most earth scientists believed that the earth was flat. Even though centuries before Columbus sailed the ocean blue, Eratosthenes knew the earth was spherical and even estimated its circumference. Simply untrue. In 1492, any scholar understood that the earth was a sphere. Simple observation told anyone who observed a ship disappearing over the horizon, that the surface of the sea was curved. The bone of contention between Columbus and his critics was over the size of the sphere - Columbus believing, wrongly, that it was considerably smaller than it actually is. While Eratosthenes' methodology was sound, his accuracy was off, by about 10% as I recall. So . . . what are your presuppositions, apart from apparently buying into a certain number of humanist myths about the state of knowledge in the Middle Ages? Hi Scott, I stand corrected about the state of knowledge in the middle ages. As to the Bible, value of the Freeware Bible database is that it let's people read the Bible for themselves - rather than hearing what other people say about what the Bible says. To me, it's like the difference between listing to music and singing a song. Between watching a play and acting. Thanks for responding to me and for having me on your board for a while. So long, Bill J. "I have undertaken to translate the Bible . . . This was good for me; otherwise I might have died in the mistaken notion that I was a learned man" -- Martin Luther
77		#12	[-]
Posts: 85 (12/18/2008 23:09:07) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hello 77, At any given point in history, most scholars in every discipline believe many things that are not true. In 1492...... (edited) In large groups, the majority scholars somehow ignore material information and the few who point out mistakes dismissed out of hand. Why does this happen? Why do people dismiss dissent? Your guess is as good as mine. With respect, I have only ever seen this with individual, or small, like-minded group efforts, but I take your point. With respect to understanding and translating first Chapter of Genesis, I believe we can and should start by let the ancient scripture speak for itself. The Freeware Bible Database is designed to let you - anyone and everyone - do us that. Now, I'm not saying that the Database is perfectly accurate - but I can say that all of the data points come from highly reputable scholarly sources that I that tried to be as objective as possible in deciding what to include and exclude. Anyway, thank you for taking the time to visit freewarebible.com and to follow this thread. These are tough times and it is getting increasingly difficult to find the time read and think, and write. Best, Bill J. Thanks for your post, and your various individual responses. I hope that you can appreciate where the skepticism you have received here is coming from. I don't doubt, though, that others here will visit your site. 77 "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." Groucho Marx
Scott McClare		#13	[-]
Posts: 2896 (12/19/2008 09:30:47) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	As to the Bible, value of the Freeware Bible database is that it let's people read the Bible for themselves - rather than hearing what other people say about what the Bible says. But we're not really doing that, are we? We are still going to your site and reading your database of scholars that you have compiled. In other words, we still rely upon your wisdom to tell us what the Bible says. Someone who wants to "read the Bible for themselves" will take the time to learn the biblical languages, read Genesis in Hebrew and perhaps do his own translation. Take care, Scott Gutless and Spineless Person #3 Whiny Crybaby Moderator, Bible Versions Discussion Board -- Scott A. McClare, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada mcclare@ncf.ca * ICQ #24034503 * AIM RansomOttawa Stepping Right Up to the KJV-only Sideshow since 2001
StoneMason		#14	[-]
Posts: 2 (12/22/2008 10:53:28) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Bill J, Your credentials are impressive, and it seems to me that your heart is in the right place. I hope that your efforts will result in some thought provoking discussions which will lead to a better personal comprehension of the books of the bible. Trying to capture the essence of Genesis, or any book, and put it into ideal prose/poetry is a worthwhile goal. Meter and rhythm are very good aids to memory. The ESV committee attempted to do this as much as possible without losing a word for word translation. Good poetry however can unlock the relationships between the words to give the reader greater insight. But if it is not done well, it can be tedious to read, and can point people off in a wrong direction. So I wish you well as you sweat the details over finding the exact words for your efforts. Scott - You raised an interesting point for me about your comment on reading the bible in the original languages. This is one of the reasons that Muslims really push their adherents to learn the Arabic that Mohammad use to write his Quran. Evidently it is very poetical in the original language, and no translation is deemed to do it justice. I feel this same "vibe" when I hear people wax on about the lyrical nature of the KJV. For now at least, I do not know Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, so being a novice my question for you is how do we know that the words that we will learn really have the right meanings associated with them? I'm not talking about the common words, but the ones where it is only used a few times in the Bible or in various contemporary documents? The point of my question is that if I take 2 years to learn biblical Hebrew, and then read it for myself, how will I know that my understanding of the verses that I am reading is any better or worse than Bill J's Freeware Bible, or any other translation?
HoLogos	Hapax Legomena	#15	[-]
Posts: 1088 (12/22/2008 22:28:25) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Actually, this is a very good question. The term for a Hebrew or Greek word used only once in all of the known literature, is a Hapax Legomenon. There are many examples of this in the Bible. A committee of very smart people may be no better at translating them than is an individual. A committee of people with advanced degrees from a wordly university is no better, and is probably worse, at rendering Hapax Legomena, than is an individual child filled with the Holy Spirit.
billjemas	The word God, for example . . .	#16	[-]
Posts: 6 (12/23/2008 05:37:21) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Hello, I've been under-the weather (and offline) for a couple of days, but am feeling better. I want to start by saying it did does lift my spirits to visit this discussion board and read what people are writing - including on this thread. I want to put my 2 cents in on translation - it is impossible to overstate the significance of looking at original sources with your own eyes. Take the word God, for example. Every popular bible translation - from Vulgate to NIV uses the word "God" to describe the magnificent powers that created the universe. The ancient scripture - the documents closest to the original oral Bible- do not. But how can a faithful Bible translation use the word God when the ancient scripture does not? If we believe that God gave us the Bible on Mt. Sinai, why would we use the name God when the voice of God did not? If we believe that the Bible was written by several people who were divinely inspired, then why would we choose to use the word God when they scrupulously avoided its use? It is not that the written text uses no word at all - it uses a word that can be transliterated into Roman letters as Elohim, or Alhim which can, in turn, be broken down into parts - "al" means 'power' or god; "hi" means 'be' or 'is'; "im" indicates plurality. Alhim is consistenly used with singular verbs indicating that the gods/powers act as one. But when Alhim speaks it is always in the first peson plural ("let us make light" or "we make mankind"). Translating Alhim as "God" hides its plurality just as translating alhim as "gods" hides its singularity. Listen, this is not to say that people of faith are wrong about God. The vision of an all knowing, all good, fatherly God for all of us to follow is a beautiful one, and those who follow this vision have helped lead the humanity to a greater place. But the Bible is a big tent with plenty of room for those of us who do not see God in human form, but feel presense of a sublime, omnipresent power urging all of us in the right direction. I think that the Bible is asking us to think about the nature God - not to slap lingustic lable on the most important idea we can possibly think about. Best, Bill J.
77		#17	[-]
Posts: 100 (12/25/2008 00:38:00) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Billjemas wrote: " But how can a faithful Bible translation use the word God when the ancient scripture does not? If we believe that God gave us the Bible on Mt. Sinai, why would we use the name God when the voice of God did not? If we believe that the Bible was written by several people who were divinely inspired, then why would we choose to use the word God when they scrupulously avoided its use? It is not that the written text uses no word at all - it uses a word that can be transliterated into Roman letters as Elohim, or Alhim which can, in turn, be broken down into parts - "al" means 'power' or god; "hi" means 'be' or 'is'; "im" indicates plurality. Alhim is consistenly used with singular verbs indicating that the gods/powers act as one. But when Alhim speaks it is always in the first peson plural ("let us make light" or "we make mankind"). Translating Alhim as "God" hides its plurality just as translating alhim as "gods" hides its singularity. Listen, this is not to say that people of faith are wrong about God. The vision of an all knowing, all good, fatherly God for all of us to follow is a beautiful one, and those who follow this vision have helped lead the humanity to a greater place. But the Bible is a big tent with plenty of room for those of us who do not see God in human form, but feel presense of a sublime, omnipresent power urging all of us in the right direction." For one, the Jews had a hang-up with saying, or even writing, the name of God - and rightly so. For another, congratulations: you seem to be on the verge of having had discovered the triune nature of God. "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read." Groucho Marx
StoneMason		#18	[-]
Posts: 3 (12/25/2008 20:45:11) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	HoLogos wrote Actually, this is a very good question. The term for a Hebrew or Greek word used only once in all of the known literature, is a Hapax Legomenon. There are many examples of this in the Bible. A committee of very smart people may be no better at translating them than is an individual. A committee of people with advanced degrees from a wordly university is no better, and is probably worse, at rendering Hapax Legomena, than is an individual child filled with the Holy Spirit. Thanks HoLogos, That was a very informative post. I had never heard of the term Hapax Legomenon before so I learned something today. Is there any site that lists all of the New Testament and Old Testament hapax legomenon that do not show up in any other literature?
AlFin		#19	[-]
Posts: 47 (12/26/2008 12:49:33) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts Report Post	StoneMason wrote: Is there any site that lists all of the New Testament and Old Testament hapax legomenon that do not show up in any other literature? I just Googled the Net using: "hapax legomenon" Bible One Jewish site lists many of them at: http://www.jewishencyclop...sp?artid=268&letter=H I'm still looking for New Testament examples. Allen Last Edited By: AlFin 12/26/2008 13:05:31. Edited 1 times.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Freeware Bible and Genesis Rejuvenated

Freeware Bible and Genesis Rejuvenated

Quick Reply