Many ex-wayers, myself included, chafe at the term "Liiteral According to Usage" simply because it drips with jargonish insider-speak.
That said, I have come to appreciate the Bible for what it is: A collection of literary genres that inform us of God's thoughts on a variety of subjects, but all pointing to a redemption through Jesus Christ.
It is NOT a magic book, grimoire, or recipe book. It was NOT produced by way of mechanical dictation or a scribe in a trance.
It is very human and beautiful in it's ability to co-exist with a reader's mind and experience, yet it is more than cold history or imagination. There is a life force that teems throughout it.
Any doctrine of innerrancy does damage to this notion.
All this to say I believe there is room for at least the concept of "literal according to usage", a concept that puts the onus on a reader of the Bible to reflect, insert one's own thoughts, experiences, and opinions.
His name appears on a google search, about page five or so, and the reference is to here, GSC..
if one keeps going down to about the twentieth or so page.. doesn't say, but he SEEMS to be affiliated with K*n P*tty (not the rocker)..
He is a smart guy.. I know he has a degree in mathematics.. taught himself Koine Greek, if I remember correctly.
It's almost like he disappeared into obscurity. Who knows.. maybe that's the way he wants it..
my opinion, in his way days, he was a "songbird" ole vic could put on stage. I'm not slighting him. I think his intelligence, voice, and even perhaps genuine care was taken advantage by herr vicmeister.
I think he was one of the few, that his education and credentials were in the vicster's hands, and the vicster chose not to entirely crush them.
"well, your education is more important. let's just forget about this god biz in this one specific circumstance.."
I don't think he had the heart to crack the whip at hq like the vicster.. I remember it getting him into trouble a time or two..
His name appears on a google search, about page five or so, and the reference is to here, GSC..
if one keeps going down to about the twentieth or so page.. doesn't say, but he SEEMS to be affiliated with K*n P*tty (not the rocker)..
He is a smart guy.. I know he has a degree in mathematics.. taught himself Koine Greek, if I remember correctly.
It's almost like he disappeared into obscurity. Who knows.. maybe that's the way he wants it..
my opinion, in his way days, he was a "songbird" ole vic could put on stage. I'm not slighting him. I think his intelligence, voice, and even perhaps genuine care was taken advantage by herr vicmeister.
I think he was one of the few, that his education and credentials were in the vicster's hands, and the vicster chose not to entirely crush them.
"well, your education is more important. let's just forget about this god biz in this one specific circumstance.."
I don't think he had the heart to crack the whip at hq like the vicster.. I remember it getting him into trouble a time or two..
Walter has been very busy in his post Way life originally he was on the research team for several projects at Gartmore House. He published a journal for several years on The Acceptable Year of the Lord (The Life and Early Ministry of Jesus Christ.) Later edited into a book , as well as a book A Journey through the Acts and Epistles. He traveled and teaches several Scripture Conferences on various subjects An updated one Things New and Renewed, An introductory seminar on How to Enjoy the Bible, one on Figures of Speech, and I believe some others. Although now grayed he is still the same personable person he was. He enjoys teaching the Bible and smoking his pipe.
Personally, I get a bit weary at times of this constant "Oh, Yeah!, well prove it!" line of thought.
Certainly not everything should be taken at face value.
Documentation of facts and figures is of great value for many things.
But, this is, after all, a discussion style forum.
That's what we do.------We discuss.----In the open.
One should not feel compelled to have provide "absolute proof" of every single statement they make or present extensive research to validate every opinion. That approach stifles the free flow of ideas.
This is a public forum. These statements aren't being made in secret, behind closed doors.
I would think by now that Walter C. is probably well aware of the existence of GSC.
If he is being misrepresented here, it's likely it would come to his attention.
He can come here and offer his rebuttal if, in fact, it's warranted, just like anyone else.
I would hope he would do that either personally or via a third party.
By the way, I had a twig leader once who said "If you squeeze a Greek word too hard, you're likely to come out looking all wet." Do I need a "tape" to verify that?
Personally, I get a bit weary at times of this constant "Oh, Yeah!, well prove it!" line of thought.
Certainly not everything should be taken at face value.
Documentation of facts and figures is of great value for many things.
But, this is, after all, a discussion style forum.
That's what we do.------We discuss.----In the open.
One should not feel compelled to have provide "absolute proof" of every single statement they make or present extensive research to validate every opinion. That approach stifles the free flow of ideas.
This is a public forum. These statements aren't being made in secret, behind closed doors.
I would think by now that Walter C. is probably well aware of the existence of GSC.
If he is being misrepresented here, it's likely it would come to his attention.
He can come here and offer his rebuttal if, in fact, it's warranted, just like anyone else.
I would hope he would do that either personally or via a third party.
By the way, I had a twig leader once who said "If you squeeze a Greek word too hard, you're likely to come out looking all wet." Do I need a "tape" to verify that?
Your free to offer your opinion on anything you choose to here. We all know about those...... If one chooses to accept your ideas is the receiver's choice, personally I like facts, or truth not peoples speculations. I've found that trusting those seems to get one in trouble down the road when they don't quite work out. So if you want me to accept your words provide proof if not ,that's ok too . I'll feel free to point out that you did not provide any documentation to support your ideas and as such that is an opinion.
what i'd like to know is: what happened to my and excie's posts (which were right after yanagisawa"s post)... wherein we declared: who cares!
i mean, who really cares what walter said in a footnote of some obscure book about "literals according to usage" or some such term that no one else uses in the real world...
whitedove, you dissected a quote from a footnote as if it really means anything in the big picture... so what if john didn't remember the footnote verbatim... the essence of the meaning is the same...
you are really hung up on the words "a researcher" being replaced by "vpw"... you strain at a gnat!
the point is a researcher (NAMED VPW) used some kind of "translation" and often made no sense when he did so... which i'm not quoting verbatim, and who cares!
A researcher must consider the inherent accuracy of the text and then seek to convey the exact thoughts and meanings of the original in current vernacular. Such a rendering is a literal translation according to usage....A literal translation according to usage reproduces the thoughts and meanings of the original, based on the words in the original in relation to the verse, content, remoter context, and to whom it is addressed.
I agree, the quoted statement from WJC referred to the fact that literal translations of Greek (or Aramaic for that matter) won't always make sense. English barely makes sense to me sometimes, hearing what I or another person says or writes.
Through my work I deal with research(ers) and data analysts There's different levels, kinds of research and I think Walter's brief description refers to them - collecting and compiling detailed data on a subject, producing views of that data through reporting mechanisms and lastly analysis, to determine meaning. For instance, I regularly run a variety of reports on internet usage, collecting basic data, and put it into reports that contain the raw numbers and then trending type reports that compare slots of time, who/what/where/when, etc.
Looking at the focus area and data then, there can be even more ways to assemble and compare the data, often leading to more collection. I'm sure we have some true data researchers and analysts floating around here who are more prolific in the field than I am but I have covered that ground somewhat over the years, enough to appreciate it anyhoo.
From that vantage point I think the literal translation according to usage is a legitmate end result of biblical research. It would include the data from a literal study of the words, the inherent accuracy of the text - plus any other information available from as many other environments as can be drawn from.
Quality is always an issue in research. Are the goals and requirements clear from the outset? Did "everything" available get captured? Is it "good research"?
Reading the results of other's research can be useful too, especially when their results differ. It's not unusual for different views to read data differently. It begs the question, how did they come up with theirs? What were the processes, the sources? A single piece of information can be viewed a 100 different ways before any conclusions are even possible. A first pass at definition may be done and repeated many times. Then, finally some effort has to be made at drawing conclusions and articulating the results. That, to me, is the LTATU. (acronyms always make for better research!!)
"Literal" means "actually" so frequently doesn't make sense because of the idiom of the original language, or the idiom of the language into which it's translated.
"According to usage" must mean according to local idiom.
A literal translation according to usage reproduces the thoughts and meanings of the original
So you could have either a literal translation or a translation according to usage but not sure that you can have both.
Thinking about it now puts this expression on the same level as "genuine spiritual suspicion" - a topic which has received its own discussion elsewhere in these forums.
what i'd like to know is: what happened to my and excie's posts (which were right after yanagisawa"s post)... wherein we declared: who cares!
Jeno you posts were deleted by a moderator as non productive I would guess. You most likely have a email to inform you of why. My response was as well as it made no sense without your posts. I'm fine with that...... If your not you can take that up with them
i mean, who really cares what walter said in a footnote of some obscure book about "literals according to usage" or some such term that no one else uses in the real world...
I care because he was being misrepresented, misqouted. What he said was being misrepresented as something he did not say. I doubt you would like that done to you . And if it happened I would do the same for you.
whitedove, you dissected a quote from a footnote as if it really means anything in the big picture... so what if john didn't remember the footnote verbatim... the essence of the meaning is the same...
Excuse me it was John who brought up the note not me I simply pointed out that HE did not fairly treat the quote. He implied that it said something it did not.
you are really hung up on the words "a researcher" being replaced by "vpw"... you strain at a gnat!
Not at all, I understand what A researcher means it is not limited to Wierwille period. i'll be happy to argue the point anytime.
the point is a researcher (NAMED VPW) used some kind of "translation" and often made no sense when he did so... which i'm not quoting verbatim, and who cares!
Had you read the book you would see that is not the case.
Your free to offer your opinion on anything you choose to here. We all know about those...... If one chooses to accept your ideas is the receiver's choice, personally I like facts, or truth not peoples speculations. I've found that trusting those seems to get one in trouble down the road when they don't quite work out. So if you want me to accept your words provide proof if not ,that's ok too . I'll feel free to point out that you did not provide any documentation to support your ideas and as such that is an opinion.
Well --- the only thing I can (or do) have to say about this is we were all there in twi.
Areas differed (acording to the *leadership* at given times), and documentation isn't always *available*, but I'm not saying anything new here. What I heard one twig leader (or area leader, or whatever *leader*) say from wherever I heard it (undocumented by either tape or written word),
DOESN'T relegate it to the category of *opinion*!
There's WAY too many stories that mesh one with another about *this, that or the other*, from folks who've never met, but ---- were all all in twi at one time or another. And these stories OPINIONS seem to be coming from all across the world, not just one small locale with a familiar ring to all of them. Given the amount of stow-ries over all these years -- it really doesn't matter if it is *documented* on tape, book, way mag., or whatever. There's too much input tossed into this from all over the globe for it to be easily dismissed so summarily or flippantly.
Don't give me the *opinion* BS. It happened, and you know it.
Well --- the only thing I can (or do) have to say about this is we were all there in twi.
Areas differed (acording to the *leadership* at given times), and documentation isn't always *available*, but I'm not saying anything new here. What I heard one twig leader (or area leader, or whatever *leader*) say from wherever I heard it (undocumented by either tape or written word),
DOESN'T relegate it to the category of *opinion*!
There's WAY too many stories that mesh one with another about *this, that or the other*, from folks who've never met, but ---- were all all in twi at one time or another. And these stories OPINIONS seem to be coming from all across the world, not just one small locale with a familiar ring to all of them. Given the amount of stow-ries over all these years -- it really doesn't matter if it is *documented* on tape, book, way mag., or whatever. There's too much input tossed into this from all over the globe for it to be easily dismissed so summarily or flippantly.
Don't give me the *opinion* BS. It happened, and you know it.
Well David it seems we were discussing a book and the quotes there in. What was stated what was not stated I fail to see what that to do with an area differing, books are the same in every area. Its pretty easy to document open book, read, close book .
Recommended Posts
Yanagisawa
Many ex-wayers, myself included, chafe at the term "Liiteral According to Usage" simply because it drips with jargonish insider-speak.
That said, I have come to appreciate the Bible for what it is: A collection of literary genres that inform us of God's thoughts on a variety of subjects, but all pointing to a redemption through Jesus Christ.
It is NOT a magic book, grimoire, or recipe book. It was NOT produced by way of mechanical dictation or a scribe in a trance.
It is very human and beautiful in it's ability to co-exist with a reader's mind and experience, yet it is more than cold history or imagination. There is a life force that teems throughout it.
Any doctrine of innerrancy does damage to this notion.
All this to say I believe there is room for at least the concept of "literal according to usage", a concept that puts the onus on a reader of the Bible to reflect, insert one's own thoughts, experiences, and opinions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
What I'd like to know.. what happened to Walter?
His name appears on a google search, about page five or so, and the reference is to here, GSC..
if one keeps going down to about the twentieth or so page.. doesn't say, but he SEEMS to be affiliated with K*n P*tty (not the rocker)..
He is a smart guy.. I know he has a degree in mathematics.. taught himself Koine Greek, if I remember correctly.
It's almost like he disappeared into obscurity. Who knows.. maybe that's the way he wants it..
my opinion, in his way days, he was a "songbird" ole vic could put on stage. I'm not slighting him. I think his intelligence, voice, and even perhaps genuine care was taken advantage by herr vicmeister.
I think he was one of the few, that his education and credentials were in the vicster's hands, and the vicster chose not to entirely crush them.
"well, your education is more important. let's just forget about this god biz in this one specific circumstance.."
I don't think he had the heart to crack the whip at hq like the vicster.. I remember it getting him into trouble a time or two..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Walter has been very busy in his post Way life originally he was on the research team for several projects at Gartmore House. He published a journal for several years on The Acceptable Year of the Lord (The Life and Early Ministry of Jesus Christ.) Later edited into a book , as well as a book A Journey through the Acts and Epistles. He traveled and teaches several Scripture Conferences on various subjects An updated one Things New and Renewed, An introductory seminar on How to Enjoy the Bible, one on Figures of Speech, and I believe some others. Although now grayed he is still the same personable person he was. He enjoys teaching the Bible and smoking his pipe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Personally, I get a bit weary at times of this constant "Oh, Yeah!, well prove it!" line of thought.
Certainly not everything should be taken at face value.
Documentation of facts and figures is of great value for many things.
But, this is, after all, a discussion style forum.
That's what we do.------We discuss.----In the open.
One should not feel compelled to have provide "absolute proof" of every single statement they make or present extensive research to validate every opinion. That approach stifles the free flow of ideas.
This is a public forum. These statements aren't being made in secret, behind closed doors.
I would think by now that Walter C. is probably well aware of the existence of GSC.
If he is being misrepresented here, it's likely it would come to his attention.
He can come here and offer his rebuttal if, in fact, it's warranted, just like anyone else.
I would hope he would do that either personally or via a third party.
By the way, I had a twig leader once who said "If you squeeze a Greek word too hard, you're likely to come out looking all wet." Do I need a "tape" to verify that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Your free to offer your opinion on anything you choose to here. We all know about those...... If one chooses to accept your ideas is the receiver's choice, personally I like facts, or truth not peoples speculations. I've found that trusting those seems to get one in trouble down the road when they don't quite work out. So if you want me to accept your words provide proof if not ,that's ok too . I'll feel free to point out that you did not provide any documentation to support your ideas and as such that is an opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jen-o
what i'd like to know is: what happened to my and excie's posts (which were right after yanagisawa"s post)... wherein we declared: who cares!
i mean, who really cares what walter said in a footnote of some obscure book about "literals according to usage" or some such term that no one else uses in the real world...
whitedove, you dissected a quote from a footnote as if it really means anything in the big picture... so what if john didn't remember the footnote verbatim... the essence of the meaning is the same...
you are really hung up on the words "a researcher" being replaced by "vpw"... you strain at a gnat!
the point is a researcher (NAMED VPW) used some kind of "translation" and often made no sense when he did so... which i'm not quoting verbatim, and who cares!
peace,
jen-o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
corps were required to "retemorize" a bunch of those "literal" and "expanded" thingies, were they not?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
A researcher must consider the inherent accuracy of the text and then seek to convey the exact thoughts and meanings of the original in current vernacular. Such a rendering is a literal translation according to usage....A literal translation according to usage reproduces the thoughts and meanings of the original, based on the words in the original in relation to the verse, content, remoter context, and to whom it is addressed.
I agree, the quoted statement from WJC referred to the fact that literal translations of Greek (or Aramaic for that matter) won't always make sense. English barely makes sense to me sometimes, hearing what I or another person says or writes.
Through my work I deal with research(ers) and data analysts There's different levels, kinds of research and I think Walter's brief description refers to them - collecting and compiling detailed data on a subject, producing views of that data through reporting mechanisms and lastly analysis, to determine meaning. For instance, I regularly run a variety of reports on internet usage, collecting basic data, and put it into reports that contain the raw numbers and then trending type reports that compare slots of time, who/what/where/when, etc.
Looking at the focus area and data then, there can be even more ways to assemble and compare the data, often leading to more collection. I'm sure we have some true data researchers and analysts floating around here who are more prolific in the field than I am but I have covered that ground somewhat over the years, enough to appreciate it anyhoo.
From that vantage point I think the literal translation according to usage is a legitmate end result of biblical research. It would include the data from a literal study of the words, the inherent accuracy of the text - plus any other information available from as many other environments as can be drawn from.
Quality is always an issue in research. Are the goals and requirements clear from the outset? Did "everything" available get captured? Is it "good research"?
Reading the results of other's research can be useful too, especially when their results differ. It's not unusual for different views to read data differently. It begs the question, how did they come up with theirs? What were the processes, the sources? A single piece of information can be viewed a 100 different ways before any conclusions are even possible. A first pass at definition may be done and repeated many times. Then, finally some effort has to be made at drawing conclusions and articulating the results. That, to me, is the LTATU. (acronyms always make for better research!!)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
footnote-
Never underestimate the destructive power of stupidity.
Edited by cmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
"Literal according to usage".
Now break this down.
It's either "literal" or "according to usage"
"Literal" means "actually" so frequently doesn't make sense because of the idiom of the original language, or the idiom of the language into which it's translated.
"According to usage" must mean according to local idiom.
So you could have either a literal translation or a translation according to usage but not sure that you can have both.
Thinking about it now puts this expression on the same level as "genuine spiritual suspicion" - a topic which has received its own discussion elsewhere in these forums.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"It's the integrity of the literal according to usage that always at stake"---sometimes---kinda, sorta.
(All depends on the kind of steak we're talking about, ya know?----N.Y. Strip, Fillet, Rib Eye---)
And then there's always the question of whether it's cool to put sauce on it or not.
Guess that's the part where you have to factor in the local customs and whatnot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
how many more posts should be deleted ????
Edited by excathedraLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I think your post spoke VOLUMES, excie
( But I have no idea why it disappeared.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Maybe it was a mini-Rapture, sort of a practice run.
Or a mini-Raptor got loose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Maybe it was a mini rapper...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Were posts really deleted? How rude. Productore' measlioso, exfilio absentade! Elete-day the ost-pay. Me next, me next!
Word, dooj. Y'know, just do an Obama. What would Jay-Z do? Brush it off.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Banjos That Destoyed The World POSTS!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Maybe W^lter really said,
"Great googly moogly!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
If he did, he borrowed it from Cleveland DJ "Mad Daddy" Pete Myers.
Growing up in Cleveland(or as Myers called it "The Land Of Oobladi") it's pretty hard to escape useless trivia like this.
Myers used to close his show by saying " Until next time, keep rockin' and reelin' and hangin' from the ceilin'."
Great Googly Moogly!!
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Thanks for that Waysider... I was told that was Frank Zappa's line.
And now I know... ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Well --- the only thing I can (or do) have to say about this is we were all there in twi.
Areas differed (acording to the *leadership* at given times), and documentation isn't always *available*, but I'm not saying anything new here. What I heard one twig leader (or area leader, or whatever *leader*) say from wherever I heard it (undocumented by either tape or written word),
DOESN'T relegate it to the category of *opinion*!
There's WAY too many stories that mesh one with another about *this, that or the other*, from folks who've never met, but ---- were all all in twi at one time or another. And these stories OPINIONS seem to be coming from all across the world, not just one small locale with a familiar ring to all of them. Given the amount of stow-ries over all these years -- it really doesn't matter if it is *documented* on tape, book, way mag., or whatever. There's too much input tossed into this from all over the globe for it to be easily dismissed so summarily or flippantly.
Don't give me the *opinion* BS. It happened, and you know it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Well David it seems we were discussing a book and the quotes there in. What was stated what was not stated I fail to see what that to do with an area differing, books are the same in every area. Its pretty easy to document open book, read, close book .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
In a court of law, an eye witness' story/opinion/viewpoint is given a lot of creedence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.