|
Forums118
Topics9,237
Posts196,304
Members1,327
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
8 registered members (Wendell Slattery, Karen Y, dedication, Piggler, daylily, 3 invisible),
1,746
guests, and 5
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Daryl]
#148568
12/31/12 10:30 AM
12/31/12 10:30 AM
|
SDA
Active Member 2014
Retired Pastor
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,014
Iceland
|
|
Elle is a she/her, rather than a he/his.
Elle is a French word for She. Another example to show how confusing languages can be. We had a very good male friend here in Iceland whose nickname could have been spelled Elle in English.
"Here is a last piece of advice. If you believe in goodness and if you value the approval of God, fix your minds on the things which are holy and right and pure and beautiful and good. Model your conduct on what you have learned from me, on what I have told you and shown you, and you will find the God of peace will be with you."
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Gregory]
#148570
12/31/12 02:28 PM
12/31/12 02:28 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2024
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,525
Midland
|
|
Why use G-d and not -od, Go-, or G--, -o-, --d, or ---? The answer to your question is simple: It stems from the fact that the Bible was written in unpointed Hebrew. In unpointed Hebrew (transliterated into English), the word god would be written as "gd." It would not be written as "go," or "od." NOTE: Transliterated is a different word than translated. So, modern Jewish people writing in English write it as "g-d" with the hyphen indicating the the Hebrew root has been transliterated in its unpointed Hebrew form. Gregory, the English word, "God" is not in Hebrew nor Greek. So pointing or unpointing does not apply. This case is nothing but an example of blasphemy at worse and calling attention to oneself at best. Especially when paired with other "issues" presented.
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: kland]
#148639
01/01/13 10:36 PM
01/01/13 10:36 PM
|
SDA
Chaplain
Active Member 2022
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,364
USA
|
|
Gregory, the English word, "God" is not in Hebrew nor Greek. On the basis that the word "god" is an English word, you are correct. However, there are a number of Hebrew and Greek words that have been translated by the English words "god "and "God." Two of these, if you will allow me to transliterate are: "el" and "Theos." Do you allege that these words are improperly translated by the English word "God?" So pointing or unpointing does not apply. Religious Jews, who understand the Biblical Hebrew, write certain words in the English language in the unpointed (g-d) style of the ancient biblical Hebrew. They bring that over from the ancient Biblical Hebrew for theological reasons. So, I would not agree with your statement above.
Gregory
May God's will be done.
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Gregory]
#148640
01/01/13 10:47 PM
01/01/13 10:47 PM
|
SDA
Chaplain
Active Member 2022
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,364
USA
|
|
Here is a Biblical use of the Hebrew word that has clearly applies to a pagan diety: Wilt not thou possess that which Chemosh thy god [Elohim] giveth thee to possess? So whomsoever Jehovah our God [Elohim] hath dispossessed from before us, them will we possess. (Judges 11:24, ASV)
Gregory
May God's will be done.
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Gregory]
#148667
01/02/13 02:29 PM
01/02/13 02:29 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2024
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,525
Midland
|
|
I'm confused why you think translating from one language to another requires the second language to make use of the alphabet style and mechanisms or not of the first language. Would you also require it to not use articles? What if the first language has a letter not in the second. Would you require the second to never use that letter no matter if the word translated has that letter?
Now, if you translate it as LHM, you may or may not have an argument to suggest for discussion.
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: kland]
#148699
01/03/13 04:49 PM
01/03/13 04:49 PM
|
SDA
Chaplain
Active Member 2022
Most Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,364
USA
|
|
Translation into another language always uses the gramatical style and alphabetic style of the language into which it is translated.
Transliteration is a different issue. I will respond to your question from the standpoint of transliteration: In transliteration, there is always an alphabetic letter of the language that the word is being transliterated into that is assigned to the alphabetic letter in the origonal language. Now, there may not be exactly one comparable letter in each alphabet. Therefore a letter in one alphaet may represent several letters in the other alphabet.
E.G. In the Korean alphabet (Korea has a 24 character alphabet.)
A couple of the letters in the Korean alphabet could be transliterated into two different letters of the English alphabet. This was of concern to the Korean government and it established a government committee that attempted to set in place a uniform system of transliteration into English. Perhaps, that has been accomplished by now? I do not know.
Gregory
May God's will be done.
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Gregory]
#148706
01/03/13 08:18 PM
01/03/13 08:18 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2014
Retired Pastor
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,014
Iceland
|
|
Translation into another language always uses the gramatical style and alphabetic style of the language into which it is translated.
Transliteration is a different issue. I will respond to your question from the standpoint of transliteration: In transliteration, there is always an alphabetic letter of the language that the word is being transliterated into that is assigned to the alphabetic letter in the origonal language. Now, there may not be exactly one comparable letter in each alphabet. Therefore a letter in one alphaet may represent several letters in the other alphabet.
E.G. In the Korean alphabet (Korea has a 24 character alphabet.)
A couple of the letters in the Korean alphabet could be transliterated into two different letters of the English alphabet. This was of concern to the Korean government and it established a government committee that attempted to set in place a uniform system of transliteration into English. Perhaps, that has been accomplished by now? I do not know.
These principles apply with many different languages. There are times when I deal with 6 or 7 different languages, some of which are somewhat similar while others are quite different. Even similar languages use different alphabets with different number of letters. In some languages you have to use a definite article to convey the same meaning that is expressed in another language without an article. In some languages the article is a separate word while in others it is a different format of the word. Words with different or opposite meanings may cause problems in quite similar languages. In some languages it takes a long sentence to convey the meaning of a short sentence in another language. At times a single word does not exist in another language and has to be explained There are so many reasons why the principles of a transliteration is incomprehensible without considering thoroughly the language you are translating the message into. It has been my privilege to translate countless articles, including Week of Prayer readings, from one language into another, also including a book by Ellen White.
"Here is a last piece of advice. If you believe in goodness and if you value the approval of God, fix your minds on the things which are holy and right and pure and beautiful and good. Model your conduct on what you have learned from me, on what I have told you and shown you, and you will find the God of peace will be with you."
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Johann]
#148709
01/03/13 10:58 PM
01/03/13 10:58 PM
|
|
|
God in French is Dieu.
How does one spell Dieu in the same sense that one spells God as G-d in English?
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Daryl]
#148710
01/04/13 12:10 AM
01/04/13 12:10 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2019
Died February 12, 2019
2500+ Member
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,536
Canada
|
|
God in French is Dieu.
How does one spell Dieu in the same sense that one spells God as G-d in English? I don't speak French very much anymore and my Bible is English. So I never really looked into the word "Dieu". Here's is what I found : ------- WIKIPEDIA -- Dieu --------
"Le mot « dieu » vient du latin Deus"
[comes from the root word Deus]
------- WIKIPEDIA -- Deus --------
"Deus (Latin pronunciation: [ˈdeːʊs]) is Latin for "god" or "deity". Latin deus and dīvus "divine", are descended from Proto-Indo-European *deiwos, from the same root as *Dyēus, the reconstructed chief god of the Proto-Indo-European pantheon.
------- WIKIPEDIA -- Deiwos & Dyeus--------
Dyēus (also *Dyēus ph2ter) is believed to have been chief deity in the religious traditions of the prehistoric Proto-Indo-European tribes. Part of a larger pantheon, he was the god of the daylight sky, and his position may have mirrored the position of the patriarch or monarch in society. This deity is not directly attested; rather scholars have reconstructed this deity from the languages and cultures of later Indo-European nations.
Later gods who are etymologically connected with Dyeus include:
In Greek mythology Zeus[1]
In Roman mythology Jupiter (originally Iuppiter)[2]
In Historical Vedic religion Dyauṣ Pitār[3]
Possibly Dionysus, and Thracian Sabazios (from Saba Zeus?)
Rooted in the related but distinct Indo-European word *deiwos is the Latin word for deity, deus. Well, it looks like I should write it as "Di-u" when I use it. Really I should not use these words at all. When I exchange with my SDA friend that share this to me, we never say G-d, but instead we use the Lord, Father, Jesus or Yah (short for Yahveh).
Blessings
|
|
|
Re: A good reason to hypernate G-d
[Re: Gregory]
#148724
01/04/13 03:01 PM
01/04/13 03:01 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2024
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,525
Midland
|
|
Translation into another language always uses the gramatical style and alphabetic style of the language into which it is translated.
Gregory, you're not making any sense. So either I am failing to understand what you are saying. In Hebrew, God is אֱלקים Why do you think God should have letters left out when English doesn't have anything related to the alphabetic style? Transliteration is a different issue. I will respond to your question from the standpoint of transliteration: In transliteration, there is always an alphabetic letter of the language that the word is being transliterated into that is assigned to the alphabetic letter in the origonal language. Now, there may not be exactly one comparable letter in each alphabet. Therefore a letter in one alphaet may represent several letters in the other alphabet.
E.G. In the Korean alphabet (Korea has a 24 character alphabet.)
A couple of the letters in the Korean alphabet could be transliterated into two different letters of the English alphabet. This was of concern to the Korean government and it established a government committee that attempted to set in place a uniform system of transliteration into English. Perhaps, that has been accomplished by now? I do not know.
Are you talking about transliterating letter for letter without the meaning? Makes no sense and would make no sense. God in French is also le Très Haut If we were translating French English, we would not put a accent anywhere on the English letters. So I don't know what you are talking about using the same alphabetic style. English does not have pointing or unpointing. Just because you translate a language which does into English does not require such. Again, what you are saying makes no sense. Other than to justify "hypernation" nonsense.
Last edited by Daryl; 01/04/13 11:37 PM. Reason: Enabled HTML in this post.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
