===>In fact something that was thus "dumbed down" for ignorant men who,
as apologists claim, could not have understood modern cosmology so
"God" had to give them fairy tales, such a story did not need any
further "dumbing down". -- L.

EHWollmann@aol.com wrote:

On Aug 22, 2:41 pm, Daniel <babylon@usa> wrote:

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 "Fr. Daniel Garguillio, DD" <drgargo...@hotmail.com> wrote:

The Douay-Rheims Bible is a scrupulously faithful translation into
English of the Latin Vulgate Bible
<snips>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

I would that that were true, that the Douay-Rheims bible was
a "scrupulously faithful translation" etc. of the preeminent
Latin Vulgate (which is indisputably the most authoritative
translation of the ancient Judeo-Christian scriptures in the
world). I've quoted two widely known passages for comparison...

For example, in the Douay-Rheims bible, the opening "day" of
Genesis, verses 1:1-5, reads quite similar to the King James
(and to every other English bible in the world you can quote):

"In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. And the
earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face
of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.
And God said: Be light made. And light was made. And God
saw the light that it was good; and he divided the light
from the darkness. And he called the light Day, and the
darkness Night; and there was evening and morning one day."

That's not to say it's a bad translation, but is oversimplified
at a minimum. Compare the Latin Vulgate, which reads as follows:

"in principio creavit Deus caelum et terram terra
in the beginning created Zeus the heaven and the earth. earth

autem erat inanis et vacua et tenebrae super
however to be inane and vacuous, and tenebrosity was upon

faciem abyssi et spiritus Dei ferebatur
the face of the abyss. and the spirit of the Gods did approach

super aquas dixitque Deus fiat lux et facta
upon the waters. and said Zeus Let there be light, and was made

est lux et vidit Deus lucem quod esset bona et
to be light. and did see Zeus the light, that it was good. and

divisit lucem ac tenebras appellavitque
divided He the light from the tenebrosity, and appellated Him

lucem diem et tenebras noctem factumque
the light Day, and the tenebrosity Night. and this was

est vespere et mane dies unus" --Genesis 1:1-5
to be evening and morning, day one.

You may not like how it translates, but it is precisely what
the Vulgate says. This naturally brings to mind the first of
the Ten Commandments. So compare the Douay-Rheims, and other
English translation(s) of your choice, with the actual words
of the Latin Vulgate at Exodus 20:1-3:

"And the Lord spoke all these words: I am the Lord thy God,
who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house
of bondage. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me."

The Vulgate reads:

"locutus quoque est Dominus cunctos
We have spoken likewise is the Dominant one altogether

sermones hos ego sum Dominus Deus
the sermons this. myself to be the Dominant one Zeus

tuus qui eduxi te de terra Aegypti
of you who brought up yourself from the land Egyptian,

de domo servitutis non habebis
away from the house of servitude. not shall you have

deos alienos coram me"
gods alien in the presence of me.

Whether the reader autonomically objects to using the Greek
language equivalent for Jehovah (YHWH), Zeus, or intensive-
singular of the same (the Dominant one) who reigns Supreme
among His equals, the Elohiym, else the nominative case of
the latter, "the Gods", plural, is arguably less important
than the oversimplification of English-translated bibles,
as we read them from Genesis 1:1 through Revelation 22:21.
I would say they don't call them "Babylonian" for nothing.

In Vigilance,
Daniel Joseph Minhttp://www.2hot2cool.com/11/danieljosephmin/

The Holy Bible is dumbed down no matter which way you look at it,
considering the the knowledge base we have now completely overshadows
and refutes most of biblical non-sense, written by uneducated old
Jewish men 2000 years ago.

===>In fact something that was thus "dumbed down" for ignorant men who,
as apologists claim, could not have understood modern cosmology so
"God" had to give them fairy tales, such a story did not need any
further "dumbing down". -- L.