|
Best choral or chanting or sacred playlists on Spotify?
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
Dunno if it's on Spotify, but the monks of Heiligenkreuz Abbey in Austria put out a really good album a few years back, simply titled “Chant“. They also produced a follow-up album where I've forgotten the name. The FSSP recently published an album with the Requiem chants on it that's supposed to be good. Orthodox-wise I dunno, but there's an utterly stunning three-part (I think) series of albums called “Le Mystère de voix Bulgares“ that's really transcendent. It's Orthodox Bulgarians chanting stuff, so close enough imo 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
I see multiple albums titled Chant, by the same group, all with different subtitles. Chant- Music for Peace, Chant - Music for the Soul, Chant - Music for...etc. Started one, like it, will explore. *edit: yes its on spotify
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
I wanted to post an album here but it's the same thing Metternich already recommended. They have another album they did with an Israeli Jewish woman singer, and I like it a lot. I love near eastern music in general though so ymmv https://open.spotify.com/album/3P31oabfZas8BZjOBBZv2z
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
On Sunday, a Lithuanian bishop called Teofilijus Matulionis was declared to be blessed and there was a huge event downtown. They even closed down traffic in one place. It was heartening to see so many people attentend the whole thing. The organisation was top notch, with the area being cordoned out into sectors and volunteers directing people where to go. We actually got invited into a sector without being participants, and we even got a small book (booklet) with all the texts, sans the Papal representative's homily.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:catholic early childhood education is still bloody as hell and i loved it Though they never talk about the baddass part about the flaming dragon which I think was just someone tripped up one night.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
A job thing is coming up for me, pray that I and the other members of my working team (I.B. and T.R. if your denomination needs names to pray for people) get this thing we'll be applying for soon!
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
What's the version of the Bible that's most widely recognized as a good translation? I'd like to grab a physical copy that's fairly well recognized, whilst not impossible to source.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 13:45
|
|
|
I don't have a recommendation for a single English translation. After years of reading parts of the Bible, I like to see what several translations say, to better discern the message. I sometimes even pull up the Greek translation of the New Testament. I don't know Greek, but I know some Greek roots. The translations I consult with the most are the Catholic's North American Bible, The Message in modern English, the nontrinitarian New World Translation from Jehovah's Witnesses, and the KJV because it's iconic and pretty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
I like the King James for poetry and the NSRV for clarity.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
The bible I have is obviously not in English (I got the newest Catholic translation because they use gender neutral phrasing whenever the original text allows it), but I've heard good things about the Jerusalem bible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
There's probably not a single translation that is recognized across denominations as preferable; each of them have strengths and weaknesses, and reflect particular interests. Personally, I tend to use the RSV for general reference when I need an English citation, the JPS translation of the Tanakh if I want something literal to the Hebrew and without the lens of Christian interpretation, and the King James if I don't need to worry about being overly literal and want to it to sound high-falutin'. Avoid anything that pretends to be "faithful to the Aramaic," since those are generally translations for crazy people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
Here's how various English Bibles translate Amen from John 10:1 KJV: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. NAB (Catholic): Amen, amen, I say to you,a whoever does not enter a sheepfold through the gate but climbs over elsewhere is a thief and a robber. Jerusalem Bible (also Catholic): In all truth I tell you, anyone who does not enter the sheepfold through the gate, but climbs in some other way, is a thief and a bandit. Douay Rheims (also Catholic): Amen, amen I say to you: He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber. The Message: Let me set this before you as plainly as I can. If a person climbs over or through the fence of a sheep pen instead of going through the gate, you know he’s up to no good—a sheep rustler! NWT (Jehovah's Witnesses): Most truly I say to you, the one who does not enter into the sheepfold through the door but climbs in by another way, that one is a thief and a plunderer. You get the gist of Joshua's message: if you're going to infiltrate a flock of sheep, go through the gate all sheeplike and not over the fence like an obvious geezer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
We used the Jerusalem Bible at school. It's pretty good imo. Parts of the translation were written by Tolkien! Jonah, I think. e: It also renders the tetragrammaton as 'Yahweh' instead of 'the LORD' which I strongly prefer. Honestly it's going to be about which translation speaks to you. I love my HarperCollins Study Bible that uses the NRSV but it doesn't have anything matching the King James version of Genesis 1 for beauty. HopperUK fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Jul 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
I grew up with the New International Version but I think the NRSV is a better 'modern' translation. King James for the beauty of the language. There are a lot of translations online at places like Bible Gateway, so you can compare and see which you like best.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
I'll generally hit up RSV if I want an ecumenically-friendly scholarly rendering, and KJV if I want some extra weight and oomph. I don't generally bother with Douay-Rheims because its fidelity to the Vulgate sometimes borders on slavish and comes at the expense of both beauty and intelligibility. If I'm doing serious exegesis I'll pull out critical editions of the originals.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
So I attended an FSSP ordination today celebrated by none other than Cardinal Burke himself. I was kind of concerned that he would go all RAARGH CULTURE WARS in his homily, especially seeing that just yesterday Germany legalised gay marriage. Turns out instead that His Eminence is a horrid preacher (at least today he was) who mangled the German and French of the homily so bad that you could hardly understand a word. Crisis averted, I guess  Also no cappa magna 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:So I attended an FSSP ordination today celebrated by none other than Cardinal Burke himself. I was kind of concerned that he would go all RAARGH CULTURE WARS in his homily, especially seeing that just yesterday Germany legalised gay marriage. Turns out instead that His Eminence is a horrid preacher (at least today he was) who mangled the German and French of the homily so bad that you could hardly understand a word. Crisis averted, I guess * voted to legalize, there's still some way to go
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
^^^You're right, I forgot that it has to pass the Bundesrat first ^^^ As an aside, does anybody here know what order/fraternity/whatever the priest on the right here comes from? Black cassock, green mozzetta and biretta, what seems to be a medal of some kind, a double-headed eagle... maybe a cathedral canon of some kind?  
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
One tidbit I heard was that a lot of translations are bad including big events of the Bible. Spoiled because detailed execution mistranslation. One of the facts is the Bible describes the spikes being driven through Jesus' hands which was really hard to imaginr even with middle school knowledge of biology and physics. The hands are just small pieces of bone with strands of thin muscle linking everything up. Putting a spike through that and expecting that to hold the human body up means the nail will sluice through the carpals freeing the person (in a really paingul way) The word for the area the Romans drove the spikes through was misinterpreted and was found to refer to an area below the wrist which is more like a loop of bone tied off with muscle at the end. Unless you break that arm nothing is going to break it any time before death.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
EVIL Gibson posted:One tidbit I heard was that a lot of translations are bad including big events of the Bible. Are you sure you know what translation is? The Gospel of John, at least, definitely reads χειρ - "hand." If the evangelist got the detail wrong, that's one thing, but the rendering is indeed accurate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:Are you sure you know what translation is? The Gospel of John, at least, definitely reads χειρ - "hand." If the evangelist got the detail wrong, that's one thing, but the rendering is indeed accurate. Yup, and you got to the part quickly where there is confusion. χείρ means "hand". χειρ can mean hand but it also parts around the hand which includes the hand, fingers, and the wrist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
I think a lot of crucifixes have Jesus tied to the cross with ropes and the hands pierced in addition to that. Others have the nails through the wrists. From what you describe both seem to match the Greek text.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
Yes, but that still seems more complex than a straight translation issue - the earliest visual depictions of the crucifixion show Jesus affixed to the cross through the hands. These, keep in mind, were often painted, drawn or sketched by native Greek speakers. If John had indeed meant the wrist, it's clear that they weren't picking up on that meaning any more than the conventional English translators might. It seems to me that calling the rendering of χειρ as hand is fine, because it indeed reflects how the early Christians understood the text - to insist on the wrist risks overcorrecting in the name of assuming that John must necessarily have had his physics right. That seems doubtful - the evangelists also record a Roman census that did not happen, can be sketchy about geography, and sometimes seem not to be sure which Herod they're talking about. A literalist would dissent, but I have no problem with the idea that they took poetic license, or sometimes were just less than accurate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
I would use whatever translation your church uses, so the language of your study and devotion matches the language of your worship. Mentioned above, the Harper Collins Study Bible is great and worth using the NRSV for that. It has the unique benefit of being the translation my denomination uses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
Synonymous posted:What's the version of the Bible that's most widely recognized as a good translation? I'd like to grab a physical copy that's fairly well recognized, whilst not impossible to source. My first Bible was the NRSV but I wasn't a huge fan. The one I'm getting now is called the Amplified Bible To use the earlier formula of comparing John 10:1 (AMP) "“I assure you and most solemnly say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up from some other place [on the stone wall], that one is a thief and a robber." I'm getting the audio version which is easier with my eyesight and also because of the narrator. I recommend listening to this sample.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
I was going to object to translations into modern idiomatic speech in favor of an appreciation of the ancient style, but then it occurred to me what Mark would look like thus translated. I cringe at the thought, and look forward to a point in the future when this will stop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:Yes, but that still seems more complex than a straight translation issue - the earliest visual depictions of the crucifixion show Jesus affixed to the cross through the hands. These, keep in mind, were often painted, drawn or sketched by native Greek speakers. If John had indeed meant the wrist, it's clear that they weren't picking up on that meaning any more than the conventional English translators might. It seems to me that calling the rendering of χειρ as hand is fine, because it indeed reflects how the early Christians understood the text - to insist on the wrist risks overcorrecting in the name of assuming that John must necessarily have had his physics right. That seems doubtful - the evangelists also record a Roman census that did not happen, can be sketchy about geography, and sometimes seem not to be sure which Herod they're talking about. A literalist would dissent, but I have no problem with the idea that they took poetic license, or sometimes were just less than accurate. Really, it doesn't matter. poo poo still hurt not matter where you stake rough iron through but if small things like that shake your faith , then there are problems. You shouldn't bother with it; Jesus stilled died for your sins and suffered no matter what. I just find studying religious things interesting coming from the inside and now can look in. Religious text is old and translations change all the time. Basically I found out the Bible is better used as a guide book of not how to be a complete and utter rear end in a top hat which everyone learns the basics already through society.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
Just found this: https://twitter.com/BillyGraham/status/850346809448902656 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 14:53
|
|
|
Just laffo. Also, one guy in the comments claiming that Catholicism is a religion while evangelical Christianity is a relatioship with Jesus that started with his death and never branched off anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:Just found this: He should stick to making crackers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
At this point, doesn't Graham himself qualify as a dusty remain?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
Not knowing Billy Graham well, I don't find this quote objectionable. Certainly no site or relic is more sacred than the human heart, the living place of Jesus. And I don't mean that metaphorically. If you cut a human heart fast enough, you can actually see Jesus hiding inside it before he darts away.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Caufman posted:Not knowing Billy Graham well, I don't find this quote objectionable. Certainly no site or relic is more sacred than the human heart, the living place of Jesus. Caufman, have you been out killing again?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Caufman rapidly becoming one of my favourite posters itt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Caufman does not kill people. Sudden cardiac failure and the departure of Jesus kill people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Is that what allows the evil skellington to rise? The departure of Jesus?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
Jesus is what keeps the Evil Skeletons Within at bay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2017 20:40
|
|