Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Texas Bible Converts “You” to “Y’all”
Firsts Things ^ | 6/3/13 | Matthew Schmitz

Posted on 06/04/2013 6:26:10 AM PDT by marshmallow

A new app called “Texas Bible” replaces “you” with “y’all” in English bible translations wherever the original language used a second-person plural. John Dyer, its creator, explains:

Just about any time I teach from the Scriptures I have to point out a place where the English Bible says “you,” but the original Hebrew or Greek indicates you plural rather than you singular. This means the original author was addressing to a group of people, but a modern English reader can’t detect this because in common English we use “you” for both singular (“you are awesome”) and plural (“you are a team”). This often leads modern readers to think “you” refers to him or her as an individual, when in fact it refers to the community of faith. . . .

(Excerpt) Read more at firstthings.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events; General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: bible; language; texas

1 posted on 06/04/2013 6:26:10 AM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
I like it ... though my pastor may not .. yet .. he HAS taught us the definitions of thee and thou and etcetera's ...
2 posted on 06/04/2013 6:28:05 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I can't prove it, but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

This should get the King James lovers’ heads spinning.


3 posted on 06/04/2013 6:33:29 AM PDT by randog (Tap into America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Yinz should do a Pixburgh version ‘nat.


4 posted on 06/04/2013 6:33:52 AM PDT by RingerSIX (My wife and I took an AIDS vaccine that they offer down at our Church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
More unintended consequences.

If English had not abandoned the second-person singular, we would not be having this problem.

Just about every major language makes the distinction between "thou" and "you". There's a reason for it.

KJV and Douay both use it.

5 posted on 06/04/2013 6:36:34 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ecce Crucem Domini, fugite partes adversae. Vicit Leo de Tribu Iuda, Radix David, Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: randog

The question I have is why do the KJV lovers go NUTS in regards to the newer English versions Bibles?

It is the Bible for goodness sakes and this is just another translation.


6 posted on 06/04/2013 6:40:17 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
"This often leads modern readers to think “you” refers to him or her as an individual, when in fact it refers to the community of faith. . . ."

Not sure I buy this. I can't think of any instance where a precept directed at a "communitly of faith" wouldn't apply equal to any individual within that community. As to whether the word "you" is being used as a plural or singular, well, it's not that hard to determine whether the speaker is addressing an individual or a group.

7 posted on 06/04/2013 6:40:39 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

That’s right y’all.


8 posted on 06/04/2013 6:43:38 AM PDT by smokingfrog ( ==> sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Therefore y’all also must be ready, for the Son of Man is fixin to come at an hour y’all do not expect.


9 posted on 06/04/2013 6:47:38 AM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

Many cling to the King James version of the Bible because it is what they have heard all their lives, and it is comforting to them—why should that bother you?

Also, as a 7th generation Texan who has always said “y’all” , I don’t much care for having a bible using that pronoun........


10 posted on 06/04/2013 6:47:47 AM PDT by basil (basil --Second Amendment Sisters.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RingerSIX

or ‘youze’ for the NY, MA, CT, RI people


11 posted on 06/04/2013 6:48:49 AM PDT by ItsOurTimeNow ("This ain't no party, this ain't no disco, this ain't no foolin' around.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RingerSIX

For I know the plans I have for yinz, declares Yahweh, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give yinz a future and a hope. (Jeremiah 29:11, pESV – Pittsburgh ESV)

http://donteatthefruit.com/2013/05/texas-bible-second-person-plural-chrome-extension/


12 posted on 06/04/2013 6:54:11 AM PDT by smokingfrog ( ==> sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

I wonder about the KJV-only people also.

..... when they translated the Bible for distribution in China, did they translate in into 15th Century Mandarin Chinese? Or did they use the modern language?


13 posted on 06/04/2013 7:00:31 AM PDT by Alex in chains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: circlecity
As to whether the word "you" is being used as a plural or singular, well, it's not that hard to determine whether the speaker is addressing an individual or a group.

Then why do so many regional dialects contain a 'fix' to clear this up? I have heard: "you guys," "youse," in addition to the popular Southern: "y'all" Isn't the problem the indefinite word: "you?"

14 posted on 06/04/2013 7:04:48 AM PDT by sportutegrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: marshmallow

Shouldn’t it be “Th’all?”


16 posted on 06/04/2013 7:20:13 AM PDT by Daveinyork (."Trusting government with power and money is like trusting teenaged boys with whiskey and car keys,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I reject this, because linguistically, “y’all” is an informal means of address, made more so by contraction, so would be generally unacceptable in the polite means of address used in the Bible.

If he had written “you all” it would be more acceptable as a plural. In many polite families, contractions are still frowned upon, including such things as “dropping g’s” (in “-ing” words), which was popularized in the 1920s.

Many other contractions would likewise dampen the mood of the Bible as a serious work, so should be avoided.


17 posted on 06/04/2013 7:28:14 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Excellent. It disambiguates occurrences of “you”. A good thing.


18 posted on 06/04/2013 7:28:49 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

How about the surfer translation? “Dude, don’t you know you’re, like, a temple of God, brah, and God is totally dwelling in you? Whoa!!”


19 posted on 06/04/2013 7:29:10 AM PDT by ZirconEncrustedTweezers (Some people take there grammar way to seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

All my pastors say “all y’all” all the time. Thats all.


20 posted on 06/04/2013 7:38:06 AM PDT by showme_the_Glory (ILLEGAL: prohibited by law. ALIEN: Owing political allegiance to another country or government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
I think my Douay-Challoner Bible uses 'ye' in those instances . . . just like the nice lady who ran the B&B we stayed in last March in Ireland.

"How are ye this morning? You're having coffee and you're having tea, right? Do ye need another minute to think about breakfast? Sure, you'll be havin' the full Irish, right? Are ye off to the cliffs today?"

21 posted on 06/04/2013 7:38:44 AM PDT by Oratam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl
"Then why do so many regional dialects contain a 'fix' to clear this up?"

because what is clear in print isn't always so clear in real life usage where there's no narrator describing what's going on. In real life both may be possible so it's necessary to distinguish.

22 posted on 06/04/2013 7:39:55 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
A couple of reasons for adhering to the KJV (or the Douay - the Catholic 17th century version which is more Latinized and translated from the Vulgate primarily, but essentially the same).

1. The language is elevated, graceful, and sets apart God's word as something extraordinary, unusual, not of the common life. This also keeps it from becoming "dated" on a 10 year scale (the problem with many modern translations).

2. The translation is accurate, usually (some sources were not available to the committee, and it can be argued that the committee's views shaded their translation somewhat, but that's true of every translation). Where the translation is not accurate, a concordance or parallel Greek Testament or Young's Literal will point this out.

3. English literature from the last 300 years draws heavily on the language of the KJV (as well as the Book of Common Prayer). If you are not familiar with the KJV, you have just seriously impoverished your appreciation of most of the major English authors.

4. The modern translations have their own drawbacks. Many are difficult to read and poorly written; many have translation problems. Exhibit "A" is the execrable New American Bible. Not only does it read as though it was produced by a committee of intellectually-challenged high schoolers for whom English was a second (or third) language, it is frequently inaccurate and the language is already very dated.

My personal choices are the KJV and Douay for personal reading, the Oxford Study Bible (RSV) for study, and the Revised Standard (Catholic edition) for public use. Although if I were a lector I would be sneaking the Douay in every chance I got . . . :-)

23 posted on 06/04/2013 7:41:48 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ecce Crucem Domini, fugite partes adversae. Vicit Leo de Tribu Iuda, Radix David, Alleluia!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
The question I have is why do the KJV lovers go NUTS in regards to the newer English versions Bibles?

It's because Jesus and His disciples spoke Old English. (/sarcasm). I have heard the King James Only arguments and I find them less than compelling. IMO, it's best to get God's Word in a language that can be understood as long as it isn't political motivated (like the gender-free bibles) or too simplistic (like the old Reader's Digest version).

Our pastor who loves studying linguistics and is very skilled in both Hebrew and Greek often provides us his translations of Biblical passages. Being from Alabama, he is comfortable using the plural form of you: y'all. He was expositing on a passage from Dueteronomy this past Sunday and I was thinking how useful the distinction was between the singular "you" and the plural "you".

24 posted on 06/04/2013 7:49:43 AM PDT by CommerceComet (Obama vs. Romney - clear evidence that our nation has been judged by God and found wanting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

“Find” and “replace” is hard.


25 posted on 06/04/2013 7:59:42 AM PDT by Carpe Cerevisi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Cowboy churches are all around here

Ten Commandments, Cowboy Style.

Cowboy’s Ten Commandments posted on the wall at Cross Trails Church in Fairlie, TX

(1) Just one God.

(2) Honor yer Ma & Pa.

(3) No telling tales or gossipin’.

(4) Git yourself to Sunday meeting.

(5) Put nothin’ before God.

(6) No foolin’ around with another fellow’s gal.

(7) No killin’.

(8) Watch yer mouth.

(9) Don’t take what ain’t yers.
(10) Don’t be hankerin’ for yer buddy’s stuff.


26 posted on 06/04/2013 8:09:42 AM PDT by sunny48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil
"Many cling to the King James version of the Bible because it is what they have heard all their lives, and it is comforting to them—why should that bother you?"

I think his question was directed at the KJV only crowd.

27 posted on 06/04/2013 8:21:19 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ZirconEncrustedTweezers
How about the surfer translation? “Dude, don’t you know you’re, like, a temple of God, brah, and God is totally dwelling in you? Whoa!!”

Have you seen the LOLCat Bible?

Boreded Ceiling Cat makinkgz Urf n stuffs

1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.

2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz.

3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1

6 An Ceiling Cat sayed, im in ur waterz makin a ceiling. But he no yet make a ur. An he maded a hole in teh Ceiling.7 An Ceiling Cat doed teh skiez with waterz down An waterz up. It happen.8 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has teh firmmint wich iz funny bibel naim 4 ceiling, so wuz teh twoth day.

9 An Ceiling Cat gotted all teh waterz in ur base, An Ceiling Cat hadz dry placez cuz kittehs DO NOT WANT get wet.10 An Ceiling Cat called no waterz urth and waters oshun. Iz good.

11 An Ceiling Cat sayed, DO WANT grass! so tehr wuz seedz An stufs, An fruitzors An vegbatels. An a Corm. It happen.12 An Ceiling Cat sawed that weedz ish good, so, letz there be weedz.13 An so teh threeth day jazzhands.

14 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has lightz in the skiez for splittin day An no day.15 It happen, lights everwear, like christmass, srsly.16 An Ceiling Cat doeth two grate lightz, teh most big for day, teh other for no day.17 An Ceiling Cat screw tehm on skiez, with big nails An stuff, to lite teh Urfs.18 An tehy rulez day An night. Ceiling Cat sawed. Iz good.19 An so teh furth day w00t.

20 An Ceiling Cat sayed, waterz bring me phishes, An burds, so kittehs can eat dem. But Ceiling Cat no eated dem.21 An Ceiling Cat maed big fishies An see monstrs, which wuz like big cows, except they no mood, An other stuffs dat mooves, An Ceiling Cat sawed iz good.22 An Ceiling Cat sed O hai, make bebehs kthx. An dont worry i wont watch u secksy, i not that kynd uf kitteh.23 An so teh...fith day. Ceiling Cat taek a wile 2 cawnt.

24 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has MOAR living stuff, mooes, An creepie tings, An otehr aminals. It happen so tehre.25 An Ceiling Cat doed moar living stuff, mooes, An creepies, An otehr animuls, An did not eated tehm.

26 An Ceiling Cat sayed, letz us do peeps like uz, becuz we ish teh qte, An let min p0wnz0r becuz tehy has can openers.

27 So Ceiling Cat createded teh peeps taht waz like him, can has can openers he maed tehm, min An womin wuz maeded, but he did not eated tehm.

28 An Ceiling Cat sed them O hai maek bebehs kthx, An p0wn teh waterz, no waterz An teh firmmint, An evry stufs.

29 An Ceiling Cat sayed, Beholdt, the Urfs, I has it, An I has not eated it.30 For evry createded stufs tehre are the fuudz, to the burdies, teh creepiez, An teh mooes, so tehre. It happen. Iz good.

31 An Ceiling Cat sayed, Beholdt, teh good enouf for releaze as version 0.8a. kthxbai.

28 posted on 06/04/2013 8:49:17 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

I have seen that.


29 posted on 06/04/2013 9:22:55 AM PDT by ZirconEncrustedTweezers (Some people take there grammar way to seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Alex in chains
Actually, the use of an archaic high literary form of the language for the Scriptures and services of the Church is perfectly defensible: St. Nicholas, Enlightener of Japan translated the Scriptures and service books of the Church into the high literary (and archaic) Japanese used in Buddhist and Shintoist rites, rather than the current Japanese of the Meiji era. The normative translation of the Divine Liturgy into English used by Orthodox parishes in the U.S. and Canada is now Bishop BASIL (Essy)'s translation of the Liturgicon, which like the KJV is in early modern English, rather than modern English. I go to the trouble of rendering hymns we have in translations by the OCA (into modern English) back into early modern English to make the fit properly into the Liturgy.
30 posted on 06/04/2013 9:26:22 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

“Y’all” is singular.
“All Y’all” is plural.


31 posted on 06/04/2013 11:31:18 AM PDT by left that other site (You Shall Know the Truth, and the Truth Shall Set You Free...John 8:32)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
The question I have is why do the KJV lovers go NUTS in regards to the newer English versions Bibles?

One who does not grasp the "why" is because of an abysmal ignorance of the purpose, theme, and use of the Bible in developing spiritually, and thus selects poorer versions for personal reading and study.

Spending a few hours in reviewing the causes will at least highlight the several reasons, if not fully affirm them.

(1) Translation of the New Testament segment of all the modern English versions (excepting the New King James Bible) are from a synthetic, corrupted Greek text which never existed prior to the late 1800s; whereas the NT Text underlying the AV/KJV is a Byzantine/Majority Textform as preserved throughout the churches and continuously available to them for about 1600 years.

(2) Most modern English translations claim to present you with "God's Word," but they do not tell you which words are from God (inspired) in the original text and syntax, and which are not, and thus destroy the overall reliability; whereas the words inserted by translators of the AV/KJV for uniformly put in italics throughout, and only then for clarity of translation--not for color.

(3) Modern translations do not uniformly and consistently cling to a literal equivalency, and thus have invented a term "dynamic equivalency", described as "from the mind of God to the minds of men" rather than "from the words of God (as given in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek) into the words of mankind (in other languages).

(4) At the time of compilation of the AV as an "upgrade" of the forms of other approved translations, the second person singular words "thee, thou, thine" had pretty much passed from common English in the sense of preserving the number--singular or plural--in the grammatical sense, and was retained only in the relationship sense--family or dear one versus distant or stranger--in the singular (as have modern French, Spanish, and German). The AV/KJB translators deliberately reintroduced the differentiation between second person singular and second person plural so that no mistake could be made in the meaning of the conjugation of the verb to do violence to doctrines depending on the translation.

And that is exactly what has happened from thousands of pulpits, in misinterpreting the "ye, you, and your" (5 times) in the 1 Cor. 6:19 verse as being singular, thus defining that it refers only to one's own body, and incorrectly identifies that a person's physical body, with the Holy Ghost in it, is The Temple of the Holy Ghost.

This is a horrible misunderstanding and devaluation of the great, awesome doctrine being presented by the Apostle!

The correct doctrine to be taught from the Sacred Desk is that:

(1) The "ye" here is the second person plural pronoun of the conjugated verb "to know, to perceive" and comprises the church of God--the complete assembly of Christian congregants--at Corinth (all of you), to whom the pastoral letter is addressed.
(2) The "your" is a plural genitive pronoun, but "body" is undeniably a single nominative noun, as indicated by the third person singular of "is."
(3) A definite article not present with the word "temple," the correct translation is "a temple" not "the temple."
(4) The next "you" is also plural, the whole substantive being "of the in-you-all Holy Ghost" nature.
(5) The word "which" is singular and neuter, making it refer to The Holy Ghost, not "temple" or "body," which are masculine.
(6) The next "ye" is plural, and that is the whole assembly, which is implicitly invested with the Holy Ghost.
(7) The next "ye" is plural, as defined by and contained in the conjugation of the verb "to be"; furthermore "ye" refers to the whole assembly being addressed by Paul and Sosthenes (who had been converted while he was the chief ruler of the Jewish synagogue, but now perhaps visiting with Paul at Ephesus, yet still a member of the Corinthian church where he was inducted/baptized into The Faith).
(8) The word "yourselves" is also plural.

The word "body" (singular) is therefore, in the figurative-literal sense, a metonymy for "the whole assembly of believers" at Corinth, a social unit. Therefore, as a whole unit, it is a temple (figuratively speaking) of the Holy Ghost. But as a figurative body, it must also have a figurative head, which is Jesus Christ (see Eph. 1:22-23). Here, the body referred to is the whole local church, no less and no more; not an individual, and not some invisible universal religious social unit comprising all believers that ever were and are to be.

Furthermore, the individual member of this local church--this temple--is but a living stone (see 1 Pet. 2:4-5), just one of several (of which Christ Himself is but one stone) that properly assembled together constitute one local temple for the residence of The Holy Ghost. Now, referring to the application of this doctrine, it is not unreasonable to assume tat this admonition applies to any local church, and if one of these individuals--one living stone--commits physical or spiritual fornication as in the previous v. 18, he/she does not merely defile himself, but soils the whole assembly, and should be the object of local church discipline. The import is that he/she defiles the whole local assembly, and brings the whole local church into disrepute before the Lord.

A perfect example of this is how The God of Heaven literally (not figuratively) dealt with the whole church of Israelites because of the defilement cause by the sin of one man, Achan, after the battle at Jericho and the sacking of the ruins. See Joshua 7:1-26, an occasion where one man caused an entire nation, every man, to suffer. In summary:

"But the children of Israel committed a trespass in the accursed thing: for Achan, the son of Carmi, the son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took ofthe accursed thing: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against the children of Israel" (Joshua 7:1).

Should not every member of a local church, a body of Christ and a temple for the dwelling of the Holy Ghost, fear for its standing before its Head, lest he disappoint or disobey the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, by his/her own personal conduct; and thus defile the entire church?

This is what and what alone should be preached from this text; and it is not, because one cannot discern the seriousness from a modern English version that does not distinguish between "thee, thy, thine" and "you, your, and yours" as does the KJV. Even slip-shod pastors miss this, and even KJV-Only ones do, when they don't take the grammar of their version seriously, developing their expositions from a direct literal/grammatical/historical/cultural hermeneutic, rather than picking and choosing between other popular but fallible commentators.

Scholars prefer the AV/KJV not because of its antiquity, but rather in spite of it!

It is the Bible for goodness sakes and this is just another translation.

No, it is not "just another translation." In English, the AV is the premiere translation which has not yet been equalled for its breadth, accuracy, splendor, and impact in presenting the Messiah, the Prince of Peace, and His coming kingdom of righteousness and harmony to a lost and dying world. The purpose is to perfectly display The God's plan and method for reconciliation, salvation, and maturation of His dear human creatures made for fellowship with Him, which the more modern versions have not fully fulfilled; in my honest opinion, cheesecloth, as compared with the AV's fine linen (Rev. 18:8, 19:14).

32 posted on 06/04/2013 1:21:42 PM PDT by imardmd1 ("I the LORD search the heart ..." [Jer. 17:10a])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

John 13:27
As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. So Jesus told him, “What y’all are about to do, do quickly.”


33 posted on 06/04/2013 2:38:07 PM PDT by RBStealth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson