> > > Psalm 23:4
> > >
> > > Hebrew: "Gam ki elech b'gia tzalmavet..."
> > > "Even though I walk in a valley of deep darkness..."
> > >
> > > New English Bible: "Even were I to walk through a valley of deepest darkness..."
> > >
> > > King James Version: "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death..."
> >
> > > It seems as though there are a lot of very religious people on Rinkworks, particularly of Judeo-Christian faiths. I'm curious what your reactions are to these differences.
> > >
> > > My own opinion is that the "original" was probably very close to the Ugaritic and Hebrew versions. However, from a literary standpoint, the King James version is much more beautiful.
> > >
> > > Grace
> >
> >
> > Modern versions tend to emphasize either literal wording or literal intent, but occasionally you'll run across a paraphrased intent.
> >
> > The King James Bible is unique and is a highlight of the history of English. [...] two goals: to translate the tesxt faithfully, and to make the text poetic. They intended all along to make this version beautiful, and they succeeded enormously well. Four centuries later, I still like some KJV verses much better than their modern counterparts.
> >
> > gab"You've got to admit that Psalm 23:4 sounds ever so much more fluid in the KJV than the NIV. Since the meaning (of most of the words) hasn't changed, I imagine the NKJV must be really good, though I haven't read it. This mid-name-quote is too long."by
>
>
> Um, I guess I've been sort of bouncing around Grace's original question, which was basically, What's my reaction to the various differences in translating a favorite Psalm? Well, I'll say this... I do feel some regret that the text does not really say "through the valley of the shadow of death". That's an indelible metaphor... nostalgic, and persistent. At the same time, when I ask myself, I think that I truly prefer to know what it actually says. The New English version, "Even were I to walk through a valley of deepest darkness," has a similar majesty and -- dare I admit it? -- a similar rhythmic flow to the KJV's. When it comes to seeking out truth and meaning, for the most part I will always prefer accuracy over literary artifice. In an English class, I was once given a definition of what it means to read a passage according to "literal intent": this means trying to interpret a text according to the author's *own* intentions, independently of later preceptual overlays.
>
> So personally, I prefer to know what the writer really said, then. If the Psalmist really wrote "deepest darkness" and *meant* it, then it's kind of selfish of me to want it to go backward and have it mean "Shadow of death" because it 'sounds cooler'. That's just my $0.02.
>
> Wolfspirit

Thanks Wolf. Yours is the type of reply I was "fishing" for when I posted my question. I am interested in other people's "emotional" (?) responses to the change in text/meaning.

Of course, as a student of literature, the more academic replies are also quite interesting and appreciated.

Again, to those of you who hold the Bible as a *foundation* of belief: What do you think of these generally unquestioned revisions to what you (may) believe is the *word* *of* *God*?

Grace