Theos-Talk Archives (October 1996 Message tl00310)

Dr. A.M.Bain writes:
>In message <199610130546.BAA04306@envirolink.org>, John Straughn
><JTarn@envirolink.org> writes
>>I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but the TI is starting to sound a lot
>>like the NIV.  I just hope you don't become so "new" as to forget the
>>wisdom and the reality of the "old".
>
>You seem to have a problem with something? Are "we" something separate
>from you?

The latter I am taking as rhetorical due to basic obviousness that we are
not...in sat.  As to the former, I wish to explain.  No, I do not have any
problems with the TI as of yet.  The comment made was in response to the term
"new Theosophy" which startled me.  When the translators for the NIV wrote
their version, they believed that their version was right, and that all their
translations written to be understood as the Hebrew/Greek would have been
understood when the original(s) was written.  However, the translators of the
KJV thought the same.  Their two translations have many differences, and I
have to say that in reading the two esoterically, the KJV has kept truer to
the terminology.  However, in having read portions of the Hebrew Genesis, I
would have to say that the KJV is quite a ways away from the intended
message(s).  However, my point is that both translators think they are right,
but they differ from each other.  My comment was not an attack on the TI, or a
statement of disfavor.  To put it in a better light...it was a warning to be
cautious of how you incorporate the "old" into the new.  It has been my
experience in the past that the message of the "new" was often far from the
intended message of the "old".


>If you read the TI statement of intent, you will see that we quite
>clearly respect and wish to keep the reality of the old *and* to bring
>the wisdom of the past into the present.  See below:

I did read it, however my statement still stands true.  I'm sure that the
various translators of the bible also respected and wished to keep the reality
of the old while incorporating it into the present.  I apologize for not
explaining my views more precisely the first time.

>"Ancient Wisdom for a New Age."
>
>THAT'S TI.
>


---
The Triaist