Simviation Forums

A young monk arrives at the monastery. He is assigned to helping the  other monks in copying the old canons and laws of the church by hand.
He  notices, however, that all of the monks are copying from copies, not  from the original manuscript. So, the new monk goes to the head abbot  to question this, pointing out that if someone made even a small error  in the first copy, it would never be picked up! In fact, that error  would be continued in all of the subsequent  copies.
The  head monk, says, 'We have been copying from the copies for centuries,  but you make a good point, my son.'
He  goes down into the dark caves underneath the monastery where the original  manuscripts are held as archives in a locked vault that hasn't been opened  for hundreds of years. Hours go by  and nobody sees the old  abbot.

So,  the young monk gets worried and goes down to look for  him.



He  sees him banging his head against the wall and  wailing.






















'We  missed the R  !



We  missed the R  !






















We  missed the R  !'
















His  forehead is all bloody and bruised and he is crying uncontrollably. The  young monk asks the old abbot, 'What's wrong,  father?'







With  a choking voice, the old abbot  replies,








'The  word was... CELEBRATE!!!

LOL! i like it

ROFL

[color=#003300]This did not bring back all good memories; the girl's mother, nevertheless, stated, "The King James version was good enough for [the apostle] Paul so it's good enough for me."
The problem with her statement is that the KJV was published, not so much later than any of the earliest English translations, in the 17th century -- 1500 years after Paul's sojourn on earth; he was versed in Hebrew and Greek (undoubtedly, also in Latin), his letters (epistles which we now often refer to as books) being written in Greek. The ancestors of the English, and their language, were so far away from his arena that they may has well have been on Uranus beneath a full body suit.

Ahem, now, to fully destroy your post:
In the Old Testament, Hebrew words such as khaw-gag', zaw-kar' and saw-khak' and, in the New Testament, the Greek euphraino were translated as celebrate.
There is no rendering to celibate in any of the Old Testament translations; I know of only one recent Bible translation (The New Living Translation*) and a commentary (God's Word**) that use the word celibate and I had to look those up because they're not in my library.

*

FFFFFRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!


CRASH!






the sound this post made because of "H"

Well, it was funny...

lol

[quote][color=#003300]This did not bring back all good memories; the girl's mother, nevertheless, stated, "The King James version was good enough for [the apostle] Paul so it's good enough for me."
The problem with her statement is that the KJV was published, not so much later than any of the earliest English translations, in the 17th century -- 1500 years after Paul's sojourn on earth; he was versed in Hebrew and Greek (undoubtedly, also in Latin), his letters (epistles which we now often refer to as books) being written in Greek. The ancestors of the English, and their language, were so far away from his arena that they may has well have been on Uranus beneath a full body suit.

Ahem, now, to fully destroy your post:
In the Old Testament, Hebrew words such as khaw-gag', zaw-kar' and saw-khak' and, in the New Testament, the Greek euphraino were translated as celebrate.
There is no rendering to celibate in any of the Old Testament translations; I know of only one recent Bible translation (The New Living Translation*) and a commentary (God's Word**) that use the word celibate and I had to look those up because they're not in my library.

*

This is the Humor section, right? As in jokes? Jests? Funny stories?  ::)

This thread is funny.  

[quote]This thread is funny.

:-/ Only two people seem to have their wits about them? I may have provided factual information but it is not without grammatical twist; although there may be a serious aspect, methinks you take me too seriously by taking me, or the subject, as too serious, thus missing what's amidst the lines.
Maybe it's like my attitude toward golf and health -- why play a game in which everyone has strokes?

Correct=boring
worng=funny