• ベストアンサー
  • すぐに回答を!


Or perhaps we should say rather that the dichotomy between primitive and revealed religions is false, for there is a sense in which all religious are religions of revelation; the world around them and their reason have everywhere revealed to people something of the divine, of their own nature and destiny.


  • 英語
  • 回答数3
  • 閲覧数82
  • ありがとう数2


  • ベストアンサー
  • 回答No.3
  • kobecco
  • ベストアンサー率44% (94/213)

ご質問の英文は、次のような意味になります。 「言い換えますと、原始宗教と神の啓示による宗教とを別々のものと考えるのは、むしろ間違っていると言うべきでしょう。と言うのは、宗教を信仰するすべての人が、神の啓示を意識しているからです。つまり、あらゆるところで人々は、神がかり的なものや、自分自身の性質や運命の何かが、宗教を取り巻く世界あるいは宗教の理念によってもたらされたものだと感じてきたのです。」



ありがとうございました。 大変わかりやすい文章で感謝しております。

その他の回答 (2)

  • 回答No.2
  • thsame
  • ベストアンサー率21% (3/14)

あるいは、おそらく、我々は最初で現された宗教の間の二分が間違っているとむしろ言わなければなりません、なぜならば、中で感覚がありますいったいどれ∥宗教的な意外な事実;彼らのあたりの世界と彼らの理由の宗教にす人々に至る所で明らかにします、彼ら自身の自然と運命の、the divineの何か ソフトで翻訳したので、間違ってるかもしれません。 意味が通らなくても、責任は持ちません(笑)


  • 回答No.1





  • 和訳お願い致します。

    It would have been well if theologians had made up their minds to accept frankly the principle that those things for the eiscovery of which man has faculties specially provided are not fit objects of a divine revelation. Had this been unhesitangly done, either the definition and idea of divine revelation must have been modified and the possibly of an admixture of error[must] have been allowed,or such parts of the Hebrew writings as were found to be repugnant to fact must have been pronounced to form no part of revelation. The first course is that which theologians have most generally adopted,but [it is adopted] with such limitation,cautels those who would know how and what God really has taught mankind, and whether anything beyond that which man is able,and obviously intended,to arrive at by the use of his natural faculties.

  • 和訳をよろしくお願いします

    One limitation of study 2 is that it was hypothetical in nature and assessed people’s likelihood of joining and /predictions about completion rather than actual persistence.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    It is refreshing to return to the often-echoed remark, that it could not have been the object of a Divine revelation to instruct mankind in physical science, man having had faculties bestowed upon him to enable him to acquire this knowledge by himself. This is in fact pretty generally admitted; but in the application of the doctrine, writers play at fast and loose with it according to circumstances. Thus an inspired writer may be permitted to allude to the phenomena of nature according to the vulgar view of such things, without impeachment of his better knowledge; but if he speaks of the same phenomena assertively, we are bound to suppose that things are as he represents them, however much our knowledge of nature may be disposed to recalcitrate. But if we find a difficulty in admitting that such misrepresentations can find a place in revelation, the difficulty lies in our having previously assumed what a Divine revelation ought to be. If God made use of imperfectly informed men to lay the foundations of that higher knowledge for which the human race was destined, is it wonderful that they should have committed themselves to assertions not in accordance with facts, although they may have believed them to be true? On what grounds has the popular notion of Divine revelation been built up? Is it not plain that the plan of Providence for the education of man is a progressive one, and as imperfect men have been used as the agents for teaching mankind, is it not to be expected that their teachings should be partial and, to some extent, erroneous? Admitted, as it is, that physical science is not what the Hebrew writers, for the most part, profess to convey, at any rate, that it is not on account of the communication of such knowledge that we attach any value to their writings, why should we hesitate to recognise their fallibility on this head?

  • 和訳して下さいm(_ _)m

    Yes very much, people of japan are hard working, they have their own and beautiful culture and traditions:) also as much i know, they are of helping nature too and i don't think there is any reason that one shouldn't like japan. Although good and bad people are everywhere but in fact after my country i like japan most in this world. What do you think about India? 和訳して下さいm(_ _)m

  • 次の英文を和訳してほしいです。

    another important property of waves is their speed, which depends on the type of wave and the nature of the medium through which the wave is traveling (for example, air, water, or a vacuum). この英文を和訳してほしいです。

  • 英文の和訳をお願いします。

    以下(1)(2)の英文を和訳してください。 大学の夏季休暇の課題で困っています。 以下、英文---------------------------- (1)There are few remarks more often on men's lips than that 'Human nature is always same,' or that 'Human nature never changes.' (2)No man, indeed, has ever understood a race of men not his own expect on the assumption that the constituents of human nature are the same everywhere and in all ages. *Human nature … 人情 *a race of men … 人類 *the constituents of human nature … 人情の構成要素

  • この英文はどのように訳せば良いのでしょう?

    この英文はどのように訳せば良いのでしょうか? 特に”nature of ~”の解釈がよく解らないのですが。 What is the nature of their claim? and, What is the total amount of their claim? if they mentioned it to you. 初歩的な質問かもしれませんが、どなたかご教授下さい。

  • 和訳お願いします!!!

    (1) The nature of children's rights is unique in that children are socially powerless to voice their views, and that their realisation is subject to an understanding of children's rights by parents, teachers and the public in general. (2) What may be considered as ”violence" in the public arena is often committed at school under the labels "cane of affection" and educational consideration. (3) some schools maintain strict rules in the name of anti-deliquency measures and improving students' academic performance, without questioning whether this might contradict the underlying assumption of respect for children's rights.

  • ざっくり和訳をお願いします

    Also, what is the nature or significance of the imperfection near the trademark and fukusuke?

  • 和訳お願いします。 すみません。

    (1) I always think of them as being quite different. As for keeping myself dry, there is evidently no one here who can at all appreciate an emotional nature. Fortunately for myself , I don't care. The only thing that sustains one through life is the consciousness of the immense inferiority of everybody else, and this is a feeling that I have always cultivated. (2)But none of you have any hearts. Here you are laughing and making merry just as if the Prince and Princess had not just been married. (3)“Well, really,” wxclaimed a small Fire-balloon, “why not? It is a most joyful occasion, and when I soar up into the air I intend to tell the stars all about it. You will see them twinkle when I talk to them about the pretty bride” (4)“Ah ! what a trivial view of life ! ” said the Rocket: “but it is only what I expected. There is nothing in you; you are hollow and empty. Why, perhaps the Prince and Princess may go to live in a country where there is a deep river, and perhaps they may have one only son, a little fair-haired boy with violet eyes like the Prince himself; and perhaps some day he may go out to walk with his nurse; and perhaps the nurse may go to sleep under a great elder-tree; and perhaps the little boy may fall into the deep river and be drowned. What a terrible misfortune ! Poor people, to lose their only son ! It is really too dreadful ! I shall never get over it.”