Note that this question asks if the following phrases all mean the same or not. I cannot understand why this is not on topic
too much to drink a lot to drink drunk freely are drunk have drunk freely have well drunk had plenty have well drunk
I also ask which of the phrases is the correct translation of the word methiosin.
Again. Translation is on topic on this site.
Someone says that because this question is on topic in Hermeneutics it shouldn't be on this site; this reasoning doesn't make any sense. So what if this is on topic on hermeneutic.SE? I may ask the same thing over there too but I want to know what secular English language experts think. People in Hermeneutics see the Bible as some special book. I want a more natural perspective. Is "phrase A the translation of word B?" kind of thing.
Finally, there is a confusion because English word drunk can mean past participle of drink or inebriated. In Indonesian it can mean mabuk or minum.
So that is a very legitimate question.
One comment says that the translation is appropriate because it talks about hypothetical case and is deliberately vague and the Bible transcription is not bowdlerized. That is precisely the kind of analysis I want to avoid. I don't care if the word if the book is the Bible or not. I don't care if the word methiosin only shows up there. I don't care if it's a bowdlerized version or not.
I want perspective from someone that don't care about all those.
Okay I care. But I want answers from those that don't care first. That issue I can ask in Hermeneutics.
- All I care is if all those phrases mean the same thing and if not what's the difference?
- I care which of those phrases means inebriated by alcohol instead of just drink.
- I care if those phrases is the best translation of methiosin.
I think all 3 issues are on topic on this site.
After I get those answers, I will compare the answer to the answer on Hermeneutics.
Basically I am not looking for super expert opinion. Just normal unbiased honest answer.