Five Mistakes in your Bible Translation

poet

Banned
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-joel-hoffman/five-mistakes-bible-translation_b_1129620.html


In the original Hebrew, the 10th Commandment prohibits taking, not coveting. The biblical Jubilee year is named for an animal's horn and has nothing to do with jubilation. The pregnant woman in Isaiah 7:14 is never called a virgin. Psalm 23 opens with an image of God's might and power, not shepherding. And the romantic Song of Solomon offers a surprisingly modern message.


But most people who read the Bible don't know these things, because extensive translation gaffs conceal the Bible's original meaning.


The mistakes stem from five flawed translation techniques: etymology, internal structure, cognates, old mistranslations, and misunderstood metaphor. (Read more: "Five Ways Your Bible Translation Distorts the Original Meaning of the Text.")


The tenth Commandment, commonly but wrongly translated as "thou shalt not covet," illustrates how internal structure or etymology can be misleading. Like the English "host" and "hostile" that share a root but don't mean the same thing, the words for "desirable" and "take" in Hebrew come from the same root. It's the second word, "take," that appears in the Ten Commandments. But translators, not recognizing that related words can mean different things in this way, misunderstood the Hebrew and wrongly translated the text as "thou shalt not covet" for what should have been "thou shalt not take." (Learn more: "Thou shalt not covet?")


The translation "Jubilee year" results from a mistaken application of cognates (similar words in different languages). In the original Hebrew, the year was called the "year of the horn," or, in Hebrew, "the year of the yovel." The Latin for yovel is iobileus, which just happens to sound like the Latin word iubileus, connected to the verb iubilare, "to celebrate." The English "Jubilee year" comes from the Latin. (A similar Latin coincidence gave rise to the notion that the fruit in the Garden of Eden was an apple.)


Starting about 2,300 years ago, the Hebrew Bible was translated into a Greek version now known as the Septuagint. One shortcoming of that translation is its inattention to near synonyms. For instance, the Hebrew words for "love," "mercy" and "compassion" are frequently mixed up, because they mean nearly the same thing. Likewise, because most young women in antiquity were virgins and most virgins were young women, the Septuagint wasn't careful to distinguish the words for "virgin" and "young woman" in translation.


This is how the Hebrew in Isaiah 7:14 -- which describes a young woman giving birth to a boy who will be named Emmanuel -- ended up in Greek as a virgin giving birth. Though these facts about Greek and Hebrew are generally undisputed among scholars, the translation error remains, both because people are usually unwilling to give up familiar translations, and also perhaps because the Gospel of Matthew describes the virgin birth of Jesus by quoting the mistaken Greek translation of Isaiah 7:14.


Metaphors are particularly difficult to translate, because words have different metaphoric meanings in different cultures. Shepherds in the Bible were symbols of might, ferocity and royalty, whereas now they generally represent peaceful guidance and oversight. So the image of the Lord as shepherd in Psalm 23 originally meant that the Lord was mighty, fierce and royal. The impact was roughly the same as "the Lord is a man of war." But in most English-speaking cultures, "the Lord is my shepherd" conveys a wholly different, and therefore inaccurate, image.


Similarly, kinship terms like "father," "brother," "sister," etc. were used in the Bible specifically to indicate power structure. This is why the romantic Song of Solomon -- the Bible's only full length treatise on relationships -- says "my sister, my bride" or "my sister, my spouse." On its face, that English translation is not only unromantic but in fact felonious. The original point, however, was that the woman in this relationship should be the man's equal.


In these and many other instances, improved translation techniques bring us closer to the original intent of the Bible. And like a newly restored work of art, the Bible's original beauty shines the brighter for it.


Oh, those pesky translations from Hebrew to Greek.....especially in Leviticus and Romans. Which is why Bible Scripture abuse is an exercise in futility. You may not know what you're talking about. Tread lightly. - poet
 
The HuffPo is now the place to go for bible lessons. LOL.

wolves_in_sheeps_clothing.jpg
 
The HuffPo is now the place to go for bible lessons. LOL.

wolves_in_sheeps_clothing.jpg

Uh, more credible site than Newsmax or Townhall.com.

The author of the article:

Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, a frequent guest lecturer in churches and synagogues, has held faculty appointments at Brandeis University and at Hebrew Union College and lectured at universities on four continents. He is the author of "And God Said: How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning" (2010, Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin's Press) and "In The Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language" (2004, NYU Press) and the chief translator for the 10-volume series "My People's Prayer Book" (winner of the National Jewish Book Award).


He also moderates the popular Bible-translation blog "God Didn't Say That" at www.GodDidntSayThat.com.



He can be reached through his website at www.Lashon.net.
 
The impact was roughly the same as "the Lord is a man of war." But in most English-speaking cultures, "the Lord is my shepherd" conveys a wholly different, and therefore inaccurate, image.

In the ancient world, it made no sense for Gods not to be angry and aggressive. He was your big brother, and he was going to beat up your enemies. The point of Gods was animalistic chest-thumping, because primitive people's thought much like modern criminals, thugs, or conservatives do today. And the point of the old testament was to show how much Yahweh PWNS all the other Gods (however, looking back at how the Jews have been treated, you would have to conclude that Yahweh is a pretty shitty God). What's the point of saying, "I have a kind and loving big brother"? Not very intimidating. That's one of the primary problems that early Christian missionaries had, actually. And they tended to emphasize the power of their God and not mention the kind and loving parts in order to be more persuasive. This left most of the converts worshipping Christ as if he were just a different God, though, and not at all in exclusion.
 
Last edited:
Uh, more credible site than Newsmax or Townhall.com.

The author of the article:

Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, a frequent guest lecturer in churches and synagogues, has held faculty appointments at Brandeis University and at Hebrew Union College and lectured at universities on four continents. He is the author of "And God Said: How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning" (2010, Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin's Press) and "In The Beginning: A Short History of the Hebrew Language" (2004, NYU Press) and the chief translator for the 10-volume series "My People's Prayer Book" (winner of the National Jewish Book Award).


He also moderates the popular Bible-translation blog "God Didn't Say That" at www.GodDidntSayThat.com.



He can be reached through his website at www.Lashon.net.

Thanks, another source for my studies.
 
In the ancient world, it made no sense for Gods not to be angry and aggressive. He was your big brother, and he was going to beat up your enemies. The point of Gods was animalistic chest-thumping, because primitive people's thought much like modern criminals, thugs, or conservatives do today. And the point of the old testament was to show how much Yahweh PWNS all the other Gods (however, looking back at how the Jews have been treated, you would have to conclude that Yahweh is a pretty shitty God). What's the point of saying, "I have a kind and loving big brother"? Not very intimidating. That's one of the primary problems that early Christian missionaries had, actually. And they tended to emphasize the power of their God and not mention the kind and loving parts in order to be more persuasive. This left most of the converts worshipping Christ as if he were just a different God, though, and not at all in exclusion.

Thoughtful response, indeed.
 
The HuffPo is now the place to go for bible lessons. LOL.

wolves_in_sheeps_clothing.jpg

WTH is up with the dog in sheep costume? Once before I asked about this but you lacked the balls to answer. Care to give one now or will you continueto avoid answering?
 
WTH is up with the dog in sheep costume? Once before I asked about this but you lacked the balls to answer. Care to give one now or will you continueto avoid answering?

Listen, he goes around posting images, usually obscene, vulgar and in poor taste, depicting forum members (in his eyes).....knowing full well, if he posted any actual pictures of forum members, it would be grounds for permanent banning.
 
The tenth Commandment, commonly but wrongly translated as "thou shalt not covet," illustrates how internal structure or etymology can be misleading. Like the English "host" and "hostile" that share a root but don't mean the same thing, the words for "desirable" and "take" in Hebrew come from the same root. It's the second word, "take," that appears in the Ten Commandments. But translators, not recognizing that related words can mean different things in this way, misunderstood the Hebrew and wrongly translated the text as "thou shalt not covet" for what should have been "thou shalt not take." (Learn more: "Thou shalt not covet?")

interesting theory, but illogical.....if "chamad" (http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/chamad.html) is to be translated as "take" instead of "covet", then Exodus 20:15 would be translated as "Thou shall not "take" your neighbor's house, thou shall not "take" your neighbor's wife, nor his maid servant nor his manservant, nor his ox nor his ass, nor anything that is your neighbor's"......

if that is true, why do we also have a commandment that says "Thou shall not steal".......it would be redundant......

the theological argument for the commandment against coveting is that in addition to not stealing or committing adultery, for example, it is wrong to think about stealing and committing adultery......."coveting" is wishing you had your neighbor's house, wishing you had your neighbor's wife.......usually it is distinguished from mere envy "I wish I had a house like my neighbors".....coveting is wishing you had your neighbor's house instead of your neighbor having it.......
 
Last edited:
interesting theory, but illogical.....if "chamad" (http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/chamad.html) is to be translated as "take" instead of "covet", then Exodus 20:15 would be translated as "Thou shall not "take" your neighbor's house, thou shall not "take" your neighbor's wife, nor his maid servant nor his manservant, nor his ox nor his ass, nor anything that is your neighbor's"......

if that is true, why do we also have a commandment that says "Thou shall not steal".......it would be redundant......

the theological argument for the commandment against coveting is that in addition to not stealing or committing adultery, for example, it is wrong to think about stealing and committing adultery......."coveting" is wishing you had your neighbor's house, wishing you had your neighbor's wife.......usually it is distinguished from mere envy "I wish I had a house like my neighbors".....coveting is wishing you had your neighbor's house instead of your neighbor having it.......



Right. And the author of the article is a Jew, and a biblical scholar who knows Hebrew, and you're what? Go sit down somewhere.
 
The translation "Jubilee year" results from a mistaken application of cognates (similar words in different languages). In the original Hebrew, the year was called the "year of the horn," or, in Hebrew, "the year of the yovel." The Latin for yovel is iobileus, which just happens to sound like the Latin word iubileus, connected to the verb iubilare, "to celebrate." The English "Jubilee year" comes from the Latin. (A similar Latin coincidence gave rise to the notion that the fruit in the Garden of Eden was an apple.)

I think he rather missed the point on this one....."Jubilee" as a word to describe a celebration dates mostly from the era of American slavery, the Biblical text being a code word for emancipation from slavery......not because of the mistranslation of a Latin word......
 
and you're what?

someone who's pointed out the error of the Jewish biblical scholar?......

tell me this.....if this Jewish biblical scholar is correct, why have the Jews been wrong about "coveting" for the last six thousand years?.......you can't blame that on an error of translating Hebrew into English.........
 
Right. And the author of the article is a Jew, and a biblical scholar who knows Hebrew, and you're what? Go sit down somewhere.

Stupid commandments for a god to give to his people anyway when there were many more severe violations he didnt include, like rape and slavery, but see the Israelites thought these things were okay in some instances, so they had their god approve of them also. It is why I believe the human concepts of god is man made.
 
With all due respect, this isn't a cut and dry issue; just because some rabbi says so doesn't mean it is settled. For every scholar in agreement, there is another scholar who would disagree.

Thanks for sharing that perspective on the issue, but as always, the debate will carry on.
 
interesting theory, but illogical.....if "chamad" (http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/chamad.html) is to be translated as "take" instead of "covet", then Exodus 20:15 would be translated as "Thou shall not "take" your neighbor's house, thou shall not "take" your neighbor's wife, nor his maid servant nor his manservant, nor his ox nor his ass, nor anything that is your neighbor's"......

if that is true, why do we also have a commandment that says "Thou shall not steal".......it would be redundant......

the theological argument for the commandment against coveting is that in addition to not stealing or committing adultery, for example, it is wrong to think about stealing and committing adultery......."coveting" is wishing you had your neighbor's house, wishing you had your neighbor's wife.......usually it is distinguished from mere envy "I wish I had a house like my neighbors".....coveting is wishing you had your neighbor's house instead of your neighbor having it.......

That's very funny because I was thinking the exact same thing but couldn't be bothered to say anything.
 
Back
Top