Featured KJV Wrongly Translates the Hebrew

Kind of short clipped that there, didn't you? I'll trust everyone who can check the link to read the entire entry to see various connotations.

 

Yes, really. It seemed odd that you clipped the entry without including the one below that mentions the verse we are discussing.

 

NET Bible: The human mind is more deceitful than anything else. It is incurably bad.19 Who can understand it?

Do you agree with the NET translation and explanation of “ʼânash” as incurably bad or incurably deceitful? Is whatever is incurable physical or spiritual? Or maybe something else?

 

I'm not sure, but I'd hazard a guess that it is.
That said, I do indeed see a connection between what is stated in Jeremiah 17:9 and what is stated in both the Psalms and Romans 1:18-32.

 

I happen to believe that the AV has been blessed by God like no other English translation has been...
and I think that you'll find that many professing Christians in the English-speaking world even today, hold this opinion of it.

Until relatively recently, it was the standard among all the English speaking believers the world over;
From roughly 1650 until 1881, there really was no other that was known as "the Bible".

When another translation comes along that has that kind of longevity,
then perhaps that one will be blessed more than the AV.

I'm sorry, but I really cannot agree.

For example, two of the ones you've mentioned above utilize the Critical Text... and to me, that makes them unfit to be considered as worthy in any sense of the word.
The third one ( the NKJV ) I would take comfort in if no other TR -based Bibles were available.

If it were really bad and I was desperate for any Bible to read, I would use an NASB before I would an ESV.
That's my own personal opinion, but there it is.

You are of course entitled to your opinion...

As for me, I see nothing wrong with how Genesis 2:2 is rendered in the AV.
For example, this source tells me that the Hebrew is indeed rendered correctly:
https://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen2.pdf

Also, from my own studies I've always understood His work to have ceased on the seventh day ( at the very end of the sixth ), and that He did no work during it.

Agreed.

 

I took a stab at it, not smoothing it out but keeping it in the Spanish word order to demonstrate the correspondence.

Engañoso es el corazón más que todas las cosas, y perverso; ¿quién lo conocerá?
Deceitful is the heart more than all the things, and perverse (wicked)' Who it can know?

Your comment made me curious about the Louis Segond French Bible. I took French in High School, but that was a few years ago -- so I had to use the online translator to get it right. (Similarly, I kept the French word order to demonstrate the correspondence.

Le coeur est tortueux par-dessus tout, et il est méchant: Qui peut le connaître?
The heart is devious above all, and it is evil (wicked): who can it know?

 

You actually did a fair bit better than I did.
I didn't know what "enganoso" meant until I ran through it a few times comparing it to the English, and as for "cosas" and "conocera", I was a bit fuzzy on those.

Mi espanol es muy terrible.

I have one in my living room...
It was a gift from a brother in the Lord that belongs to the Trinitarian Bible Society, and he gave it to me because he knew that I had taken French in high school.

I do that as well, but my French is somewhat better than my Spanish is ( currently ), so I'm able to carry on a bit further in French before I inevitably give up and go to Google Translate.

Thanks for the added info.

 

My high school French was about 47 years ago, so I have forgotten most of what I knew. Re Spanish, I mostly learned it conversationally, listening to tapes, using a dictionary, and reading books. I have worked with a lot of Spanish speakers. However, though I know a lot of words, I get fouled up on the verb tenses and such like. Plus, I have not worked directly on a daily basis with anyone who speaks Spanish in about 10 years. So I am slipping! Translating a Bible verse with which I am familiar is sort of cheating cause I'm guessing at the actual right verb tense.

 

You asked for a “host” of other versions that said wicked besides the Geneva (which actually you declared to be the only one that had it besides the KJB). So do you discredit the ones I showed you because it doesn’t amount to what satisfies you as “hosts” of?

 

I was responding to Dave, who mentioned the Spanish translation. However, you are the one who, beginning from your original post, invoked how various translations render the word “ʼânash”. Yes, all of those you gave were in English, but Englishmen are not the only people who can and do translate the Bible. You raised the question and have found it important that no one gives "wicked" other than the Geneva and KJV. But, in fact, some others do, both in English and the equivalent in other languages. Not only that, as we have seen from your Parallel Bibles link at Bible Hub, quite a few others give some words that are not particularly in the realm of sick or diseased any more than "wicked" is (e.g., corrupt, hard, stubborn, unsearchable). Perhaps some of those translators had a rudimentary knowledge of the Hebrew language, and those translating after 1906 might have even been familiar with A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, by Brown, Driver, and Briggs.

What is it that is incurable about the heart (or the mind, as NET gives it)? Is it the right atrium, the left ventricle? Or is it something spiritual and/or moral? If the latter, what is it, in particular?

 

Do KJV defenders or KJV-only advocates consistently grant other English Bible translators the exact, same amount of leeway to choose one out of the range of claimed possible meanings for original-language words of Scripture as they are so willing to grant to the makers of the KJV?

KJV defenders seem in effect to be very tolerate or flexible in granting the KJV translators a great deal of leeway in their translation decisions while in contrast being very inflexible or rigid in their assertions concerning the translation decisions of other English Bible translators and in what they allege or claim to be inaccurate or wrong in them.

If the same amount of leeway in translation decisions was granted to other English Bibles translators, would most of KJV-only allegations or claims against present English Bible translations fall away?