debated word "choices" in english translations

Originally posted by Spirit and Truth:
Over the years, I have heard many state that certain word choices in various english translations did not give the most exact rendering of the word from the original Greek or Hebrew. I would like to get the opinion of the forum members on this topic, so please give examples of a translation and what you feel were poor word choices. Please list chapter and verse, and specify translation [KJV, NASB, NIV, etc]

I shall provide several examples. First, in the NIV,at Romans 7:5, the Greek word 'sarx' is rendered, "sinful nature". According to Strong's Concordance, and several Greek acquaintances, 'sarx' means, "flesh", as the KJV, NASV,NKJV, and several other versions render it. Therefore, "sinful nature" is a very poor rendering at best, if not an outright goof.

The KJV renders 'agape' as "love" 86 times, but also renders it "charity" 27 times, beginning at 1 Corinthians 8:1. Love and charity are two different things, and I believe we ALL know 'agape' means "unconditional love". Charity may be done from love, but it's quite often done for a tax write-off, or to make the 'giver' look good.

And I'm sure you've seen the "Easter" discussion involving Acts 12:4 in the KJV. Any way you look at it,"Easter" here is a very poor choice of word.

 

Incorrect!

Click here: "Easter" is Not a Mistranslation

Click here: Isn't "Easter" in Acts 12:4 a mistranslation of the word "pascha"?

 

Incorrect! </font>[/QUOTE]Teachnically speaking, "Easter" isn't a mistranslation; however, it is a misleading and confusing translation and therefore not the best translation. The best translation is "Passover."

 

And I'm sure you've seen the "Easter" discussion involving Acts 12:4 in the KJV. Any way you look at it,"Easter" here is a very poor choice of word.

Incorrect!

Click here: "Easter" is Not a Mistranslation

Click here: Isn't "Easter" in Acts 12:4 a mistranslation of the word "pascha"?

Thanx for the link, but-Been there, Seen it, Done that. Dr Gipp is NOT a very reliable source, as his "facts' are often opinion and guesswork like most other Onlyist writings. He was a student of DR. RUCKMAN, and the idea that Herod was observing the heathen festival of Ishtar/Eostre is totally without merit, as Herod was trying to PLEASE the Jews, so they'd praise him to Caesar.

The English translations of Scripture are supposed to render the writings of the original penmen as closely as possible to what they wrote. We know neither Luke nor Herod observed Easter as we know it. Yes, I know some early writers sometimes called Passover "Easter", & it was used in some earlier English BVs, but in the AV 1611's "List of Holy Days, EASTER IS INCLUDED-the observance of Jesus' resurrection, NOT Passover-so those men knew what Easter was in their time. Therefore there's no excuse for "Easter" being in Acts 12:4 as it is NOT the term best representing what Luke was writing about, which was the week of Passover.

 

Askjo, if those articles on Easter are correct, then Luke 22:1 is in error. It's that simple.

 

I think you vaguely understand the difference between Easter and Passover according to the Scriptures.

 

If it is misleading, it is incorrect. The Easter is occured after the passover.

Click here: Easter, or Passover

 

I think you vaguely understand the difference between Easter and Passover according to the Scriptures. </font>[/QUOTE]No, I don't think so. I have studied it in quite some detail. The Passover Feast is on the 14th of the month. Next comes seven days of unleavened bread (the 15th to the 21st of the month), with the Feast of Unleaved Bread on the last day (the 21st). Luke, inspired by the Holy Spirit, wrote "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover." (22:1) The entire 8-day span is "called the Passover". Askjo, I've told you this before. Don't tell me I'm wrong, simply read Luke 22:1 and explain it.

 

The Easter is occured after the passover.

Now, you're even citing Jack Moorman articles! Speaking of scraping the bottom of the barrel...

Any supposed connection between Herod and Ishtar has been long disproven.

Now, let's look briefly at Dr, Gipp's assertions that he got from his former mentor, Dr. Ruckman. Gipp says Passover had already come and gone, However, SCRIPTURE SAYS THE OPPOSITE!!! Here's PROOF, directly from the KJV!

Ezekiel 45:21 ?In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, ***a feast of seven days;*** unleavened bread shall be eaten.?

Luke 22:1 "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the ***Passover***." (This was written by THE SAME LUKE WHO WROTE ACTS!)

Acts 12:3 "And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)"

The Hebrew word used in Ezekiel 45:21 is pecach, which is universally translated 'Passover' throughout the OT. The Greek word used in Luke 22:1 is that same word pascha, which is used in Acts 12:4.

Luke couldn't possibly have been writing about Easter, as that observance didn't exist in his time. And Luke consistently wrote the word pascha whenever he was clearly referring to the Passover, which was seven times in his Gospel. So did the other three Gospel writers.

Now, a brief look at the Herods, to end the confusion about which Herod sought Jesus' life, to which Herod Pilate sent Jesus, and of which Herod was the Herod of Acts 12.

Herod The Great was the son of Antipater, an Arab, and a close friend & political ally of Julius Caesar's. After Antipater was murdered in 43 BC, his territory was divided among his four sons. Here we shall look only at Herod, who got the territory of Judea, his regency affirmed by Mark Antony, and by the Roman senate after Octavian became Augustus Caesar. He ruled for some 37 years, and was both a friend and an enemy of the Jews. He had the Temple magnificently remodeled, a work that wasn't completed after his death. He also completed the work on the fortress of Masada,which later became famous as a place of Jewish resistance to the Romans. But he quickly killed any Jew he found to have shown any sign of rebellion, and he issued the infamous "slaughter of the innocents" decree as he sought Jesus'life. This Herod died C.4 BC.

His son Archelaus, who took the throne, can be described in one word-SCUMBAG. Unlike his father, he made no effort to mollify the Jews, and began to interfere with their worship rites. many small rebellions sprang up. Augustus saw that if he didn't act, he was going to have a full-scale revolt on his hands, so he deposed Archelaus & replaced him with his brother Herod Antipas. Antipas had learned a lesson from his father and his brother, so he sought to win the favor of the Jews. His rule lasted all the rest of Jesus' human life. He was the Herod who beheaded John The Baptist, and the one to whom Pilate sent Jesus.

Herod The Great had several wives. A Samaritan woman was the mother of Herod Antipas. His half-brother was Aristobulus, who became ruler of some of the territory ruled by his father. Aristobulus' son, by Bernice, was Herod Agrippa I, who took over after Herod Antipas died He sometimes used only the name Herod, and at other times, he used only the name Agrippa. THIS MAN WAS THE HEROD OF ACTS 12. He made every effort to mollify the Jews while still ruling them with an iron hand, He did all he could to favor their religion. This was the same Herod who was smitten by God's angel for allowing men to call him a god.(Acts 12:21-22) this occurred C.44 AD.

His son, Herod Agrippa II, was the Agrippa before whom Paul made his defense.{The Bernice who accompanied Agrippa was his grandmother.)

This info came from various encyclopediae and the King James Bible. You can see for yourself that the Herod of Acts 12 had nothing to do with Ishtar/Eostre, which wasn't worshipped in that part of the world. We've seen FROM SCRIPTURE that the entire week that included the paschal meal & the days of unleavened bread was called passover, NOT just the paschal meal itself, and you can verify this by asking anyone of Jewish faith, if you think my take of those Scriptures is wrong.Thus, the tall tales written by Gipp & Moorman are shown incorrect.

The AV translators certainly knew the difference between Easter and Passover. This is PROVENin their "List of Holy Days" in the AV 1611, where Easter, the Lord's resurrection, holds a high spot. PASSOVER IS NOT FOUND IN THIS LIST! Therefore, since the AV translators knew Easter from Passover, their choice to render pascha as Easter in this one instance, while rendering it Passover every other time Luke(and the other Apostles) used the word, was a very poor choice indeed.

 

If it is misleading, it is incorrect.</font>[/QUOTE]Then the KJV, by your own admission, is incorrect.

 

One example of a poor word choice is found in some English translations of the account of Jesus' baptism in Mark. The Greek participle used in Mk. 1:10 to describe the opening of the heavens is σχιζομενους, from σχιζω, a stong verb which carries the sense of something being forcefully divided into two. It's the same verb used in Mk. 15:38 to describe the tearing of the Temple veil at the moment of Jesus' death. These two occasions are the only times in Mark's Gospel where the verb σχιζω is used -- once at the beginning, once at the end -- and they "bracket" the Gospel to show how Jesus Christ our Mediator tears away barriers and grants us access to God. Mark 1:10 is also the fulfillment of the ancient prophecy in Isa. 64:1, "Oh that you would rend the heavens and come down..." Some English Bible translations correctly render the forceful nature of the Greek participle, while others completely miss it and have a poor translation.


Good translations:

"And as soon as he was come out of the water, John saw the heavens cloven in twain, and the holy Ghost descending upon him like a dove" (Mk.1:10, Geneva Bible)

"and immediately coming up from the water, he saw the heavens dividing, and the Spirit as a dove coming down upon him" (Mk. 1:10, Young's Literal)

"And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens rent asunder, and the Spirit as a dove descending upon him" (Mk. 1:10, ASV)

"And when He came up out of the water, at once he [John] saw the heavens torn open and the [Holy] Spirit like a dove coming down [to enter] into Him." (Mk. 1:10, Amplified Bible)

"And when Jesus came up out of the water, he saw the heavens split open and the Holy Spirit descending like a dove on him." (Mk. 1:10, NLT)

"And just as he was coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens torn apart and the Spirit descending like a dove on him. (Mk. 1:10, NRSV)

"As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. (Mk.1:10, NIV)

"And immediately, coming up from the water, He saw the heavens parting and the Spirit descending upon Him like a dove." (Mk. 1:10, NKJV)

"The moment he came out of the water, he saw the sky split open and God's Spirit, looking like a dove, come down on him." (Mk. 1:10, The Message)


Poor translations:

"And at once he went up of the water, and saw heavens opened, and the Holy Ghost coming down as a culver, and dwelling on him." (Mk. 1:10, Wycliffe Bible)

"And assone as he was come out of the water Iohn sawe heaven open and the holy goost descendinge vpon him lyke a dove." (Mk. 1:10, Tyndale Bible)

"And assone as he was come vp out of the water, he sawe heauen open, and the spirite descending vponn him like a doue." (Mk. 1:10, Bishops' Bible)

"And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him" (Mk. 1:10, KJV)

"Immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him." (Mk. 1:10 NASB)

"As soon as Jesus came out of the water, he saw the sky open and the Holy Spirit coming down to him like a dove" (Mk. 1:10, CEV)

"And straightway coming up out of the water, He saw {b]the heavens opened[/b], and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him." (Mk. 1:10, KJ21)

"And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens opening and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. (Mk. 1:10, ESV)

 

KJ readings which leave (at least today) either an impression of contradiction, or a confusion, or do not adequately reflect original text - consider Acts 1:7-8 - "exousia" in 7, "dunamis" in 8, both "power" in KJ; Gal. 1:6-7, "another gospel, which is not another" - two words for other/another, may be brought into our terms as:
"another kind of gospel, which is not the same kind" ("heteros" and "allos"); and my favorite
"textual issue", Rom. 5:1. Depending on omicron or omega, it is (KJ)"we have peace," or (ASV mg., others) "Let us have peace." BOTH ARE TRUE! Compare Joshua Chapter one - v. 3, I have given you the land; v. 11, Go in to possess the land. Did God Himself allow some manuscripts to have omega, others omicron, to teach us the double truth? "Long o" or "short o" - both necessary to the total message! R. Charles Blair - Ro. 8:28

 

I did not see how you solve any problems on the KJV, however you did not solve any problems on modern versions That's why you said the KJV is incorrect.

 

I did not see how you solve any problems on the KJV, however you did not solve any problems on modern versions That's why you said the KJV is incorrect. </font>[/QUOTE]There is a simple way to solve the problem of incorrect translations in the KJV (or any other version) -- just re-translate them correctly.

 

There are some others in the KJV to consider, such as "God forbid" for the Greek 'me ginotai'(may it not, or never,be),"book" of life in Rev.22: 19 when most Greek mss read, "tree" of life,& the famous "strain AT a gnat" in Matt.23:24.

Let's not pick upon just the KJV. The KJV reads at Psalm 9:17, "The wicked shall be TURNED INTO HELL, and all the nations that forget God" while the NIV reads, "The wicked RETURN
TO THE GRAVE, and all the nations that forget God." This NIV rendering makes no sense unless general reincarlation before the return of Christ would be fact. Several other versions say, "returned to sheol". I understand the Hebrew word here rendered 'returned or turned' is 'shuwb', which can mean either "return" or "put". (A little help from someone better-versed in Hebrew than I am, please?)

I reckon that if one is looking to spot errors or poor renderings in any and every BV, one can find them.