-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Ambiguous Word create confusion.
- Thread starter Van
- Start date
- Status
Wow, insulting much. This is so typical of you. "Sloppy. unstudied translation choices" indeed. Yet according to what you have said before, you have never translated, don't know the original languages of the Bible, and do not know any other languages.
(To interested parties other than Van, I am a Bible translator and teach Bible translation in seminary. This is not bragging--I'm not claiming to be good at it, but just to give my resume for the purpose of my answer.)
I'll let you go now back to your insults and ignorance, and back onto my "Ignore" list.
Last edited:
To everyone other than Van, if you are familiar with dynamic equivalence (also called functional equivalence) translating ambiguity with certainty is a DE principle "It is this approach [idiomatic translation--JoJ] That reduces ambiguity and obscurity to a minimum...." (Beekman and Callow, Translating the Word of God, p. 25).
If you are a DE translator, fine, translate implicit terms with explicit ones, translate ambiguous terms with your understanding and make the rendering of the ambiguous explicit. And tell people you are translating by the DE principles. But don't accuse people of "sloppy, unstudied" translation which then "hinder the cause of Christ" if someone disagree with you--especially if you actually have no experience in translating and know no foreign languages.
If you are a DE translator, fine, translate implicit terms with explicit ones, translate ambiguous terms with your understanding and make the rendering of the ambiguous explicit. And tell people you are translating by the DE principles. But don't accuse people of "sloppy, unstudied" translation which then "hinder the cause of Christ" if someone disagree with you--especially if you actually have no experience in translating and know no foreign languages.
Note that it is not always possible to translate ambiguity with ambiguity. For example, anothen (ἀνοθεν) in Luke 1:3, "from the very first," can also be translated, "from above" or "again." There is no way to preserve the ambiguity of the original in this case. The translator must choose one or the other. This is often the case.
Having said that, there is often a way from the context to tell which is the correct meaning. Looking at the same word, anothen, in John 3:3 & 7, we see that Nicodemus understood the meaning to be "again," since since he asked if it meant he must return to his mother's womb and once again be physically born.
Having said that, there is often a way from the context to tell which is the correct meaning. Looking at the same word, anothen, in John 3:3 & 7, we see that Nicodemus understood the meaning to be "again," since since he asked if it meant he must return to his mother's womb and once again be physically born.
I am so blessed this morning! In chapel, we had a presentation by our translation team who went to Mexico and visited three tribal translation efforts in two weeks. I was in tears at one point. The team consisted of:
1.Miss B., our linguistics prof. She speaks seven languages, and has an MA in linguistics through SIL (Summer Institute of Linguistics; she already had an MA in education). She is leading our team to produce a translation in Rohingya, a people group with a very large population in Milwaukee but no Bible. So far they have seen only one 11 year old girl saved. Please pray for a "person of peace" to be saved, who will then be the lead translator.
2. T. is a student in our MA in Bible Translation, and a truly fine young man. I'll be teaching him for 9 weeks in "Bible Translation Theory and Practice," and I expect an A from him, since he is an excellent student and very smart. He is on the Rohingya team.
3. Miss S. is a German lady, a graduate of our MA in Bible Translation. I am so blessed to have taught her. She is very brilliant, and also on the Rohingya team.
4. Miss C. is high school senior who has a huge burden for Bible translation. She will likely matriculate in our Bible college in the fall, so I'll no doubt get to teach her Greek starting in the fall of 2024. She is a brilliant young lady, doing her "capstone project" for her senior year on how tribal languages are disappearing, so she borrowed several books from my library for that.
Consider, please, the difficulty of getting an MA in linguistics or Bible translation. Our MA is almost 40 grad credits (I think), each with about 1000 pages of reading and a project or two. The language requirements are 12 credits of undergrad Greek and 6 credits each of grad Greek and Hebrew, so 36 credits of the Biblical languages. Then there are syntax and translation courses, systematic theology, etc.
So, I don't appreciate it when people with no training in linguistics, other languages, or translation theory set themselves up as experts. These translators and translation students deserve great respect for the huge amount of training and work they are doing. The native translators they met in Mexico (not a single American) and their Mexican leaders also work very hard at translation, and have experience and knowledge. They deserve respect, too.
Sometimes on the BB I don't see that respect. If you are going to post on Bible translation here on the BB. If you don't have training or experience in this area, be humble and respectful.
P. S. About Miss B., she had to do a thesis for her MA in linguistics, she bounced stuff off me for that. Some of the stuff she was talking about was brand new to me. Brilliant lady!
1.Miss B., our linguistics prof. She speaks seven languages, and has an MA in linguistics through SIL (Summer Institute of Linguistics; she already had an MA in education). She is leading our team to produce a translation in Rohingya, a people group with a very large population in Milwaukee but no Bible. So far they have seen only one 11 year old girl saved. Please pray for a "person of peace" to be saved, who will then be the lead translator.
2. T. is a student in our MA in Bible Translation, and a truly fine young man. I'll be teaching him for 9 weeks in "Bible Translation Theory and Practice," and I expect an A from him, since he is an excellent student and very smart. He is on the Rohingya team.
3. Miss S. is a German lady, a graduate of our MA in Bible Translation. I am so blessed to have taught her. She is very brilliant, and also on the Rohingya team.
4. Miss C. is high school senior who has a huge burden for Bible translation. She will likely matriculate in our Bible college in the fall, so I'll no doubt get to teach her Greek starting in the fall of 2024. She is a brilliant young lady, doing her "capstone project" for her senior year on how tribal languages are disappearing, so she borrowed several books from my library for that.
Consider, please, the difficulty of getting an MA in linguistics or Bible translation. Our MA is almost 40 grad credits (I think), each with about 1000 pages of reading and a project or two. The language requirements are 12 credits of undergrad Greek and 6 credits each of grad Greek and Hebrew, so 36 credits of the Biblical languages. Then there are syntax and translation courses, systematic theology, etc.
So, I don't appreciate it when people with no training in linguistics, other languages, or translation theory set themselves up as experts. These translators and translation students deserve great respect for the huge amount of training and work they are doing. The native translators they met in Mexico (not a single American) and their Mexican leaders also work very hard at translation, and have experience and knowledge. They deserve respect, too.
Sometimes on the BB I don't see that respect. If you are going to post on Bible translation here on the BB. If you don't have training or experience in this area, be humble and respectful.
P. S. About Miss B., she had to do a thesis for her MA in linguistics, she bounced stuff off me for that. Some of the stuff she was talking about was brand new to me. Brilliant lady!
Last edited:
Folks, note the absence of any on topic content, but rather a total effort at personal disparagement.
There is no need to "be a translator, know the original languages, or know languages other than English" to see that translating Gehenna, Hades, Sheol, Tartarus all as "hell" is translator mal-practice.
Can bible translation and bible study of translations be improved by deriving the most probable meaning of the original language word based on the words historical meanings and contextual usage? Yes, of course.
Just as "anothen" (G509) is translated as "again" by the KJV in John 3:3 and John 3:7, we find YLT ignoring the context (return to his mother's womb) and choosing "from above."
The premise that folks holding college degrees do not make mistakes obvious to diligent students of the Word is false.
If you look at other translations of John 3:3, you find more than 15 translations using "from above." The NET footnote says Jesus s using the "misunderstood question" technique (Nick's mistaken response) to bring out His clarification. No sale, even by folks holding Doctorates.
The best translation choice is "anew" since we were spiritually born dead and must be spiritually born anew (alive together with Christ). Not the same birth (again) but a new birth, anew.
Just as "anothen" (G509) is translated as "again" by the KJV in John 3:3 and John 3:7, we find YLT ignoring the context (return to his mother's womb) and choosing "from above."
The premise that folks holding college degrees do not make mistakes obvious to diligent students of the Word is false.
If you look at other translations of John 3:3, you find more than 15 translations using "from above." The NET footnote says Jesus s using the "misunderstood question" technique (Nick's mistaken response) to bring out His clarification. No sale, even by folks holding Doctorates.
The best translation choice is "anew" since we were spiritually born dead and must be spiritually born anew (alive together with Christ). Not the same birth (again) but a new birth, anew.
Last edited:
The word translated "saved" is "diasoza" which refers to being brought to safety through peril. The word appears about 8 times in scripture and is used for producing physical well-being, rather than spiritual salvation. Thus brought safely through water is the most probable meaning, rather than saved spiritually by water.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Thank you for sharing God’s wonderful work through you, your students and school.
It is beyond arrogant to dismiss those who have dedicated their lives to biblical languages and translations, through intense peer reviewed study, and lift yourself up as expert of equal or greater degree.
I’ve had 4 classes each of Biblical Hebrew and Greek. Just enough to work my way through a lexicon for study purposes.
Even with my bare minimum credits, I know enough to clearly recognize the errors of some which almost always comes down to not understanding the context in which the word is used.
Thanks for sharing JoJ.
peace to you
I appreciate your kind words. I'll share a little more.
A. is a young man who graduated with our MA in Bible Translation. He is currently on deputation to raise support for working with the Madi tribe in Africa. He has already been there several extended periods to help the native translators as a translation consultant, and that will be his role after he has raised support. He will continue to teach them Greek and Hebrew so that they can get their translation to be correct. He will also be doing evangelism, and hopefully get a church planting movement started.
M. is another graduate of the program. He is a Persian who got saved while working in Australia. God led him to our seminary and to a wonderful wife who graduated from our college. They have three beautiful kids, including a set of twins. He has a burden to translate the OT into Farsi, the language of his country, to fit together with a NT already published in Farsi. He takes trips into Muslim countries to evangelize and start churches--a dangerous task--and reaches into Farsi speaking countries on Internet TV and radio, and even has his own Bible institute to train his converts in those countries. All in all, he is a wonderful servant of Christ!
Alas, Miss E., another of our graduates, got married rather than become a translator, and now is a sweet husband and mother. We forgive her!
These stories illustrates a recent development in Bible translation. In many cases nowadays, the translation team consists all of nationals, even the leadership. The missionary is then the trainer and the translation consultant. The team is thus able to do a better job than a missionary translator, being native speakers of their heart language. They must know more than one language, have definite linguistic ability, and be trained. Any one of these native translators could post expertly here on the BB about translation theory!
Years ago I flew to Africa and taught translation theory to a group of African men, who are now working on a translation in Cameroon Pidgin. This will be very useful to the radio ministry that exists there, since there is no Scripture at all in that language.
Years ago I flew to Africa and taught translation theory to a group of African men, who are now working on a translation in Cameroon Pidgin. This will be very useful to the radio ministry that exists there, since there is no Scripture at all in that language.
RipponRedeaux
Well-Known Member
[QUOTE="Van, post: 2876350, member: 10696]
The premise that folks holding college degrees do not make mistakes obvious to diligent students of the Word is false.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that was awkward.
The premise that folks holding college degrees do not make mistakes obvious to diligent students of the Word is false.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that was awkward.
Here are five words frequently found in our New Testaments, translating Greek words with more than one meaning.
1) Baptism - does this refer to our water baptism in obedience to Christ, or our spiritual baptism into Christ?
2) Sanctification - does this refer to being set apart spiritually into Christ, or being progressively conformed to the image of Christ?
3) Called - does this refer to being invited to put our trust in Christ, or being spiritually transferred into Christ by God?
4) Hell - does this refer to Hades or to Gehenna or to Tartarus?
5) Things - does this refer to all things or some of the things?
We all should know that some Christians believe these words mean one thing in a verse, while other Christians believe something else is meant. And this divide leads to squabbles and factions and other hindrances to the ministry of Christ.
It would seem possible to remove or minimize the confusion in our translations by addressing the specific meaning the translators believe is the intended meaning. For example, rather than saying baptize say either water baptize or spiritually baptize. Say positional sanctification or progressive sanctification. Remove "hell" and use either Hades, Gehenna or Tartarus as indicated by the text.
Address the specific things in view, or if unknown translate using "these thing" to suggest the reader to consider the contextual meaning.
1) Baptism - does this refer to our water baptism in obedience to Christ, or our spiritual baptism into Christ?
2) Sanctification - does this refer to being set apart spiritually into Christ, or being progressively conformed to the image of Christ?
3) Called - does this refer to being invited to put our trust in Christ, or being spiritually transferred into Christ by God?
4) Hell - does this refer to Hades or to Gehenna or to Tartarus?
5) Things - does this refer to all things or some of the things?
We all should know that some Christians believe these words mean one thing in a verse, while other Christians believe something else is meant. And this divide leads to squabbles and factions and other hindrances to the ministry of Christ.
It would seem possible to remove or minimize the confusion in our translations by addressing the specific meaning the translators believe is the intended meaning. For example, rather than saying baptize say either water baptize or spiritually baptize. Say positional sanctification or progressive sanctification. Remove "hell" and use either Hades, Gehenna or Tartarus as indicated by the text.
Address the specific things in view, or if unknown translate using "these thing" to suggest the reader to consider the contextual meaning.
Let us consider 1 Peter 3:20 where many translations indicate eight were saved by water. This rendering is ambiguous and allows some to mistakenly think the water saved the eight. About 15 translations present the text in this ambiguous way.
About 15 others render the phrase "saved through water" which can be misconstrued to means saved through the means of water.
Thus ambiguous shoddy unstudied translation hinders the ministry of Christ.
OTOH, the NASB says "brought safely through water." Ditto ESV. Even greater clarification could be added such as brought safely through the flood water. (Flood packs peril into the rendering.)
About 15 others render the phrase "saved through water" which can be misconstrued to means saved through the means of water.
Thus ambiguous shoddy unstudied translation hinders the ministry of Christ.
OTOH, the NASB says "brought safely through water." Ditto ESV. Even greater clarification could be added such as brought safely through the flood water. (Flood packs peril into the rendering.)
Looking back through Van's posts I see that he is conflating ambiguities in the original language with ambiguous renderings. (Okay, I peeked at Van's posts though I have him on ignore. So sue me! 
But I certainly have no desire to interact with his insulting self, so there. 
)
My reply in Post #5 to Rob's Post #2 was about preserving ambiguities in the original text (which Van does not read), rather than translating a clear original word with an ambiguity. And various of Van's illustrations of renderings are not even ambiguous!
At any rate, there are two very different issues at hand her: preserving ambiguities in the source text, and producing ambiguities in the target language from clear phrasing in the original, such as in 1 Peter 3:20, which is not ambiguous in the original. The meaning of the preposition δια should be taken as causal--problem solved!
Humph. Amateur. (It's not an insult to call Van an amateur, though he is going to take it that way and insult me again. It's simply a fact.)
But I certainly have no desire to interact with his insulting self, so there. ) My reply in Post #5 to Rob's Post #2 was about preserving ambiguities in the original text (which Van does not read), rather than translating a clear original word with an ambiguity. And various of Van's illustrations of renderings are not even ambiguous!
At any rate, there are two very different issues at hand her: preserving ambiguities in the source text, and producing ambiguities in the target language from clear phrasing in the original, such as in 1 Peter 3:20, which is not ambiguous in the original. The meaning of the preposition δια should be taken as causal--problem solved!
Humph. Amateur.
(It's not an insult to call Van an amateur, though he is going to take it that way and insult me again. It's simply a fact.)Looking back through Van's posts I see that he is conflating ambiguities in the original language with ambiguous renderings. (Okay, I peeked at Van's posts though I have him on ignore. So sue me!
My reply in Post #5 to Rob's Post #2 was about preserving ambiguities in the original text (which Van does not read), rather than translating a clear original word with an ambiguity. And various of Van's illustrations of renderings are not even ambiguous!
At any rate, there are two very different issues at hand her: preserving ambiguities in the source text, and producing ambiguities in the target language from clear phrasing in the original, such as in 1 Peter 3:20, which is not ambiguous in the original. The meaning of the preposition δια should be taken as causal--problem solved!
Humph. Amateur.
ROFLOL!
Did JOJ offer an example, other than anothen of an ambiguous word in the original text? Nope I am charged with being insulting, but the topic is ignored.
I addressed the premise that God used ambiguous words to make us become thinking believers. It is a false premise.
Let us consider 1 Peter 3:20 where many translations indicate eight were saved by water. This rendering is ambiguous and allows some to mistakenly think the water saved the eight. About 15 translations present the text in this ambiguous way.
About 15 others render the phrase "saved through water" which can be misconstrued to means saved through the means of water.
Thus ambiguous shoddy unstudied translation hinders the ministry of Christ.
OTOH, the NASB says "brought safely through water." Ditto ESV. Even greater clarification could be added such as brought safely through the flood water. (Flood packs peril into the rendering.)
Ask yourself, who were the amateurs, among the professional translators going with "saved by water?" The issue has nothing to do with qualifications, and everything to do with rightly dividing the word.
Folks, a house of cards can be built from ambiguity. Lets take "saved by water." Why is this rendering seen by many (15 published translations) to be appropriate? First, "saved" might refer to spiritual salvation, and so with this as the root of the bad tree, we have, in the next verse (1 Peter 3:21) the apparent statement, corresponding to this, baptism now saves you. Corresponding to what? If baptism refers to "water baptism" then the "corresponding previous statement" would seem to be "saved by water."
However, if "baptism" refers to our being "spiritually baptized into Christ" then the corresponding previous statement is "in it (the Ark)" eight were brought safely through the waters." Thus the Ark of Christ was prefigured by the wooden Ark.
We cannot eliminate or ignore ambiguity in our understanding of scripture, but we should be diligent to discern the most probable meaning, and footnote the alternate view. Our leaders, pastor/teachers should equip us (train us) such that we can rightly divide the word.
However, if "baptism" refers to our being "spiritually baptized into Christ" then the corresponding previous statement is "in it (the Ark)" eight were brought safely through the waters." Thus the Ark of Christ was prefigured by the wooden Ark.
We cannot eliminate or ignore ambiguity in our understanding of scripture, but we should be diligent to discern the most probable meaning, and footnote the alternate view. Our leaders, pastor/teachers should equip us (train us) such that we can rightly divide the word.
I want the Bible I study from to be as close to the original language as I can tolerate, if there are ambiguities in the text, I want to know they are there.
It is dangerous to try and make clear what is ambiguous in the Bible.
The things that are clearly written, we can be sure of.
Things that are less clearly written, we should have a more relaxed posture towards.
It is dangerous to hold an opinion of Scripture based upon our preconceived notions. We need to critically examine the positions we hold and realize that we may hold an opinion that is not as solidly based as we think.
We can be brothers and sisters in Christ despite our disagreements.
Rob
It is dangerous to try and make clear what is ambiguous in the Bible.
The things that are clearly written, we can be sure of.
Things that are less clearly written, we should have a more relaxed posture towards.
It is dangerous to hold an opinion of Scripture based upon our preconceived notions. We need to critically examine the positions we hold and realize that we may hold an opinion that is not as solidly based as we think.
We can be brothers and sisters in Christ despite our disagreements.
Rob
Last edited:
- Status