For benefit or reason

[RipponRedeaux]

Well, I'll be using Van's standard for those 10 verses he presented in post #19. Out of those ten passages the CEB and LEB scored a perfect 10 out of 10. CSB scored 9 out of 10.
The NASB, ISV and NET all tied with the NIV at 5 out of 10 --or 50%.
EHV scored 40%.
MOUNCE got a score of 30%.
And the Bible version Van seems to tout the most --the WEB? Well it scored only 10%.

Six versions scored either the same as the NIV or lower. Nothing special to note here except Van's deeply flawed ratings system.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Advocating creating ambiguity for no gain in clarity or simplicity seems like pointless and futile twaddle.

You have to work on your English Van. It's hard for you to be a translator for reasons known to all. But if you can't master the target language, you are in sad shape.

"Advocating creating." Whew! That's bad.

Secondarily, if someone advocates using ambiguity, then obviously clarity isn't their aim. Ambiguity and clarity are antonyms. Do you understand?

 

[Van]

You have to work on your English Van. It's hard for you to be a translator for reasons known to all. But if you can't master the target language, you are in sad shape.

"Advocating creating." Whew! That's bad.

Secondarily, if someone advocates using ambiguity, then obviously clarity isn't their aim. Ambiguity and clarity are antonyms. Do you understand?

Who put RR in charge of English? Nobody.
I am not a translator but I do offer interpretive versions to reflect my understanding.
Those on the left want to suppress differing views, and they use subjective criteria

"For the sake of" is ambiguous and thus should not be used to translate "dia." Thus the NIV translation of Matthew 15:3, Matthew 15:6, Matthew 19:12 and Matthew 24:22 is deeply flawed.

Add Mark 13:20 to the list of NIV flaws, as again it uses "sake" instead of the unambiguous "because of." Ditto for 1 Corinthians 9:23. Ditto for 1 Corinthians 10:28. Ditto Philippians 3:7. Ditto 2 Timothy 2:10. Ditto 1 Peter 1:20. Ditto 1 Peter 2:13.

If you are keeping count that makes at least eleven times the NIV put ambiguity into the text needlessly.

 

[Van]

Well, I'll be using Van's standard for those 10 verses he presented in post #19. Out of those ten passages the CEB and LEB scored a perfect 10 out of 10. CSB scored 9 out of 10.
The NASB, ISV and NET all tied with the NIV at 5 out of 10 --or 50%.
EHV scored 40%.
MOUNCE got a score of 30%.
And the Bible version Van seems to tout the most --the WEB? Well it scored only 10%.

Six versions scored either the same as the NIV or lower. Nothing special to note here except Van's deeply flawed ratings system.

The only person claiming multiple translation flaws in other versions justifies the NIV flaws is RR. Tommy-rot once again...

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Add Mark 13:20 to the list of NIV flaws, as again it uses "sake" instead of the unambiguous "because of." Ditto for 1 Corinthians 9:23. Ditto for 1 Corinthians 10:28. Ditto Philippians 3:7. Ditto 2 Timothy 2:10. Ditto 1 Peter 1:20. Ditto 1 Peter 2:13.

Regarding Mark 13:20, a dozen versions have for the sake of.
The NET has because.
Regarding 1 Cor. 9:23, 11 versions have for the sake of.
CSB and NET have because.
Regarding 1 Cor. 10:28 there are eleven versions that have for the sake of.
The NET has because.
Regarding Phil. 3:7, nine versions have because.
Four versions have for the sake of.
Regarding 2 Tim. 2:10, a dozen versions have for the sake of.
No version has because.
Regarding 1 Pe. 1:20, ten versions have either for your sake, or for the sake of you.
No version has because.
Regarding 1 Pe. 2:13, ten versions have either for the sake of or for the Lord's sake.
No version has because.

To summarize, out of the seven passages the NET agreed with Van's preference four times.
The CSB and NABRE agreed twice.
Mounce agreed with him once.
Van's favorite translations : LEB and WEB, did not support his translational view.
There is an overwhelming incidence of agreement with the NIV rendering among these various translations for these seven passages.

The 14 translations I used are :
CEB, CSB, EHV, ESV, ISV, LEB, Mounce, NASB, NABRE, NET, NIV, NLT, NRSV and WEB.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

"For the sake of" is ambiguous and thus should not be used to translate "dia." Thus the NIV translation of Matthew 15:3, Matthew 15:6, Matthew 19:12 and Matthew 24:22 is deeply flawed.

Regarding Matt. 15:3, seven versions have for the sake of.
Four versions have because..

Regarding Matt. 15:6, eleven versions have for the sake of.
One version has because and another has on account of.

Regarding Matt. 19:12, eight versions have for the sake of.
Five versions have because.

Regarding Matt. 24:22, a dozen versions have for the sake of.
One version has because.

To sum up, the versions that agreed with Van in descending order are:
ISV and CSB -- 3 each.
NET -- twice.
LEB, WEB, EHV and NABRE just once a piece.

Again, overwhelmingly, most of these versions, most of the time, agreed with the NIV.

Making it simple:

Van : 4
RR : 7

Van : 2
RR : 11

Van : 5
RR : 8

Van : 1
RR : 12

Total score :
Van 12 points. RR 38 points. The various Bible versions for these four passages harmonized with the NIV more than three times over that of Van's preferred wording.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I am not a translator

Nice! Confession is good for the soul.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Concerning post #25 of mine, Van got 13 points and I got 70 (really the NIV).
So, tallying up the way the seven passages were rendered in post 25, and adding how the four were rendered in post 26 :
Van has 25 points and I have 108 (really the NIV). In those eleven passages most of the 15 versions agreed with the NIV wording more than four times as much as Van's preferred phrases.

I'd say the translators of so many varying Bible versions know a great deal more Greek than Mister Van. Most of the versions harmonized nicely with the NIV the vast majority of the time.

 

[Van]

Regarding Mark 13:20, a dozen versions have for the sake of.
The NET has because.
Regarding 1 Cor. 9:23, 11 versions have for the sake of.
CSB and NET have because.
Regarding 1 Cor. 10:28 there are eleven versions that have for the sake of.
The NET has because.
Regarding Phil. 3:7, nine versions have because.
Four versions have for the sake of.
Regarding 2 Tim. 2:10, a dozen versions have for the sake of.
No version has because.
Regarding 1 Pe. 1:20, ten versions have either for your sake, or for the sake of you.
No version has because.
Regarding 1 Pe. 2:13, ten versions have either for the sake of or for the Lord's sake.
No version has because.

To summarize, out of the seven passages the NET agreed with Van's preference four times.
The CSB and NABRE agreed twice.
Mounce agreed with him once.
Van's favorite translations : LEB and WEB, did not support his translational view.
There is an overwhelming incidence of agreement with the NIV rendering among these various translations for these seven passages.

The 14 translations I used are :
CEB, CSB, EHV, ESV, ISV, LEB, Mounce, NASB, NABRE, NET, NIV, NLT, NRSV and WEB.

Once again, RR makes the idiotic argument two or more wrongs make a right. These verses said because of, not for the benefit of. Group think is no virtue. Taking a clear statement in Greek and making it ambiguous in English is no virtue, and presenting the statement with clarity is no vice.

Thus RR scores a big fat zero for advocating poor translation.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Van, your view is in the distinct minority. Thirteen versions harmonized with the NIV rendering. That's more than 4 times the amount agreeing with your take. The field of translations here is diverse. I did not engage in cherry picking. There was no subjectivity involved. It is purely objective that your interpretive take has to take a backseat to authentic translators.

 

[Van]

Matthew 5:10, “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (NASB)

Is this verse saying righteousness benefits from persecution? Or is this verse saying that the people who have been persecuted because of their righteousness, will be blessed?

Thus the use of "sake" as a word conveying the meaning of "heneka" which means because of or on account of introduces needless ambiguity.

 

[Van]

Has anyone ever seen the movie "Stand and Deliver?" Students were accursed of cheating because "it was claimed" they made the same errors on the same questions. But had they copied? Nope. When given a second test, the results were basically the same, all passed the test again.

Why do you suppose so many translations chose the ambiguous choice, rather than the one with clarity? Why translate "Heneka" as "for the sake of" when "because of" makes clear what the intended meaning was? We they copying from a prior translation because they did not know the actual meaning of "heneka?" Or were they afraid of deviating from the accepted traditional way of translating the verse? Or we they motivated by the fear they might be charged with a "quirky." "odd" or "unconventional" translation?

Should we just read "because of" every time we seek "sake" in the text? Nope. We can read "because of" every time "dia" or "heneka" is translated using sake, but what about the remaining words on the list:

G3686"onoma" - Matthew 10:22 (ESV)
G4392 "prophasis" - Mark 12:40 (NASB)
G4771 "sy" - John 11:15 (NIV)
G5228 "hyper" - Romans 9:3 (NIV)

"Onoma" can be accurately translated as meaning "for My name's benefit" on two occations, Acts 9:16 and Romans 1:5. In these examples, "hyper" has been translated as "for" but could also be translated as "for the benefit of" thereby allowing "onoma" to be literally translated as "name" as in "My name." For simplicity's sake, let us put those two verses in the "hyper" meaning benefit column, leaving no valid examples of "onoma" being accurately translated as "name's sake." Three down, three to go...

 

[Van]

A few translations do render "prophasis" as "for appearance's sake" or "for the sake of appearance" meaning for the benefit of a deception. but other choices (pretend, pretext, pretense, make a show) allow avoiding the redundant use of "sake." Here is how the NET presents the idea with simplicity:

Mark 12:40 (NET)
They devour widows’ property, and as a show make long prayers. These men will receive a more severe punishment.”

 

[Van]

"Sy" is a pronoun meaning "you" and so "because of you" accurately translates verses rendered "for your sake."

Thus, 2 Corinthians 8:9 could be better translated as "because of you" rather than "for your sake." However, again we find the "for you sake" translation of "hyper" as "for" so in Colossians 1:24, and therefore once again let us put this verse in the "hyper" column as meaning "for the benefit of."

 

[Van]

So on post 35, we come to the Greek word "hyper" (G5228) which does indeed have within its range of meanings "for the benefit of" someone or something!

For example here is:
Luke 6:28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. The meaning of "hyper" here is to pray for the benefit of those who mistreat you. Our translations would be improved if they had used "sake" to render "hyper" exclusively, but since "sake" can mean two different things (because of and for the benefit of) and even better improvement would be to use "benefit."

John 17:19
“For their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth. (NASB). Here "for" is translating "hyper" and thus "For their benefit" I sanctify Myself... presents the actual message of Christ.

 

[Van]

Bottom line, the use of "sake" is unnecessary and since the word may mean two very different things, if a word or phrase with the single contextual meaning is available, that unambiguous word or phrase should be used.

Which version uses "sake" the least in the NT? YLT (about 19)
Then CSB at about 21. The NIV is not too shabby with 34 ambiguous choices. Then we head over the cliff - NASB 54, NKJV 62 and the winner for the highest count of misses is the regrettable ESV with about 73. Thus going with the "traditional choice" seems to motivate several big selling versions.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Matthew 5:10, “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (NASB)

Thus the use of "sake" as a word conveying the meaning of "heneka" which means because of or on account of introduces needless ambiguity.

You're getting lost in your sentences Van.

For Matthew 5:10 NASB, NABRE have for the sake of.
The ISV and WEB have for righteousness' sake

The CEB, CSB, EHV, NIV and LEB have because.

The NET and NLT have for.

 

[Van]

You're getting lost in your sentences Van.

For Matthew 5:10 the NABRE have for the sake of.
The ISV and WEB have for righteousness' sake

The CEB, CSB, EHV, NIV and LEB have because.

The NET and NLT have for.

RR posts endless claims, of two or more wrongs, makes right. Sake is ambiguous and should be avoided by using a more accurate word or phrase.

Is Matthew 5:10 saying righteousness benefits from persecution? Or is this verse saying that the people who have been persecuted because of their righteousness, will be blessed?

Thus the use of "sake" as a word conveying the meaning of "heneka" which means because of or on account of introduces needless ambiguity.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Regarding Van's post #32 :

Matthew 10:22 : CSB, EHV, NET, ISV, LEB, NIV, NABRE and NRSV have because of.
The CEB and Mounce have on account of.
The WEB has for my name's sake.

Mark 12:40
NIV and NET have a show
CSB has for show
CEB has show off
NLT has pretend
WEB and ESV have for a pretense
NABRE has pretext
NASB has for appearance's sake
NRSV and LEB have for the sake of appearance

John 11:15
CEB, NASB, NLT, WEB have for your sakes
ESV, EHV, ISV, LEB, Mounce, NET, NIV, NRSV have for your sake
NABRE has for you

Romans 9:3
NIV, NRSV, NET, NASB, NABRE, LEB, ISV, ESV, Mounce, WEB have some form of sake
NLT has for
CSB has benefit (which will warm the heart of Van)

Acts 9:16
NIV, NABRE, EHV, CSB have for my name
NLT, WEB, ISV have for my names' sake
NRSV, NET, ESV, Mounce, LEB, CEB have for the sake of my name
NASB has in behalf of my name

Romans 1:5
CSB, ESV, ISV, NABRE, NRSV have for the sake of his name
CEB, WEB, NIV have for his name's sake
EHV, LEB, Mounce, NASB, NET have on/in behalf of his name

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Regarding Van's post number 34:

2 Corinthians 8:9
CSB, LEB, NABRE, NIV have for your sake
CEB, EHV, NRSV, ISV, Mounce, NET, NLT, WEB have for your sakes

Van insists on because of you. However his wishes keep getting dashed. For the sake of him, Van can't win. LOL!! Ditto for the next verse.

Colossians 1:24
Van wants the wording for the benefit of.

CEB, Mounce, NET, NIV have for the sake of
NRSV has for your sake
WEB has for his body's sake
EHV, ISV, LEB, NABRE, NASB have on behalf of