HCSB Gen. 16:12 a "wild ass" verse?

No problem as far as I am concerned.

You mentioned that the KJV Genesis 16:12 translation says "wild man" but this is the only place that the KJV translators didn't translate the word PEREH as "wild ass".

Merriam Webster has the following for the number 1 definition:

Found online in the public domain at http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary.

HankD

 

I don't believe any English reader should have any prob with that word, given the context of the verse. If they DO have a prob, they've made it themselves. The translators coulda said "wild horse" & someone somewhere woulda had some prob with it. The translators know they can't please every last reader, so they simply ignore them & move on.

 

Great Point Hank. Case Closed!

 

Every other time, with the exception of Hosea 8:9, the reference is to the actual animal that Webster defines. In Hosea, the term is used as a metaphor to describe Israel as a whole.

In the 10 passages in which this word is used, my opinion is that the KJV has it correct all 10 times.

If I read the HCSB version of Genesis 16:12 to my bus kids, I guarantee you they wouldn't picture a "hardy gregarious African or Asian perissodactyl mammal;" they would assume it is the same word that they have heard many times at home.

 

I don't have a problem with this wording. It's pretty clear, especially read in context with the surrounding verses, what the scripture is telling us here.

Just like we largely agree on this board - we should be taking these scriptures in context. If we do that, there's no problem.

Consider this:

This would seem to be offensive - but when read in the larger context:

When seen in the correct context, it is quite clear what the scripture is saying - in this case and in the case of the subject scripture.

When these (and other) terms are used in the Bible, there is no need to fear them - or to giggle as an adolescent. These are real words or phrases, with appropriate meaning.

As for what the kids understand, exercise discernment by all means, but never be afraid to teach the truth of the scripture, and don't be afraid of isolated words and phrases.

 

I thought this was a thread about Robby Gordon.

 

God's Word also says, "...there is no God,"


[but I wouldn't want to be included in the categorization of the individual which His Word signifies made that statement].

 

Actually, I think it's appropriately descriptive given the context. If my Sunday school boys snicker, then that's a teachable moment,too. One of the beauties of the Scriptures is their vividness; translations like this one which close that gap between every day life and God's Word are helpful, it seems to me.

 

Isn't that one of the attractions of the MVs, to do away with the need to clarify what a word "really" means? I thought that was the problem with the archaic language of the KJV? What is the difference in the use of a word that has changed it's meaning, or the use of a word that has an ambiguous meaning? Both have to be explained.

 

Any translation that claims to be reflecting current usage should never use "ass" when referring to a donkey. Because even when the word is used today in that context, it still carries the burden of the slang meanings. I don't think their use is racism, it's just plain stupid.

 

I agree, no big deal.

Note: In the NAS, HCS, NIV, ESV, and even the NKJV, Job 39:5 and Hosea 8:9 use “wild donkey”; the KJV uses ”wild ass”.

In the KJV and the NKJV translations of Genesis 16:8, they have failed to properly communicate the metaphor. The KJVO crowd complain about the MV translations because of their fast and loose translations. Here is a point where they got it right and the KJV group cut corners.

In most cases the KJV translators sufficiently translated the text including the metaphors but here the translation misses the style of the original Hebrew text.

Perhaps in today's English
Donkeys connote stubornness.
Ass's connote anger and arrogance

Rob

 

Again, I say some people have tried to make a problem where none exists.(Not speaking of anyone here.)

 

Don't only point fingers at the HCSB. Like I said, the KJV also translates the same word in two different ways.

The only explanation I can think of is that the words in English have slightly different conotations.
Our English slang use of ass may fit well with the intent of the text in Genesis.

Rob

 

Debby in Philly said:

Any translation that claims to be reflecting current usage should never use "ass" when referring to a donkey.

Why not? As an insult, the word still retains the meaning of "donkey" just as much as the other. For example, what word comes after "pompous"?