New Testament Quotations of the Old Testament

[rlvaughn]

Do New Testament quotations of the Old Testament, which are translations of Hebrew to Greek, provide examples of and precedents for idiomatic translation over essentially literal translation?

I just purchased and read Dave Brunn's One Bible, Many Versions. It is an interesting read and raises many issues to think upon. In Chapter 8, "First Century Translators," Brunn writes,

"Does it really matter if we change Abram to Abraham, or say “God” instead of “the Lord”? Apparently not, because God allowed it in Romans 4:3. The form has been changed, but the meaning is the same...God in his sovereignty allowed New Testament authors to quote Genesis 15:6 and other passages in a form that is not a word-for-word translation of the verses from which they originated." (p. 152)

"James and Peter both changed “the Lord” to “God” when they quoted Proverbs 3:34...The author of the book of Hebrews also substituted “God” for “the Lord” in Hebrews 9:20, quoting Exodus 24:8 like this." (p. 151)

"...even within Scripture, the New Testament writers and speakers sometimes changed the forms when they translated from one language to another (chapter 8).

"Despite these realities, God's Word still stands as our firm foundation." (p. 158)

Thoughts?

 

[Rippon]

Do New Testament quotations of the Old Testament, which are translations of Hebrew to Greek, provide examples of and precedents for idiomatic translation over essentially literal translation?

Yes, indeed.

Singulars and plurals are exchanged also, and it is perfectly fine.

 

[Rippon]

I just purchased and read Dave Brunn's One Bible, Many Versions. It is an interesting read and raises many issues to think upon.

I bought Brunn's book more than half a decade ago and gave it away to a friend.

More folks need to be made aware of the facts he presents --though it often counters their narrative.

It's the second best book on the subject.

 

[rlvaughn]

Brunn gives two examples of translating/quoting active as passive.

Table 8.8 Genesis 15:6 (active) Romans 4:3 (passive) “he counted it to him as righteousness.” “it was counted to him as righteousness.”

Table 8.9 is another example.16 Table 8.9 Isaiah 25:8 (active) 1 Corinthians 15:54 (passive) “He will swallow up death in victory.” “Death is swallowed up in victory.”

"Some translators have felt obligated to try to match every passive construction in the original with a passive, and every active with an active. Apparently, that is not a requirement of faithfulness and accuracy in translation because Old Testament verses quoted in the New do not all measure up to this standard." (p.158)

Some of Brunn's book can be seen using the Google Books preview.

 

[loDebar]

if it was known as a quote in Hebrew, why use the Greek to then translate to English? Why not Hebrew straight to English?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

I'm not really sure that the New Testament quotes of the Old Testament with slight variation can used to support Dynamic Equivalency. The New Testament writers wrote under inspiration and the Holy Spirit has the authority to quote the Old Testament with whatever variations he wanted. I do not see how that gives authority to us to do the same.

 

[loDebar]

I'm not really sure that the New Testament quotes of the Old Testament with slight variation can used to support Dynamic Equivalency. The New Testament writers wrote under inspiration and the Holy Spirit has the authority to quote the Old Testament with whatever variations he wanted. I do not see how that gives authority to us to do the same.

Why would the Holy Spirit lead a writer to misquote a known verse?

 

[rlvaughn]

if it was known as a quote in Hebrew, why use the Greek to then translate to English? Why not Hebrew straight to English?

loDebar, I'm not sure I'm following your question? Are you saying that translators should ignore the Greek quote by the original speaker or authors (Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc.) and find the Hebrew that was quoted and translate that into English?

The examples that Brunn gives are in English because he is writing to English readers. But he is dealing, for example, with active/passive in Hebrew and Greek.

 

[rlvaughn]

I'm not really sure that the New Testament quotes of the Old Testament with slight variation can used to support Dynamic Equivalency.

I’m not sure either – that’s why I’m asking for discussion. In fact I don’t think it should in any wholesale way. If the Greek has ει αγιων ποδας ενιψεν (1 Timothy 5:10), I want to see in English “washed the saints’ feet” – not “welcoming God’s people into her home” (CEV) or “performed humble duties for other Christians” (GNT)! That’s way too much interpretation for translators, in my opinion.

The New Testament writers wrote under inspiration and the Holy Spirit has the authority to quote the Old Testament with whatever variations he wanted. I do not see how that gives authority to us to do the same.

Correct, the New Testament writers wrote under inspiration, and we can’t duplicate that. At the same time, since the New Testament is our rule of faith and practice – and our only guide for whether we should translate – then we need to be careful we don’t rule it out of order for how we should translate. While I wouldn’t take the examples to mean “go through the entire Bible translating with dynamic equivalence,” I think we can also see that “Young’s Literal Translation” is not required either!

 

[loDebar]

loDebar, I'm not sure I'm following your question? Are you saying that translators should ignore the Greek quote by the original speaker or authors (Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc.) and find the Hebrew that was quoted and translate that into English?

The examples that Brunn gives are in English because he is writing to English readers. But he is dealing, for example, with active/passive in Hebrew and Greek.

The Hebrew quote being said in Greek is fine to stay in as a Greek Translation, Jesus did not speak Greek. If He spoke Hebrew, or Aramaic . why include Greek if the original quotes are known? To your point, is it an discrepancy if a quote from the OT does not match the NT?

 

[loDebar]

Do New Testament quotations of the Old Testament, which are translations of Hebrew to Greek, provide examples of and precedents for idiomatic translation over essentially literal translation?

I just purchased and read Dave Brunn's One Bible, Many Versions. It is an interesting read and raises many issues to think upon. In Chapter 8, "First Century Translators," Brunn writes,

"Does it really matter if we change Abram to Abraham, or say “God” instead of “the Lord”? Apparently not, because God allowed it in Romans 4:3. The form has been changed, but the meaning is the same...God in his sovereignty allowed New Testament authors to quote Genesis 15:6 and other passages in a form that is not a word-for-word translation of the verses from which they originated." (p. 152)

"James and Peter both changed “the Lord” to “God” when they quoted Proverbs 3:34...The author of the book of Hebrews also substituted “God” for “the Lord” in Hebrews 9:20, quoting Exodus 24:8 like this." (p. 151)

"...even within Scripture, the New Testament writers and speakers sometimes changed the forms when they translated from one language to another (chapter 8).

"Despite these realities, God's Word still stands as our firm foundation." (p. 158)

Thoughts?

Your examples are some that do not matter but words , especially from different languages do have different meanings.
Lord from a monotheistic culture is quite different than God is a polytheistic culture as Greek

Accuracy is most important.

During Paul's conversion, one says Jesus spoke in Hebrew in the KJv and in Aramaic in the Peshitta

Acts 26:14 - And we fell all of us upon the earth; and I heard a voice that said to me in Hebrew, Shaol, Shaol, why persecutest thou me ? [Shaol, Shaol, mono rodeph ath li ?] It is hard to thee to kick against the pricks !

in one yet this in another.

14 And we all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice, while saying unto me in Ebraith {the Hebrew, or rather, the Aramaic Language}: ‘Shaul {Saul}! Shaul {Saul}! Why do you persecute Me? It is hard for you to kick the goads!

Does it matter which language? Depends on the listener.

 

[Baptist Believer]

if it was known as a quote in Hebrew, why use the Greek to then translate to English? Why not Hebrew straight to English?

The New Testament writers, including Jesus, often quoted from the LXX (the Greek translation of the Old Testament scriptures).

Jesus did not speak Greek.

I have to disagree with you. Greek was used throughout that part of the ancient world, and Galilee was more Hellenized than Jerusalem. It also appears that Jesus quoted the LXX a fair amount.

 

[loDebar]

Jesus spoke Aramaic and Hebrew. He probably knew Greek as well but He would not have quoted Hebrew scriptures in Greek to Hebrew scholars who knew Hebrew scriptures very well

Please show m a verse that was Greek spoken by Jesus

 

[rlvaughn]

The Hebrew quote being said in Greek is fine to stay in as a Greek Translation, Jesus did not speak Greek.

My point is not whether Jesus made the original statement in Greek, but that the New Testament texts that we have recorded the statement in Greek. So, for example, when Jesus speaks to Satan and says it is written, what we have preserved for us in Scripture is written in Greek.

If He spoke Hebrew, or Aramaic why include Greek if the original quotes are known?

Because what we have preserved for us in Scripture is written in Greek. For example, Matthew 4:7 εφη αυτω ο ιησους παλιν γεγραπται ουκ εκπειρασεις κυριον τον θεον σου (Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.)

To your point, is it an discrepancy if a quote from the OT does not match the NT?

Not if the inspired writers quoted it that way.

 

[loDebar]

I’m not sure either – that’s why I’m asking for discussion. In fact I don’t think it should in any wholesale way. If the Greek has ει αγιων ποδας ενιψεν (1 Timothy 5:10), I want to see in English “washed the saints’ feet” – not “welcoming God’s people into her home” (CEV) or “performed humble duties for other Christians” (GNT)! That’s way too much interpretation for translators, in my opinion.
Correct, the New Testament writers wrote under inspiration, and we can’t duplicate that. At the same time, since the New Testament is our rule of faith and practice – and our only guide for whether we should translate – then we need to be careful we don’t rule it out of order for how we should translate. While I wouldn’t take the examples to mean “go through the entire Bible translating with dynamic equivalence,” I think we can also see that “Young’s Literal Translation” is not required either!

I think your position is why there is SDA's, JW's , Mormons and each man made denomination exist The lax renderings allows mans opinions to be used. To be accurate, to insure consistency, is exactly why a Young's Literal Translation is necessary "Rightly dividing the Word of Truth" is just as important as "not of private interruption" .

 

[Baptist Believer]

Jesus spoke Aramaic and Hebrew. He probably knew Greek as well...

Since (1) Jesus is the most intelligent man that has ever walked the earth; and (2) Greek was the language of commerce (He and his father Joseph were tradesmen), I think it is almost certain that Jesus both read and spoke Greek.

...but He would not have quoted Hebrew scriptures in Greek to Hebrew scholars who knew Hebrew scriptures very well

I hope you realize that Jesus did not spend that much time with the Hebrew scholars of the day. He spent most of His time with the common people and His disciples.

Please show m a verse that was Greek spoken by Jesus

Since we have received the New Testament in Greek, we cannot be sure about all the places, but one of the classic examples is Luke 4:18-19.

The phrase "sight to the blind" is in the LXX, but not in the Hebrew text of Isaiah 61.

 

[loDebar]

My point is not whether Jesus made the original statement in Greek, but that the New Testament texts that we have recorded the statement in Greek. So, for example, when Jesus speaks to Satan and says it is written, what we have preserved for us in Scripture is written in Greek.
Because what we have preserved for us in Scripture is written in Greek. For example, Matthew 4:7 εφη αυτω ο ιησους παλιν γεγραπται ουκ εκπειρασεις κυριον τον θεον σου (Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.)
Not if the inspired writers quoted it that way.

Yes, it was preserved in Greek, Then translated to English. Hebrew to Greek to English. They can be different,,,both are Inspired? Translations are not inspired

 

[rlvaughn]

I think your position is why there is SDA's, JW's , Mormons and each man made denomination exist The lax renderings allows mans opinions to be used.

So what are you saying? That the inspired writers like Matthew, Paul, Peter, James, made "lax renderings" when their Greek statements don't exactly match the way it is written in Hebrew?

 

[rlvaughn]

Yes, it was preserved in Greek, Then translated to English. Hebrew to Greek to English. They can be different,,,both are Inspired? Translations are not inspired

I had said nothing otherwise -- that is, if we leave off the question mark after "both [Hebrew & Greek] are inspired."

 

[Baptist Believer]

Why would the Holy Spirit lead a writer to misquote a known verse?

This is a really good, intriguing question, but the answer is not a simple "He wouldn't."