• 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!

Vulgarity in translation

Greektim

Greektim

Well-Known Member
I am not an advocate for the complete non-use of vulgar terms. I think they help communicate effectively points. So I am occasionally for profanity (will make a good subject in another part of the BB).

I don't think Paul was either. Phil. 3:8 and σκυβαλον is a good example.

Consider the NET note on this word:
NET Phil 3:8 said:
The word here translated “dung” was often used in Greek as a vulgar term for fecal matter. As such it would most likely have had a certain shock value for the readers. This may well be Paul’s meaning here, especially since the context is about what the flesh produces.
Click to expand...

Question then: if this is considered a vulgar term, would it be ok to translate it as such? Of course, the intensity may vary (which society will determine in varying ways). But would "crap" work or perhaps even "s**t"?
 
Crabtownboy

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I do not believe the gospel should be toned-down. I have been told that Jesus could be quite earthy. I am not a Greek scholar, so I have to take the words of others.

The good, Anglo-Saxon, word s**t could be used as far as I am concerned. It certainly would leave little to misunderstand.
 
Greektim

Greektim

Well-Known Member
Greektim said:
I am not an advocate for the complete non-use of vulgar terms. I think they help communicate effectively points. So I am occasionally for profanity (will make a good subject in another part of the BB).

I don't think Paul was either. Phil. 3:8 and σκυβαλον is a good example.

Consider the NET note on this word:


Question then: if this is considered a vulgar term, would it be ok to translate it as such? Of course, the intensity may vary (which society will determine in varying ways). But would "crap" work or perhaps even "s**t"?
Click to expand...
Ok... haha... moving on. I was hoping to have a serious translation discussion on the OP.
 
F

franklinmonroe

Active Member
Greektim said:
... Question then: if this is considered a vulgar term, would it be ok to translate it as such? Of course, the intensity may vary (which society will determine in varying ways). But would "crap" work or perhaps even "s**t"?
Click to expand...
Some words are considered profane under certain circumstances; consider --
A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD. (Deu 23:2)
And a bastard shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines. (Zec 9:6) ​
Are those vulgar renderings? Would something like "illegitimate child" be better?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
John of Japan

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Amy.G said:
The KJV uses pi$$.
Click to expand...
This was actually a Hebrew idiom for "grown men" in 6 passages, and I don't think a case can be made for it being a vulgar idiom in 1611, though in our modern society it is often considered so. The proper modern word for this should be "urine" or "urinate."

Note that the word "pi**" occurs in 2 Kings 18:27 and Is. 36:12 (same incident) along with "dung," which has never been a vulgarity in English. If you're going to use a vulgarity for one, you'll use one for the other, since the two words are a couplet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
John of Japan

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
franklinmonroe said:
Some words are considered profane under certain circumstances; consider --
A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD. (Deu 23:2)
And a bastard shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines. (Zec 9:6)
​
Are those vulgar renderings? Would something like "illegitimate child" be better?
Click to expand...
You are projecting your 21st century understanding into 1611. It was not a vulgar term then.
 
John of Japan

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Greektim said:
I am not an advocate for the complete non-use of vulgar terms. I think they help communicate effectively points. So I am occasionally for profanity (will make a good subject in another part of the BB).

I don't think Paul was either. Phil. 3:8 and σκυβαλον is a good example.

Consider the NET note on this word:


Question then: if this is considered a vulgar term, would it be ok to translate it as such? Of course, the intensity may vary (which society will determine in varying ways). But would "crap" work or perhaps even "s**t"?
Click to expand...
The burden of proof is on you and the NET writer. I say skubalon was not a vulgar word in Koine Greek. Prove to me that it was, and then I'll consider your argument. Until then it is entirely speculative. Not one single lexicon that I have (and I have many) calls it a vulgar term.
 
G

Gregory Perry Sr.

Active Member
Seriously?

Greektim said:
Serious doesn't have to be scholarly.
Click to expand...

Ask Logos:smilewinkgrin:....He knows everything! At least about the KJV! And by the way Amy...the word is piss....AND pisseth (I love olde English!)....NOT pi$$. Since it actually IS in the Bible (2 Kings 18;27, Isa.36:12, 1 Sam.25:22,34 , 1 Kings 14:10,(16:11-now isn't THAT an interesting coincidence?),21:21 & 2 Kings 9:8 we don't need to be afraid to say it here or anywhere else...amen?:thumbsup: By the way...if the "people of the Book" didn't consider it "vulgar" in 1611, then I don't think we need to consider it "vulgar" in 2013. There are other words in English that I might not say that about. IMHO

Bro.Greg:saint:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Amy.G

New Member
Gregory Perry Sr. said:
Ask Logos:smilewinkgrin:....He knows everything! At least about the KJV! And by the way Amy...the word is piss....AND pisseth (I love olde English!)....NOT pi$$. Since it actually IS in the Bible (2 Kings 18;27, Isa.36:12, 1 Sam.25:22,34 , 1 Kings 14:10,(16:11-now isn't THAT an interesting coincidence?),21:21 & 2 Kings 9:8 we don't need to be afraid to say it here or anywhere else...amen?:thumbsup: By the way...if the "people of the Book" didn't consider it "vulgar" in 1611, then I don't think we need to consider it "vulgar" in 2013. There are other words in English that I might not say that about. IMHO

Bro.Greg:saint:
Click to expand...
Greg, I know that piss (there, I typed it) was not a vulgar word in the 17th century, but it is in our culture. At least to me it is. So I do not like to use it. That's why Bibles need to be updated from time to time, because language changes.
In our culture, the word "bloody" is acceptable, but in the UK, it's a vulgar word, on par with the F bomb here.
So if you want to use the "p" word just because it was ok in 1611 England, be my guest. But I won't.
 
Earth Wind and Fire

Earth Wind and Fire

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
In our current society, would "Yo Momma" or "....and the horse you rode in here with" be considered vulgar since I cant say "go P*SS up a rope" or "go sh*t in your hat" :confused:
 
A

Amy.G

New Member
Earth said:
In our current society, would "Yo Momma" or "....and the horse you rode in here with" be considered vulgar since I cant say "go P*SS up a rope" or "go sh*t in your hat" :confused:
Click to expand...

Probably not. Just extremely rude. Which is just as un-Christlike as vulgar language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top