Why do so called interpreters who 'translate' the Word of God actually pervert it?

[Nux]

I was in a jam, as I was in a rush to get to my band’s jam session, because they were trying to jam through their next hit on our album. On my way I got stuck in a traffic jam, so I ate a jam sandwich in the car, looked to my left and noticed there was something wrong with the door jam.

Now translate that paragraph word for word into Hebrew.

LOL, that is definitely a challenge)) But in the example I've provided 'soul' was translated like 'creature' and 'life' and 'soul'. What in your oppinion was the reason for that?))

 

[public hermit]

Don't wanna argue but God created 'soul', not 'emotion' or 'appetite'. This is not something abstract although it can't be seen. Our soul descends to sheol, is kept there untill the coming of Jesus who will deliver it. Turn 'soul' into 'creature' or 'appetite' is not a translation, it's, taking into account the importance of the matter, rather a way to blur the meaning of the message.

What might help is to the recall the consistent scriptural premise that emotion and appetite are inseparable aspects of soul, and soul is an aspect of creaturehood/living beings. Those are all understood as intimately connected, and in some instances cannot be coherently seperated. Can you show me that the ancient Hebrew language did not use the one word "nephesh" in precisely those ways? I'll give you an example that runs contrary to your understandable assumption about nephesh.

In Gen. 1:24, God says, "Let the earth bring forth living nephesh of every kind..." And then we are giving instances of various kinds of creatures. You could translate that "souls," as you want. Or you could translate it "creatures" like the KJV and others. Edit: I just realized this is the passage you had in mind? It's a perfectly reasonable translation given the context and the OT understanding of the soul and creatures.

I understand your frustration with translations because some are better than others. But language, especially when translating, is not always as precise as we might wish. Gratefully, our faith is not in language or concepts, as necessary as they might be, but in the Living God that brings things into existence and raises the dead.

 

[Nux]

I don't think they think they are doing that. Rather, I think they believe they are illuminating the truth of the Bible as they see it. Iow, they present their interpretation as fact to forestall a reader from seeing or accepting some other denomination's interpretation.

Like where the KJV translates the clear world RETURN as its opposite, are turned into: Ps 9:17 The wicked will RETURN to Sheol—all the nations who forget God. Other so called translations use go down to rather than are turned into or the actual word used, to return.

See how it works? If you have an agenda, you get to translate anything to fit your pov, sigh. The trick is to find their agenda, like denying animals have souls, and then making up your own mind about what is written.

Thanks! Yep, this was almost exactly what I was thinking about when writing the original post. Now, I believe, I know their adenda, and, with the guidance from Yahweh God, blessed is his Name, I'm not going to let anybody fool me. I'll do my best to check everything I can.

 

[SuperCow]

LOL, that is definitely a challenge)) But in the example I've provided 'soul' was translated like 'creature' and 'life' and 'soul'. What in your oppinion was the reason for that?))

Because some churches object to the idea that animals are souls like humans, so they believe that to translate verses about animals the same as humans would mislead people, ironically doing the same thing.

 

[eleos1954]

I'm going through a deep disappointment now, because of the fact, at least I believe so, that there are actually no faithful translation of the Word of God available to me. I've tried every kind of them starting from NIV and up to the so called 'word-to-word' LEB or YLT98. And do you know what? Even that last ones are not 'word-to-word'... And I'm not talking about some deep and complex matters, because I don't know Hebrew or NT Greek well enough to dive into them. But listen, why don't they translate the original words seemingly through the whole OT, to help readers to know what the original meaning is, like the devoted interpreters, as I believe, must do? Let's take, for example, the way LEB translates the 'soul' h5315. Here is the link to the Strong's Lexicon H5315 - nep̄eš - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (kjv) so that everybody can check. Why, although it is commonly translated like 'soul', they've chosen 'creature' to be placed instead in Genesis? This is definitely not what is called translation. Why do they twist and darken the meaning of the Word of God?

Really it is based on what one believes about immortality as to how a person applies the definition to the word "soul".

There is nothing immortal about us .... that is the gift (reward) we receive WHEN Jesus returns .... not before .... the teaching of a "immortal soul" has it's roots in paganism.
Mystery Babylon .... come out of her my people.

All rest in a dormant sleep until Jesus returns and the first resurrection (of the saved) occurs.

Paul summed it up nicely here .... however many more verses stating death is a dormant sleep in the grave (hell) ... not some burning place where God tortures people.

1 Thessalonians 4

13Brothers, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you will not grieve like the rest, who are without hope. 14For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, we also believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him.15By the word of the Lord, we declare to you that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a loud command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will be the first to rise. 17After that, we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord.

18Therefore encourage one another with these words.

Mystery Babylon ..... come out of her my people.

Revelation 17

Amplified Bible
And on her forehead a name was written, a mystery: “BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES (false religions, heresies) AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.”

Revelation 18:4

New International Version
Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “’Come out of her, my people,’ so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues;

 

[Nux]

All rest in a dormant sleep until Jesus returns and the first resurrection (of the saved) occurs.

Agree. This is what scriptures clearly say.

Paul summed it up nicely here .... however many more verses stating death is a dormant sleep in the grave (hell) ... not some burning place where God tortures people.

I prefer to say 'sheol' instead of 'hell'. First of all it is an original term for 'grave', and also, because it is rarely used it is free from unnecesarry associations)).

 

[Nux]

Because some churches object to the idea that animals are souls like humans, so they believe that to translate verses about animals the same as humans would mislead people, ironically doing the same thing.

I'm not sure animals are souls of the same kind as humans because the man was created in the image of God and they wasn't, but they are definitely souls))

 

[TedT]

Thanks! Yep, this was almost exactly what I was thinking about when writing the original post. Now, I believe, I know their adenda, and, with the guidance from Yahweh God, blessed is his Name, I'm not going to let anybody fool me. I'll do my best to check everything I can.

Well, yes, but remember you also have a biased pov, sigh. Ie, lean not to your own understanding but GOD's leading.

 

[LeGato]

Yep, NIV is defenitely not for studying. Among them all I prefer LEB and YLT98, although they are far from perfection. But KJV is worser than they. Follow this link H5315 - nep̄eš - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (kjv) and see how differently, depending on context, it translates in Genesis the same word 'soul'. And morover the Holy Name of God is blot out of it. Don't wanna use such translation.

LEB and YLT98

Thank you, I've never heard of these.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

There are thousands of common English words that can be translated to other languages in different ways, depending on the context.
You can try it on translate.google.com and play with it.

And biblical languages are no exception. To pick just one meaning of many and force it to any context would produce a bad translation. On the other hand, with any translation, you rely on opinions of others, so you may want to learn to read Greek, if you do not like any translation.

When Translate Google first came out, "Kyrie Elesion" was translated "I'm sorry sir"

To add what Myst and others are saying, you can do a word for word translation, and because Greek does not follow English grammar or sentence structure, you can get very strange passages when translated.

Matt 1:18 translated word for word reads
Now of Jesus Christ the birth was this. Being betrothed for the mother of him, Mariam to Joseph, before joining of them, she was found in womb, pregnant, by Spirit Holy.

There are also passages where multiple Greek words only have one English equivalent such as agape, philia, eros, and storg, which all get translated to "love". Now, eros and storg do not appear in the scriptures, but when we translate "X loves Y", we lose the context of which version of love was used.

So you can find word for word translations and dynamic equivalence translations where the translators are attempting to get the thought and context across. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Are there better and worse translations? Of course.

If I'm really ambitious, I'm reading the Greek and I can do a translation in my head. But I can only do that for short periods of time and typically getting ready to read a passage for a service. I sound out the entire passage so I can read it publicly.

If I'm reading reading for my own prayer life, I use NKJV, RSV or ESV.

 

[Nux]

Thank you, I've never heard of these.

I've chosen them because they didn't blot out God's Name and are relatively literal. But of course they are just translations and by no means can be called 'Word Of God'. Wanna know the truth - use interlinear. Thanks to it - now I know that God has Name))

 

[Nux]

If I'm reading reading for my own prayer life, I use NKJV, RSV or ESV.

I'm using only translations with God's Name. Don't wanna tolerate LORD instead of Yahweh.

 

[SuperCow]

I'm using only translations with God's Name. Don't wanna tolerate LORD instead of Yahweh.

I believe the American Standard Version keeps God's name, if you want an easier to read version. (The English transliteration from Yahweh to Jehovah anyway.)

 

[kiwimac]

One language does not always translate well into another; a couple of simple examples,
"Oh, la la" and "Sacre bleu", both French and with both a wider vocabulary than Hebrew and a closer familial relationship to English.

The job of a translator is to make grammatical sense of a passage without damaging the meaning, much easier written than done. Especially with language such as Ancient Hebrew, Aramaic and koine Greek.

 

[TedT]

The job of a translator is to make grammatical sense of a passage without damaging the meaning, much easier written than done. Especially with language such as Ancient Hebrew, Aramaic and koine Greek.

Especially when every translator is a member of a Church with a doctrinal pov that fills his interpretation.

Did you now that naked and cunning in evil in Genesis are the same Hebrew word, `RM, and the interpretation has been chosen for us by people who made the decision of what the word should mean for us, not trusting us to figure it out for ourselves by following the Spirit....

 

[Strong in Him]

I'm going through a deep disappointment now, because of the fact, at least I believe so, that there are actually no faithful translation of the Word of God available to me. I've tried every kind of them starting from NIV and up to the so called 'word-to-word' LEB or YLT98. And do you know what? Even that last ones are not 'word-to-word'...

Do you require a Bible to be a word-for-word translation of the original language before you can read, learn, grow and benefit from it?
The Gospel is the same in all Bibles.

And I'm not talking about some deep and complex matters, because I don't know Hebrew or NT Greek well enough to dive into them. But listen, why don't they translate the original words seemingly through the whole OT, to help readers to know what the original meaning is, like the devoted interpreters, as I believe, must do?

I would guess that:
- in some cases the original word may not be that clear. Several verses in my Bible have the footnote "the Hebrew is not clear/easy to understand".
- in some cases there may be no one English word to express what the Hebrew/Greek means. Take the word "love"; in English the same word is used whether the statement is "I love chocolate", "I love my husband", "I love his music/her dress/his poems" etc, or "I love God". Clearly the sentiment is not always the same - I doubt anyone loves their husband in the same way that they love chocolate, or loves a dress in the same way that they love God. So in the Greek, for example, there are different words, and an English translation may need to differentiate between brotherly love, romantic love or divine love.
- the meanings of words changes over time; "gay", now, does not mean the same at all as when I was a child.
- a word might be able to be translated different ways and mean slightly different things. Take the word Diakonos; it can be translated as "servant", "deacon" or "minister", and this affects understanding. So, for example, someone who does not accept women's ordination may stress that Phoebe, in Rom 16:1, was a servant of the church - which could mean anything. Someone else will say that she was a deacon, just as Stephen, Philip etc in Acts 6 were deacons. And someone else will point out that the same word is used for Paul as a minister of the Gospel. If you look in a Thesaurus, words often have more than one meaning.

Let's take, for example, the way LEB translates the 'soul' h5315. Here is the link to the Strong's Lexicon H5315 - nep̄eš - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (kjv) so that everybody can check. Why, although it is commonly translated like 'soul', they've chosen 'creature' to be placed instead in Genesis? This is definitely not what is called translation.

Yet we do the same in English.
If someone calls a sick/disabled person a "poor soul", they mean that they feel sorry for the person.
Proverbs 1:11, in my Bible, says "let us ambush some harmless soul". Can a soul be ambushed by someone? They clearly mean "person".
A Christadelphian one referred me to a verse in the Bible which said "the soul that sinneth shall die". Can a soul sin? I'm sure other translations would have used the word "person".

Why do they twist and darken the meaning of the Word of God?

"Twist and darken" suggests a deliberate attempt to deceive.
I don't believe Bible translators want to do any such thing.

 

[Strong in Him]

I've chosen them because they didn't blot out God's Name and are relatively literal. But of course they are just translations and by no means can be called 'Word Of God'. Wanna know the truth - use interlinear. Thanks to it - now I know that God has Name))

God has many names - "El Shaddai", "Jehovah", "Adonai", for a start. Not to mention "the Lord", "Saviour", the Lord is my banner", "the God who provides" and so on.
These are all used at different times and in different passages.

 

[pescador]

I'm going through a deep disappointment now, because of the fact, at least I believe so, that there are actually no faithful translation of the Word of God available to me. I've tried every kind of them starting from NIV and up to the so called 'word-to-word' LEB or YLT98. And do you know what? Even that last ones are not 'word-to-word'... And I'm not talking about some deep and complex matters, because I don't know Hebrew or NT Greek well enough to dive into them. But listen, why don't they translate the original words seemingly through the whole OT, to help readers to know what the original meaning is, like the devoted interpreters, as I believe, must do? Let's take, for example, the way LEB translates the 'soul' h5315. Here is the link to the Strong's Lexicon H5315 - nep̄eš - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (kjv) so that everybody can check. Why, although it is commonly translated like 'soul', they've chosen 'creature' to be placed instead in Genesis? This is definitely not what is called translation. Why do they twist and darken the meaning of the Word of God?

It is impossible to have a word-for-word translation of the early Biblical sources for several reasons...

1) The Bible "books" are a collection of ancient scrolls based on the original writings, but notice that the original writings don't exist. The best that we have are early scrolls -- or parts of scrolls -- written in three different languages: ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

2) For several reasons it is impossible to produce a complete, accurate translation into a receptor language. There is no one-to-one correspondence between the early languages and modern English. Word meanings, verb tenses, and idioms can be very different. A reverse example I have given previously: if I told you that it's raining cats and dogs you would understand the idiom, but it would horrify someone who hadn't heard it before.

3) The best that can be done is for the translators to determine for whom they are creating the translation, then translate the ancient scrolls so that they are best understood by the target audience. Since we don't live in a culture that existed thousands of years ago, with its daily living habits and cultural norms (folkways and mores), there is no real alternative.

I can guarantee that, with very, very few exceptions, our Bibles are accurate translations of the ancient writings. My advice is to read the same passages on a web site such as biblegateway.com and decide which ones "speak" to you most clearly. My personal preference is the NET 2.1. It's an excellent translation into our modern English language (and thinking) and has more than 60,000 translator's notes that explain more than you want to know about virtually every verse.

I also recommend avoiding the King James Version, which is written in a form of Englyshe that is long-since dead and therefore open to all kinds of misinterpretations.

 

[pescador]

Nux, there's a lot that goes on linguistically when translators in any project attempt to translate the Bible. The first hermeneutical hurdle comes in the fact that we don't have any of the original biblical documents, and what we do have thousands of years later are comparative compilations of copies of copies of various 'families' of texts. To say that our current translations are all deficient is to imply that we have a perfect baseline form which to draw from in the first place, but we actually don't.

Add to this that different translators in different creative teams for various versions have attempted purposely to use different interpretive equivalencies in the translation process since languages don't necessarily match up in conceptual nor grammatical structures, and it's no wonder we have the number of translations that we do.

Have you read any scholarly books on the hermeneutical processes and linguistic difficulties that are involved in the work of various biblical translation teams and/or individual scholars?

Great post!

 

[pescador]

The NIV is one of the worst of them. I use KJV, weird for a Lutheran, i know.

The NIV is one of the best of them. It is the best-selling Bible because it is an excellent translation of the ancient source documents -- the ancient scrolls -- into our modern English.

The KJV is more than 400 years old, written in a dead language for a culture that no longer exists. It satisfies some people's idea of what "holy language" should sound like but there is no basis for that mistaken concept. Ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek were the common languages of ancient, vastly illiterate peoples -- the kind of language used every day -- not some special "ecclesiastical" language.

Read different selections in different versions and see which one(s) "speak" most clearly to you. Those are the ones you should use!