Faulty translations of the Bible???

[Dianka]

Before I dropped religion completely, I read that when the Bible was being translated into different languages, the writers translated some of the text incorrectly. I was wondering if any of you have information about this claim, and possibly some examples.

 

Any information is appreciated.

 

SM

 

 

[Ouroboros]

Before I dropped religion completely, I read that when the Bible was being translated into different languages, the writers translated some of the text incorrectly. I was wondering if any of you have information about this claim, and possibly some examples.

 

Any information is appreciated.

 

SM

Yeah, there's been plenty of translations of a different reasons:

 

1. Older translator didn't know the exact meaning of some words, or didn't understand the grammar or the references being made.

 

2. Some passages are still hard to translate correctly

 

3. There has been many new finds of partial fragments of the OT and NT, with different wordings and more or less text, and the newer translations are revised accordingly

 

4. The language it has been translated to is changing, so new translations are needed to keep up with any living language. English today is not the same as English 100 years ago.

[dead_hobbit]

Before I dropped religion completely, I read that when the Bible was being translated into different languages, the writers translated some of the text incorrectly. I was wondering if any of you have information about this claim, and possibly some examples.

 

Any information is appreciated.

 

SM

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Um... yeah, it's very true.

 

Where do you want to start?

 

Remember, some Hebrew words can only be loosely translated into English.

 

One famous example is the translation of העלמה (ha'almah) which means "the young woman". But Christians began to translate it (and parthenos) as Christians when they began to forget that their book of Matthew is basically a Midrashic text. You'll notice, however, that they never translate the masculine version of that word (elem) as "virgin", and they usually don't translate almah as "virgin" except in that instance.

[Ouroboros]

I think the first translations to English were based on the Greek translations of the OT too. (Correct me if I'm wrong)

 

Let's see, was it a Greek translation or an Arameic translation of the Torah that the alleged Jesus had?

And some bad interpretations of the so-called prophesies in the OT are wrong in NT just because they based their thoughts on a mis-translated Torah? (Please correct me)

[Gnosis of Disbelief]

One famous example is the translation of העלמה (ha'almah) which means "the young woman". But Christians began to translate it (and parthenos) as Christians when they began to forget that their book of Matthew is basically a Midrashic text. You'll notice, however, that they never translate the masculine version of that word (elem) as "virgin", and they usually don't translate almah as "virgin" except in that instance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I found this link which discusses this passage in detail.....

 

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/virgin.html#context

 

 

This site also discusses embellishments that the fundies have made to their

versions of the "inerrant" bible:

 

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/versions.html

 

 

Apparently, the ancient texts aren't "inerrant" enough for them....

[dead_hobbit]

I agree. But reading the text the begging seems to be in a style of jewish writing known as midrash, and in that case the author isn't meaning a fulfilled prophecy in the literal sense.

 

I found this link which discusses this passage in detail.....

 

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/virgin.html#context

This site also discusses embellishments that the fundies have made to their

versions of the "inerrant" bible:

 

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/versions.html

Apparently, the ancient texts aren't "inerrant" enough for them....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[dead_hobbit]

Let's see, was it a Greek translation or an Arameic translation of the Torah that the alleged Jesus had?

 

It could have been either or. The original LXX (no longer extant) would have been around in his time - which was a greek translation of the Torah made by a group of 72 Rabbis. According to tradition, it was a very very good translation.

 

There were also various Targums (Aramaic translations) around.

 

But if the NT portrays JC even semi-correctly, then I'd say there was a good chance he knew Hebrew.

 

And some bad interpretations of the so-called prophesies in the OT are wrong in NT just because they based their thoughts on a mis-translated Torah?

 

If the begginging of the book of matthew was meant to be taken literally (which is a position I do not share), then yes - mistranslated and taken out of context.

 

Many of the NT "prophecies" are mistranslated, but most are taken out of context.

[SkepticOfBible]

I agree. But reading the text the begging seems to be in a style of jewish writing known as midrash, and in that case the author isn't meaning a fulfilled prophecy in the literal sense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In any case that prophecy was fulfilled long before Christ. It was filled by the guy called Hezekiah.

 

Isaiah 7:14-Deception In The Name Of Jesus

 

The author of Matthew was trying to retrofit Jesus into a prophecy about a child who was to be born and called the name Immanuel. This tactic is called manufacturing a prophecy fulfillment and the author of Matthew was a master at doing it. He was a master of deception.

One of the problems with this is that the prophecy given by Isaiah was already fulfilled hundreds of years before Jesus ever arrived on earth.

 

The birth and naming of the child Immanuel was to be a sign for king Ahaz that God was with his people who were about to be invaded by two rival kingdoms. This is clear when Isa 7:14 is put back into the context which the author of Matthew lifted it out of.

Isa 7:10-16

Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying,

Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.

But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD.

And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also?

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.

For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

 

This promise was kept by God as shown in 2 Kings 16:9.

Assyria defeated the two rival kings and Ahaz and his people would be safe.

2 Kings 16:9

And the king of Assyria hearkened unto him: for the king of Assyria went up against Damascus, and took it, and carried the people of it captive to Kir, and slew Rezin.

 

The child was born, called by the name Immanuel by his mother and the Assyrians defeated the two kings who threatened Ahaz and his people. The prophecy was fulfilled long before the author of Matthew dishonestly claimed that Jesus fulfilled it.

The author of Matthew ignored all this because he only wanted one verse from Isaiah and that was Isa 7:14 which he wanted to use to give credibility to his tale about a "virgin" birth.