Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,809 Year: 3,066/9,624 Month: 911/1,588 Week: 94/223 Day: 5/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   You prefer an "eclectic" text source for Bible translations? Or from 1 select source
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 1 of 2 (838099)
08-13-2018 9:57 PM


Bible translators are not upfront and honest about the fragmentary nature of the sources.
(The King James supporters are the worst at making false claims of "original manuscripts" when they have a very late MEDEIVAL eclectic jumbled text from 1 trillion pick&choose sources)
It is difficult to know how to answer because the witnesses are so fragmentary.
But just for clarity, perhaps a single text should be translated IF POSSIBLE.
Take the Old Testament.
I wish all translations would either translate an ENTIRE manuscript of the Septuagint or an entire manuscript of the Masorah.
Start with the Old Testament.
At least for every Old Testament book, the translators could pick 1 base text (whether Hebrew or Greek or whatever), then translate it.
Take one text for, say Genesis, and then translate it.
The Aleppo Codex could be a source.
Aleppo Codex - Wikipedia
Tell the Bible readers what text it is that is the source text, then translate it.
TELL READERS THE DATE!
I am (frankly) so sick of seeing modern translations smuggle in the Septuagint word "virgin" for Isaiah 7:14, while claiming to be using the Hebrew Masorah (which has the word for "young woman").
The Greek Gospel of Matthew quote does use the Septuagint, so "virgin" is fine to be used there.
As long as translators include a note saying that the extinct Hebrew Gospel of Matthew used the Hebrew text that says "young women".
And as long as the date of the SINGLE (Greek?)Gospel of Matthew used is given
(The Masorah didn't exist in the 1st century, but all Hebrew texts had the word for "young woman")
What year and text is the source-manuscript used in your Bible?
Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 738 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 2 of 2 (838101)
08-13-2018 10:10 PM


HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN HONEST TRANSLATION TECHNIQUE.
Take the Jewish Christians of the first 4 centuries after Jesus.
They had a Greek translation of their Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.
It used Greek words.
But they were upfront about their original Hebrew Gospel being a 1st century Aramaic text that had a quotation of Isaiah 7:14 (which was originally in Hebrew) and the Aramaic Matthew text said "young woman".
They translated the word accurately into Greek so that is said "young woman".
But they were upfront.
Jerome also translated the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew into European.
He said where he got the text (from the library of Beroea and there was big Jewish communites in Caesarea)and when.
Here are quotes of Jerome.
http://www.purebibleforum.com/showthread.php?543-Jerome-a...-(not-canonical-Matthew)
I am trying to find examples of honesty.
It is difficult, I admit.
MORE QUOTES OF Jerome
Hebrew Matthew
Here is a long PDF
quote:
jacksonsnyder.com/yah/manuscript-library/Gospel-of-the-Hebrews.pdf
The original language of the Gospel was Hebrew. It has generally been assumed on insufficient grounds that this Hebrew was in fact Aramaic (commonly called Hebrew).
Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024