HCSB Gen. 16:12 a "wild ass" verse?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by EaglewingIS4031, Jan 6, 2005.

  1. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought that subject line might get your attention hope it was not to offensive. But if it was it proves my point that the HCSB should probably not have translated the following verse in this manner.


    Every other MEV I checked with the exeption of one the the Catholic NAB. Has "wild donkey." The KJV doesn't even have "ass" it says "wild man" and the NKJV follows suit.

    Why would a 21st century translation use the term "wild ass" with all of its profain and vulgar conotations?

    I wouldn't have much of a problem with it if the HCSB was consistant but in Job 39:5 and Hosea 8:9 the HCSB says "wild donkey." If "wild ass" is inaprpriate at these two OT verses why is OK to call Ishmael (the father of the Arabs) a "wild ass"

    Now the NAB (and I have noticed alot of simularities between the RC's NAB and the SBC's HCSB) uses "wild ass" but it is consistant in that it uses the term in all 3 of the fore mentioned verses.

    Any thoughts?

    Would you use the HCSB's rendering of Genisis 16:12 if you were teaching a Sunday School class of adolecent boys? And if you did would you expect jeers, snickles and gigles from the kids?

    The point is is that in modern english the term "ass" is rarely used to refer to a beast of burden. But is usualy used as a common insult and profanity. The HCSB translators (i.e. the SBC and 17 other denominations) realized this in Job and Hosea. But in refernce to Ishmael they use the more common and vulgar term! Since Ishmael is the father of the Arabs could this be a subtle form of racism or anti-semitism?

    EaglewingIS4031

    P.S. I am going to foward this post to Broadman and Holman I will post their reply. When I recieve it.
     
  2. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    No problem as far as I am concerned.

    You mentioned that the KJV Genesis 16:12 translation says "wild man" but this is the only place that the KJV translators didn't translate the word PEREH as "wild ass".

    Merriam Webster has the following for the number 1 definition:
    Found online in the public domain at http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary.

    HankD
     
  3. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I don't believe any English reader should have any prob with that word, given the context of the verse. If they DO have a prob, they've made it themselves. The translators coulda said "wild horse" & someone somewhere woulda had some prob with it. The translators know they can't please every last reader, so they simply ignore them & move on.
     
  4. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,816
    Likes Received:
    0
    Great Point Hank. Case Closed!
     
  5. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    Every other time, with the exception of Hosea 8:9, the reference is to the actual animal that Webster defines. In Hosea, the term is used as a metaphor to describe Israel as a whole.

    In the 10 passages in which this word is used, my opinion is that the KJV has it correct all 10 times.

    If I read the HCSB version of Genesis 16:12 to my bus kids, I guarantee you they wouldn't picture a "hardy gregarious African or Asian perissodactyl mammal;" they would assume it is the same word that they have heard many times at home.
     
  6. USN2Pulpit

    USN2Pulpit
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,641
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't have a problem with this wording. It's pretty clear, especially read in context with the surrounding verses, what the scripture is telling us here.

    Just like we largely agree on this board - we should be taking these scriptures in context. If we do that, there's no problem.

    Consider this:
    This would seem to be offensive - but when read in the larger context:
    When seen in the correct context, it is quite clear what the scripture is saying - in this case and in the case of the subject scripture.

    When these (and other) terms are used in the Bible, there is no need to fear them - or to giggle as an adolescent. These are real words or phrases, with appropriate meaning.

    As for what the kids understand, exercise discernment by all means, but never be afraid to teach the truth of the scripture, and don't be afraid of isolated words and phrases.
     
  7. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought this was a thread about Robby Gordon.
     
  8. ktn4eg

    ktn4eg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    1
    God's Word also says, "...there is no God,"


    [but I wouldn't want to be included in the categorization of the individual which His Word signifies made that statement].
     
  9. Wilander

    Wilander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, I think it's appropriately descriptive given the context. If my Sunday school boys snicker, then that's a teachable moment,too. One of the beauties of the Scriptures is their vividness; translations like this one which close that gap between every day life and God's Word are helpful, it seems to me.
     
  10. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    Isn't that one of the attractions of the MVs, to do away with the need to clarify what a word "really" means? I thought that was the problem with the archaic language of the KJV? What is the difference in the use of a word that has changed it's meaning, or the use of a word that has an ambiguous meaning? Both have to be explained.
     
  11. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    Look the word doesn't offend me and I know what is meant in the HCSB ussage of it. But why did the HCSB guys translate it as "donkey" in Job and Hosea? Why not be consistant. The NAB Says "ass" at Gen, 6:12 and in Hosea and Job. The NASB, NIV, and ESV, etc. Say "Donkey" at all 3 places. Which begs the question...Why does the HCSB use "Ass" in Genesis to describe Ishmael but use the more modern term "donkey" in the other 2 places?

    I am SBC and I Like the HCSB translation. But consider the folowing facts:
    >consider the fact that the SBC has been trying very hard over the past 10 years or so to shed it's racist past or at least the apperance of it's racist past
    >consider the fact that the term "wild ass" can be used as an insult or in a derogatory manor in modern English,
    >and that Ishmael is considered to be the father of the Arabs

    In a post 9/11/01 world where many people are resentful of Arabs, do you think the the HCSB's use of the term in Gen. 6:12 is subtle racism?
     
  12. Debby in Philly

    Debby in Philly
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Any translation that claims to be reflecting current usage should never use "ass" when referring to a donkey. Because even when the word is used today in that context, it still carries the burden of the slang meanings. I don't think their use is racism, it's just plain stupid.
     
  13. USN2Pulpit

    USN2Pulpit
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2003
    Messages:
    1,641
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]
     
  14. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] [​IMG] :D

    Daytona
     
  15. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,968
    Likes Received:
    128
    I agree, no big deal.

    Note: In the NAS, HCS, NIV, ESV, and even the NKJV, Job 39:5 and Hosea 8:9 use “wild donkey”; the KJV uses ”wild ass”.

    In the KJV and the NKJV translations of Genesis 16:8, they have failed to properly communicate the metaphor. The KJVO crowd complain about the MV translations because of their fast and loose translations. Here is a point where they got it right and the KJV group cut corners.

    In most cases the KJV translators sufficiently translated the text including the metaphors but here the translation misses the style of the original Hebrew text.

    Perhaps in today's English
    Donkeys connote stubornness.
    Ass's connote anger and arrogance

    Rob
     
  16. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Again, I say some people have tried to make a problem where none exists.(Not speaking of anyone here.)
     
  17. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree ! [​IMG] Donkey is not the first mental image most modern English speakers think of when they here the word "ass," at least not here in the States.

    Ok! But why then is Ishmael more angry and arrogant than he is stubborn? What criteria did the HCSB use to determine this?
     
  18. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,968
    Likes Received:
    128
    Don't only point fingers at the HCSB. Like I said, the KJV also translates the same word in two different ways.

    The only explanation I can think of is that the words in English have slightly different conotations.
    Our English slang use of ass may fit well with the intent of the text in Genesis.

    Rob
     
  19. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not pointing fingers. I'm just asking; why?
     
  20. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Debby in Philly said:

    Any translation that claims to be reflecting current usage should never use "ass" when referring to a donkey.

    Why not? As an insult, the word still retains the meaning of "donkey" just as much as the other. For example, what word comes after "pompous"?
     

Share This Page

Loading...