How did the KJV translators get 'Let us alone' out of 'Aha'?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Mexdeaf, Nov 2, 2007.

  1. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Luke 4:34 (KJV) Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God.

    Luke 4:34 (ESV) "Ha! What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are— the Holy One of God."

    ea ea, eh'-ah apparent imperative of 1439; properly, let it be, i.e. (as interjection) aha!:--let alone.

    :confused:
     
  2. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dynamic equivalence!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

    Ed
     
  3. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    The KJV translators kept "let us alone" at Luke 4:34 from the Bishops' Bible. Tyndale's and Great Bible have "let me alone."

    At Luke 4:34, the 1560 Geneva Bible has:
    "Saying, Oh, what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know who thou art, even the Holy one of God.
     
  4. PastorGreg

    PastorGreg
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2000
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the thread title indicates a bias. Look in the definition in the original post - It includes, "Let it be" and "let alone." So "let us alone" is a very legitimate translation.
     
  5. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    If Strong's hasn't listed the KJV usage in the entry so
    far then the last part of the entry will be the KJV usage.

    Strangely, this same verse appears at
    Mark 1:24 and Luke 4:34. The Geneva Bible
    translated the word "Ah" in Mark 1:24 and translated
    the word "Oh" in Luke 4:34.

    Of course, there is no doctrine anybody has gets
    changed by this, eh?
     
  6. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    He who "lets" is the Holy Ghost.

    The demonic spirits recognized Jesus as God.

    "Spirits" is plural thus "us" is correct.

    The sense is that the spirits desire was to be left alone to continue with their deeds of posessing the man of the Gaderenes in rebellion to the Lord.:godisgood:
     
  7. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    No bias intended. The word is not defined as 'let alone' rather that is the KJV translation. I was just surprised by the ESV rendering and wondered why the difference.

    True, as another said, no doctrines are affected with either translation, but it appears to me that the ESV has the most literal translation in this case.

    I had not considered that the KJV translators just took and used the 'Bishop's Bible' rendering. Perhaps the question should be better stated, "How did the translators of the Bishop's Bible, Tyndale, or the Great Bible get their translations from 'Aha!'?"
     

Share This Page

Loading...