Is changing "God forbid" to "Far be it" wrong?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, Jun 19, 2011.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    When there is no Hebrew word for "God" in the text, is it wrong for English translators to change the rendering "God forbid" to "far be it" or some other English words that present the actual meaning of the original language words?

    Do some abandon an appeal for literal, word-for-word translating in this case?
     
  2. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Even the more "literal" translations of Greek (btw, not Hebrew) will sometimes leave the formal word-for-word equivalence when translating a verse and adopt the dynamic idea-for-word equivalence.

    The Anglican Version (now adopted as the "only" translation by, of all people, some Baptists!!) is such. Common idioms of English language, especially when supporting either the State or the State Anglican Church, were used to translate the texts.

    Rom 6:2 et al simply says "me genoito" which is "may it not/never be". That would be the correct, exact, formal equivalence and still make sense today. They opted instead for "God forbid", neither of which is found in the Greek text. Any Greek text. Just used an idiom as meaning the same in thought as did the text.

    In the case of the OT "God save the King", again the Anglicans used a common idiom. "God" never appears in the text, or is even implied in context. It was something to promote the monarchy and commonly used in English translations of that era.


    I like the formal equivalence in the most modern, clear language. Sadly, it often takes 2-3 additional words to make the meaning in English, such a weak language, to be clear.
     
  3. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    44
    Who's obsessed with the KJB? LOL.

    Not sure what to make of this "Greek, Not Hebrew!" nonsense.

    At II Samuel 20:20 (last time I checked that's Hebrew), for example, the State Church clerics in exile in Geneva employed their English idiom "God forbid".

    The KJB used "far be it", the alternate translation noted in the OP.
     
  4. Japheth10

    Japheth10
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Being true to the inspired Greek is NEVER a bad thing..
     
  5. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unless there are times where you would have it make little sense IF translated totally literally to someone in the new version reading and studying it!
     
  6. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    At 2 Samuel 20:20, the Geneva and Bishops’ Bibles have “God forbid” twice while the KJV has “Far be it” twice. This verse has the same Hebrew word twice that the KJV rendered “God forbid” several other times.

    If it is not wrong for the KJV translators to change "God forbid" to "far be it" or some other rendering, how is it supposedly wrong for other translators to do the same thing?


    At 1 Samuel 20:9, the 1560 Geneva’s rendering [“God keep it from thee”] and the Bishops’ rendering [“God keep that from thee”] were revised in the KJV [“Far be it from thee”].
     

Share This Page

Loading...