Featured CSB review

The KJV, followed by the NASB , NKJV. The older ASV & RSV would be closer still.

 

The truth has stung you Van. Facts are my speciality. ;-)

 

From Fee &Strauss: (pages 54,55)

"Formal equivalent versions tend to seek one-to-one correspondence, and if the translation works --even awkwardly ---then that translation is retained. The problem is that this results in unnatural English. For example, the Hebrew verb nathan usually means 'give.' Yet that word appears in many collocations that are impossible to translate literally into English. Other collocations translate only awkwardly." Then some examples are given in which the NKJV uses a more formal equivalent. I will cite the NKJV wording and also give the LEB wording.

Gen. 43:14 : Give you mercy/ LEB : grant you compassion
Deut. 23:14 : Give your enemies over to you/ LEB : hand your enemies over to you
Isaiah 3:4 : Give children to be their princes/ LEB : make boys to be their princes
Isaiah 55:4 : Give him as a witness/ LEB : made him a witness
Mic. 7:20 : Give truth to Jacob/ LEB : show faithfulness to Jacob
__________________________________________________________________________
So Van, please tell me, is the LEB less accurate in these renderings? Is the NKJV better?

 

Well, well, well. You're lying again I see Mr. Van man.

 

Gordon Fee seems to be on the payroll of Zondervan.

 

You have a habit of inverting the meaning of words Van. Things that are factual you view as nonsense.

I have dealt with you on this very same subject many times Van. Don't make things up.

I just gave five examples. I was not being comprehensive. My question still stands. Is the LEB less faithful than the NKJV in those five instances, or not?

You gave a lot of examples in which the NKJV is not employing word-for-word consistency as you have gone on and on about for years on the BB. If the NKJV does not translate as you wish --is indeed the LEB even worse in that regard?

You can't win Van. As I have said repeatedly on the BB --it's more about contextual meanings --not lexical ones.

 

He has dementia at 86 years of age. I doubt he is on that payroll since he's not with CBT any longer. The NASB team is on the payroll though.

 

But he once, in the past was. He was very biased towards his employer. He put the New American Standard/New King James Version down, yet exalted the jerusalem/new jerusalem bible, new english/revised english bible. He only criticized competition with the NIV. The others were not so he praised them.

 

You mean he thought some renderings in those other versions were better in his estimation. It doesn't mean he put them down entirely. He was dealing with certain passages. Before he was an NIV translator he critiqued it negatively with respect to certain passages.

You really need to read some Bible commentaries. It's not uncommon for a commentator to list up to a dozen different translations in which various versions are praised when it comes to the renderings of particular passages and negatively when it comes to others.

 

You still have not answered my question. Go sit and ponder. Then, after you have used what's left of your gray matter, give me a reasonable answer.

 

Translations are not people. They can't be called "everybody." ;-)

I wonder how inconsistent the LEB would be in the opinion of Mr. Wu.

 

Where Van comes from the term "willy nilly" is a term of high prominence.

No pity is needed. But don't be cowardly. Just answer my question. Did the cat get your tongue?

 

"The scores may be different when a sense-based evaluation system is used."