Featured For benefit or reason

Here is the NASB95 translation of Matthew 15:3: "And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?"

Do folks transgress the commands of God to benefit their tradition or do they transgress the commands of God in order to follow their tradition's doctrines. YLT has "because of your tradition?"

The English word "sake" can mean "for the benefit of" or "for the purpose of."

The Greek word translated "for the sake of" is "dia" and here is used to show instrumentality, i.e. "because of." The idea does not seem to advocate violating God's commands for the supposed benefit of false doctrine. No, the idea is we should not violate God's commands because some man-made doctrine renders God's command to no effect.

Bottom line, when translations render "dia" as "for the sake of" they create ambiguity, whereas going with "because of" provides clarity.

 

How does the NIV translate Matthew 15:3?
Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?

How does the ESV translate Matthew 15:3?
He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?

How does the NASB20 translate Matthew 15:3?
And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves also break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?

Just in the Book of Matthew these three versions translate "dia" as "for the sake of" rather than "because of" several times including Matthew 15:6, Matthew 19:12 and Matthew 24:22.

 

Correspondence refers the practice of translating the same source language word or phrase meaning into the same target language word or phrase. When more than one source language word or phrase meaning is translated into the same target language word or phrase, then the translation lacks "correspondence."

For example, take our English word "sake" or the phrase "for the sake of," when more than one Greek word is rendered in the same or very similar (i.e. for my sake) way, correspondence is sacrificed for no apparent reason. The NIV translated about six different Greek words into "sake" which is regrettable, but for the supposed more literal ESV and NASB to also obliterate whatever inspired nuance was intended by use of the differing words, is quite disappointing.

We have already seen where "dia" (G1223) is sometimes rendered "for the sake of" but that is only the tip of the isceburg. Here are at least some of the other Greek words also rendered as "sake:"

G3685 "onoma" - Matthew 10:22 (ESV)
G1753 "heneka" - Romans 8:36 (NIV)
G4392 "prophasis" - Mark 12:40 (NASB)
G4771 "sy" - John 11:15 (NIV)
G5228 "hyper" - Romans 9:3 (NIV)

 

Yet another taint so post. For the benefit of your traditions...

 

Right, there is no difference between for the benefit of and because of...

 

Romans 8:36 presents the LXX rendering of Psalm 44:23. Here is the NET footnote:

54tn The statement “because of you” (1) may simply indicate that God is the cause of the Israelites’ defeat (see vv. 9-14, where the nation’s situation is attributed directly to God’s activity, and cf. NEB, NRSV), or (2) it may suggest they suffer because of their allegiance to God (see Ps 69:7 and Jer 15:15). In this case one should translate, “for your sake” (cf. NASB, NIV). The citation of this verse in Rom 8:36 follows the LXX (Ps 43:23 LXX), where the Greek term ἕνεκεν (Jeneken; LXX ἕνεκα) may likewise mean “because of” or “for the sake of” (BDAG 334 s.v. ἕνεκα 1).​

Posters unable to grasp the ambiguity issue will continue to post distractions.

 

"For the sake of" is ambiguous and thus should not be used to translate "dia." Thus the NIV translation of Matthew 15:3, Matthew 15:6, Matthew 19:12 and Matthew 24:22 is deeply flawed.

 

Let us consider another verse, Matthew 10:22. Here is the NIV rendering:
You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

A literal translation would read "because of my name," but in neither case is found "for my name's sake." Clearly those hating are not doing so for the benefit of Christ, but rather for His detriment. The hating is on account of professing and acting in accordance with Christ's name, his attributes and teachings. Thus translations create ambiguity when they render the phrase "for my name's sake" when "because of my name" presents the idea without ambiguity.

The flawed version is found in the KJV family, the WEB, the ESV, RSV (but the NRSV fixed it).

If we look at another place where the Greek word "onoma" (G3686) appears, Matthew 19:29, we see the NASB95 going with the flawed "for My name's sake" but corrected in the NASB20 with "on account of My name." Thus the ambiguity has been removed by the NASB20.

In Mark 13:13 we see the literal "because of My name" but with the KJV family, the WEB, the ESV again using the ambiguous "for My name's sake." And once again the NIV removes "My name" and inserts "me." Not ambiguous, but a corruption of the actual text for the sake of simplicity.

 

Why would anyone accept your assessment of anything? Your posts are animated by animus, not edification.

Mathew15:3 (NIV)
Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?

Matthew 15:3 (NKJV)
He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?

Matthew 15:3 (CSB)
He answered them, “Why do you break God’s commandment because of your tradition?

Matthew 15:3 (NET)
He answered them, "And why do you disobey the commandment of God because of your tradition?

Matthew 15:3 (WEB - World English Bible)
He answered them, “Why do you also disobey the commandment of God because of your tradition?

Translating "dia" as "for the sake of" created needless ambiguity, and thus is a deeply flawed choice.

 

Another Greek word listed in post #4 is "heneka" (G1752) which is an adverb and usually relates the reason for an action, thus "on account of" or "because of" present the meaning in English. Just for grins, lets consider the NIV translators handling of our word:
Matthew 5:10 - because of
Matthew 5:11 - because of
Matthew 10:18 - on account
Matthew 10:39 - for [my] sake
Matthew 16:25 - for me
Matthew 19:5 - reason
Matthew 19:29 - for my sake
Luke 4:18 - because
Luke 6:22 - because of
Luke 18:29 - for the sake of

That is enough examples. When some action is taken "for the sake of" does that mean for the benefit of something or because of something? The word (heneka) provides the cause for the action so if you leave your family because of the kingdom of God, the actual message is conveyed, whereas "for the sake of" presents a possible motive for the action not found in the text. In Luke 18:29 the actual idea is suffering loss to obtain the kingdom, rather than to benefit the kingdom.

 

Advocating creating ambiguity for no gain in clarity or simplicity seems like pointless and futile twaddle. Perhaps the idea is failure is an option.