1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Mal 2:16 in the ESV

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Pastor Larry, Jul 10, 2002.

Top Posters
  1. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    For those who are fans of the ESV, I notice the follow a new translation in this verse. What do you think?

    It reads: "For the man who hates and divorces, says the LORD ..."

    This is translation that is being supported by a number of scholars and I was surprised to see it in a major translation. But it probably is the right translation.
     
    #1 Pastor Larry, Jul 10, 2002
  2. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting that the RSV, from which the ESV was taken, reads:

    "For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel, and covering one’s garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless."

    The ESV translators must have felt pretty secure to change the rendering.
     
    #2 Chris Temple, Jul 10, 2002
  3. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I came across this translation several years ago in a seminar on divorce and remarriage. It was before the ESV came out and thus there was no major translation (or any translation that I know of) that read this way. There is a significant work that defends it but I can't remember what it is. I wish I could. I will have to do some research to find it.

    So, Do you think it is the right translation?
     
    #3 Pastor Larry, Jul 10, 2002
  4. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know. I am not a gifted Greek student, and i have the utmost confidence in the ESV translators.

    Still, its hard to understand how the translators fo the KJV, RSV, NASB, NKJV and NIV could all have missed this "correction". My feeling is the ESV is in error here.

    I may email CrossWay and ask them about it.
     
    #4 Chris Temple, Jul 11, 2002
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    See Huegenberger in his Marriage As a Covenant (Baker). This is the definitive work. There is also an article by Joe Sprinkle in JETS from about 6 or 7 years ago that came to the same conclusions. I think Stuart also argues for this position in his Malachi commentary in McComiskey's 3 volume work on the Minor Prophets.

    Some of the LXX versions follow this new rendering which makes it quite old.

    [ July 11, 2002, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
     
    #5 Pastor Larry, Jul 11, 2002
  6. mesly

    mesly Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am in agreement with Chris. This translation does not seem correct. I am really concerned about the liberty that some of these translators are taking with the word of God. What type of new knowledge do we have now that justifies going against what has been translated the same way for the past 500 years? This is really shattering my confidence in the ESV - how many other verses are we going to find like this?
     
    #6 mesly, Jul 11, 2002
  7. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    But as Hugenberger, Stuart, and others point out, this is not a new translation. It dates back to some versions of the LXX, considered by most knowledgeable scholars to be prior to the time of Christ. Furthermore, it is a grammatical issue of the Hebrew text which Hebrew scholars acknowledge is a distinct possibility, perhaps even probability considering the text and the context.

    When I first studied this several years ago, I shared your view ... that the predominant English view for centuries could not be so easily thrown aside. That is why I was surprised to see the ESV choose that rendering. I assume there is a marginal note though I am not sure. However, now I am giving more considerable opinion to the view of Hugenberger and Stuart. It is, after all, an easily defensible translation.

    Have you looked at any of these three sources before "losing confidence"?
     
    #7 Pastor Larry, Jul 11, 2002
  8. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    The ESV textual notes says this: "*Probable meaning (compare Septuagint and Deuteronomy 24:1-4 For the LORD, the God of Israel, says that he hates divorce, and him who covers".

    So it seems to be a difficulty in the Hebrew. (Why did I earlier say Greek?? [​IMG] )

    Michael, I have found the ESV to be extrememly accurate, especially so in the minor prophets and in the NT. Do not lose confidence; all versions contain errors in translation or questionable choices.
     
    #8 Chris Temple, Jul 11, 2002
  9. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chris,
    You said earlier you sent an email to Crossway about this translation. Let us know what you find out.
     
    #9 TomVols, Jul 11, 2002
  10. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is the response I rec'd from Crossway:
     
    #10 Chris Temple, Jul 12, 2002
  11. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is the book I reference above about Marriage and covenants. It is the one I read through briefly. Now that you mention the "Jerome" influence, I remember that angle as well that he seems to be the one who made the traditional rendering popular. In the class, there were about 12 of us who beat this up pretty good. At that time, I was in the minority following the old way. Now I am not so sure.
     
    #11 Pastor Larry, Jul 12, 2002
  12. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Didn't they teach you the difference at Southeastern? They do at Southern :D
     
    #12 TomVols, Jul 12, 2002
  13. mesly

    mesly Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I appreciate all of the information presented here - including the letter from Crossway. It is certainly things to consider (and research!).

    I am slowly coming out of a KJV only mindset (for the past 12 years), so please excuse me for my over-reactions. I am used to pointing to one standard, the KJV, as the final authority. For me to start seeing variations as strong as that - it concerns me. I fear that variations like this may dilute our dear and precious faith.

    Over all, I do like the ESV and have enjoyed reading it. You are both right, nothing is perfect that man touches, so living with issues such as this is something I/we need to accept.

    Thanks again Larry and Chris.

    Michael
     
    #13 mesly, Jul 12, 2002
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...