And I agree with that.
The objection to "new translations" makes little sense when we consider that in the First Century the Septuagint was utilized even by the Apostles. Of course, one could argue this is not the case, but, I think we have enough internal evidence to make a good case for that.
So the above quote, as I said, I agree with. In other words, even if someone does not wax eloquent in their speech, if they are translating what God conveyed, then it is the Word of God.
Example:
"God said don't do no-one in."
That is the Word of God, no matter that it is crude and fits the vocabulary of a culture that is crude.
Another: "God said not to be stepping out on your wife."
And forgive the crude nature of my examples, lol. Best I can do when I'm in a hurry...
God bless.
The NIV 2011 edition
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by evangelist6589, Feb 27, 2017.
Page 4 of 8
-
-
-
-
-
-
You do not need to ask questions when you know the answer. -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
The butchering of the English language is just awful! -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
It is not the business of a translator to make assessments of that sort. It is his business to translate the words that are there, and the NIV 2011 fails to do that, and they obscure more than one clear reference to Christ. It would not matter if every single commentator agreed with Carson; the translators translate what's there.
In case you've forgotten, here it is again:
Psalm 8:6. 'You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands; You have put all things under his feet.'
Ephesians 1:22. And He put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church.'
So when the NIV 2011 translates in Hebrews 2:8, 'You have put all things under their feet,' how can it be denied that it is obscuring a possible reference to the Lord Jesus Christ? They are effectively calling the Apostle Paul a dunce and an ignoramus. Paul has made a clear allusion to Psalm 8 and ascribed its subject matter to the Lord Jesus Christ; the NIV 2011 has obscured it for no better reason than to placate a bunch of feminists who will not be happy until 'Son of Man' is rendered as 'Child of Person.'
But in fact a deeper look reveals real confusion by the translators.
Heb. 2:7. 'You made them [Greek auton: 'Him'] a little lower than the angels.' [Greek brachu ti par'angelous]
Heb. 2:9. '.....Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while.....' [Greek brachu ti par'angelous]
The Greek can mean either 'a little lower than....' or lower.......for a little while' (cf. the NKJV margin), but by translating exactly the same words differently in the two verses, the translators have obscured the reference to Christ even more!! One has to ask why they would want to do that. It is too basic to be accidental. It is true that they give the alternatives in the marginal notes, but not everybody reads them. -
Lk 24:44 Everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. -
In Psalm 15 of the NIV it keeps to the singular throughout.
Verse 2: The one...
Verse 3: whose tongue utters no slander,
who does no wrong to a neighbour,
and casts no slur on others;
[You wouldn't say "cast no slur" because it's dealing with the singular case.]
Verse 4: who despises a vile person
but honours those who fear the LORD;
who keeps an oath even when it hurts,
and does not change their mind.
[When speaking of an individual as the NIV is doing here it would be absurd to say, as you suggested:Who keep an oath...]
Verse 5 : who lends money to the poor without interest;
who does not accept a bribe against the innocent.
Whoever does these things
will never be shaken.
[When referencing a person it would be ungrammatical to say who lend money to the poor. So when you feel in the mood to denigrate a fine translation make sure you don't make a dunce of yourself in the process.] -
-
-
I will quote yet again from one of my favorite books : How To choose A translation For All Its Worth by Gordon Fee and Mark Strauss. ( The book was published when the TNIV was in use.)
"To address this issue, we must consider the meaning of the psalm both in its Old Testament context and in its application to Jesus in Hebrews 2. It can hardly by denied that the psalmist is speaking inclusively rather than exclusively in Psalm 8. He does not mean, 'What are males...' but rather 'What are human beings...' All commentators agree that 'enosh and ben 'adam are generic references to humanity.
Most commentators also agree that this same meaning applies to the use of the psalm in Hebrews 2:6-8. The author is not claiming that the psalm refers exclusively to Christ, but that the destiny of humanity as expressed in the psalm ('to be crowned with glory and honor,' vv. 6-8) has been fulfilled in Christ (v. 9). The reference to 'him' in verse 8 is not to Jesus but to humankind. Though man's (= humanity's) original destiny was to be crowned with glory and honor and for creation to be subject to him (see Gen. 1:28), 'at present we do not see everything subject to him.' In its present fallen state, humanity has not achieved its true destiny.
Jesus, however, through his suffering and death has fulfilled the ultimate destiny of humanity by being made for a time 'a little lower than the angels,' but now 'crowned with glory and honor' (vv. 7,9). William Lane sums up well" 'In Jesus we see exhibited humanity's true vocation. In an extraordinary way he fulfills God's design for all creation and displays what had always been intended for all humankind, according to Ps. 8.' Psalm 8, both in its Old Testament context and in its context in Hebrews, is about God's intention for humanity. Jesus fulfills this destiny by acting as the true human representative. The plural references in both Psalm 8:4 and Hebrew 2:6-8 capture this sense well." (pages 106 and 107) -
So I see no reason to deny it. If one agrees with the translational philosophy of the 2011 NIV, they should embrace it. -
-
-
-
Translators can either make it so that both Jesus and geneal humanity in view, or just Jesus, but not exclude him!
-
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Page 4 of 8