Login

u/Then_Reader_6011

r/TrueChristian r/Christianity r/Bible r/Anglicanism r/AskBibleScholars
In Psalm 1, why does the Septuagint differ from the Masoretic Text already in verse 4?
▲ 0 r/AskBibleScholars

In Psalm 1, why does the Septuagint differ from the Masoretic Text already in verse 4?

How come there are already differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text in Psalm 1:4? I'm also aware that there are differences between the two in Psalms 2 and 3 (on which I will make a future post later on), but what explains that? Is it not the more reasonable suppostion that the LXX is generally interpretive and that the differences here and elsewhere are the result of LXX interpretation, or could there be a possibility that the differences are due to some Hebrew text no longer in existence which the LXX translated?

Edit: Here are the translations and reconstruction in text:

The Masoretic Text:

>לֹא־כֵ֥ן הָרְשָׁעִ֑ים כִּ֥י אִם־כַּ֝מֹּ֗ץ אֲֽשֶׁר־תִּדְּפֶ֥נּוּ רֽוּחַ׃

The Jewish Publication Society Tanakh, 1917:

>Not so the wicked; but they are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.

The Septuagint:

>οὐχ οὕτως οἱ ἀσεβεῖς, οὐχ οὕτως, ἀλλ᾿ ἢ ὡσεὶ χνοῦς, ὃν ἐκρίπτει ὁ ἄνεμος ἀπὸ προσώπου τῆς γῆς.

Brenton’s English Septuagint:

>Not so the ungodly;—not so: but rather as the chaff which the wind scatters away from the face of the earth.

A reconstruction of a hypothetical Hebrew base for the Septuagint reading:

לא-כן הרשעים לא-כן: כי אם-כמץ אשר-תדפנו רוח מפני הארץ:

u/Then_Reader_6011 — 10 hours ago
▲ 2 r/AskBibleScholars

Why do the ESV and LSB mess up in Genesis 2:19?

Given that:

  1. The English Standard Version is based on the Revised Standard Version,
  2. The Legacy Standard Bible is based on the New American Standard Bible 1995,
  3. Both the Revised Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible 1995 are based on the American Standard Version,

How come the English Standard Version and the Legacy Standard Bible make a mistake in translating Genesis 2:19 when the versions they are based on accurately translate them?

Edit: Here are the verses in text:

>✅ASV:
And out of the ground Jehovah God formed every beast of the field...

>✅RSV:
So out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field…

>❌ESV:
Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed^([a]) every beast of the field…
a. Or And out of the ground the Lord God formed

>✅NASB 1995:
Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field…

>❌LSB:
And out of the ground Yahweh God had formed every beast of the field...

u/Then_Reader_6011 — 13 hours ago
▲ 12 r/Anglicanism+2 crossposts

The American Standard Version and the translations based on it:

It is interesting how the American Standard Version is practically the father of a few prominent modern translations. Derived from the Revised Version—which itself was a revision of the King James Version—the American Standard Version may very well be considered the bridge between the King James Version and the modern versions popular today.

u/Then_Reader_6011 — 17 hours ago
▲ 11 r/TrueChristian

Did The Passion Translation go too far in Matthew 1:23?

Here's Matthew 1:23 in the KJV, NASB, even the Message and the TPT:

✔King James Version, a historic, hyper literal translation:

>Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

✔New American Standard Bible, a modern, highly literal translation:

>“Behold, the virgin will conceive and give birth to a Son, and they shall name Him Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.”

✔The Message, a modern, highly interpretive paraphrase:

>Watch for this—a virgin will get pregnant and bear a son;
They will name him Immanuel (Hebrew for “God is with us”).

❌The Passion Translation:

>Listen! A virgin will be pregnant, she will give birth to a Son, and he will be known as “Emmanuel,” which means in Hebrew, “God became one of us.”

And the TPT footnote says:

>Or “God with us” or “God among us”; that is, God incarnated. See Isa. 7:14; 8:8, 10 (LXX).

At this point the TPT is going far beyond being a paraphrase and is now making the Bible say what the translators want it to say. Not even the Message Bible rendered this verse in such a way that the theology of the translator was presented as the biblical text.

Immanuel - עמנואל is by no means a difficult Hebrew word to translate. It's made up of two words: עמנו - with us, and אל - God. Literally "with us God" (as the Septuagint translated it, μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν ὁ Θεός) or "God is with us". This Hebrew word doesn't mean "God among us" (there are other ways to say that in Hebrew, Immanuel is not one of them) and it definitely doesn't mean "God became one of us".

Even as a Trinitarian Christian who does believe that Jesus is God in the flesh, I have to say that inserting one's theology onto the biblical text or presenting one's theological interpretation as if it's the biblical text is unacceptable.

Note: They also have the same error in Isaiah 7:14 and especially the footnote:

>'The Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold—the virgin will conceive and give birth to a son and will name him God Among Us.'

The footnote says:

>Or “Immanuel” (“God became one of us,” Matt. 1:23).

Again, Immanuel means neither of those. Interpreting it as such is one thing. Translating it as such is an entirely different thing.

reddit.com
u/Then_Reader_6011 — 1 day ago
▲ 3 r/Bible

Did The Passion Translation go too far in Matthew 1:23?

Here's Matthew 1:23 in the KJV, NASB, even the Message and the TPT:

✔King James Version, a historic, hyper literal translation:

>Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

✔New American Standard Bible, a modern, highly literal translation:

>“Behold, the virgin will [a]conceive and give birth to a Son, and they shall name Him Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.”

✔The Message, a modern, highly interpretive paraphrase:

>Watch for this—a virgin will get pregnant and bear a son;
They will name him Immanuel (Hebrew for “God is with us”).

❌The Passion Translation:

>Listen! A virgin will be pregnant, she will give birth to a Son, and he will be known as “Emmanuel,” which means in Hebrew, “God became one of us.”

And the TPT footnote says:

>Or “God with us” or “God among us”; that is, God incarnated. See Isa. 7:14; 8:8, 10 (LXX).

At this point the TPT is going far beyond being a paraphrase and is now making the Bible say what the translators want it to say. Not even the Message Bible rendered this verse in such a way that the theology of the translator was presented as the biblical text.

Immanuel - עמנואל is by no means a difficult Hebrew word to translate. It's made up of two words: עמנו - with us, and אל - God. Literally "with us is God" or "God is with us". This Hebrew word doesn't mean "God among us" (there are other ways to say that in Hebrew, Immanuel is not one of them) and it definitely doesn't mean "God became one of us".

Even as a Trinitarian Christian who does believe that Jesus is God in the flesh, I have to say that inserting one's theology onto the biblical text or presenting one's theological interpretation as if it's the biblical text is unacceptable.

reddit.com
u/Then_Reader_6011 — 1 day ago
▲ 9 r/Anglicanism

The King James Version and its revisions

Added the arrows for clarification, to indicate which translation/version influenced the other.

A list of the translations mentioned above and the years when they were published:

  1. Douay-Rheims Version - NT: 1582, OT: 1609-1610. Revised 1749-1752.
  2. King James Version - 1611. Revised 1629, 1638, 1762 and 1769.
  3. Revised Version - NT: 1881, OT: 1885, Apoc./DC: 1894.
  4. American Standard Version^((X)) - NT: 1900, OT: 1901.
  5. Revised Standard Version - NT: 1946, OT: 1952, Apoc./DC: 1957. Revised: 1971 (NT).
  6. RSV Catholic Edition - NT: 1965, OT: 1966.
  7. RSV Second Catholic Edition - 2006.
  8. New Revised Standard Version - 1989.
  9. NRSV Catholic Edition - 1993.
  10. NRSV Updated Edition - 2021.
  11. English Standard Version - 2001, Apoc./DC: 2009. Revised: 2007, 2011, 2016 and 2025.
  12. ESV Catholic Edition - 2018.
  13. New American Standard Bible^((X)) - NT: 1963, OT: 1971. Revised 1977, 1995 and 2020.
  14. Legacy Standard Bible^((X)) - NT: February 2021, OT: November 2021.

Fun facts:

  1. The two translations that consistently transliterate the divine name YHWH, either as Jehovah or Yahweh, are the American Standard Version and the Legacy Standard Bible.

  2. The KJV and RV rarely render the divine name as Jehovah, although the RV does so more than the KJV.

  3. The Douay-Rheims Version renders the divine name in Exodus 6:3 as Adonai and it even renders the Greek word for Lord, Κύριε, as Adonai in Judith 16:16 (16:13 in the KJV).

  4. The latest translation to use archaic pronouns and verbs was the 1977 NASB.

  5. While the ESV had four revisions in just 24 years since its initial publication in 2001, the NRSV had only one major revision in 2017, which is 38 years since its publication in 1989.

  6. The RSV is the first English translation to have the Expanded Apocrypha, which includes books peculiar the Eastern Orthodox biblical canon.

Hope you enjoy this!

u/Then_Reader_6011 — 1 day ago
▲ 2 r/Christianity

Hot take: I think the NKJV does a good job with Psalm 2:12

While I agree that the reading "Kiss the Son" is not considered the most accurate rendering of נַשְּׁקוּ־בַ֡ר, I think the NKJV does justice to the verse by mentioning how this verse is rendered in the ancient versions.

New King James Version:

>[a]Kiss the Son, lest [b]He be angry,
And you perish in the way,
When His wrath is kindled but a little.
Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him.
a. LXX, Vg. Embrace discipline; Tg. Receive instruction
b. LXX the Lord

Septuagint:

>Accept correction, lest at any time the Lord be angry, and ye should perish from the righteous way: whensoever his wrath shall be suddenly kindled, blessed are all they that trust in him.

Aramaic Targum:

>Accept instruction lest He be angry, and you lose your way; for His wrath will tarry a little. Happy all who trust in His Word!

Another translation that I think does a good job with Psalm 2:12 is the NASB 1995:

>[a]Do homage to the Son, that He not become angry, and you perish in the way,
For His wrath may soon be kindled. How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!
a. Lit Kiss; some ancient versions read Do homage purely, or, Lay hold of instruction

I know that the NRSVue's rendering of נַשְּׁקוּ־בַ֡ר is "kiss his feet", which is also found in the RSV. I'd appreciate any insight into the RSV's reading.

reddit.com
u/Then_Reader_6011 — 4 days ago
▲ 15 r/AskBibleScholars

The different translations of Psalm

There are a few ways that Psalm 24:6 has been translated:

  1. It was translated to say that "the generation of those who seek him" are seeking the face of Jacob, as shown in the King James Version and the footnotes of the Revised Standard Version and the New International Version.
  2. It was translated to say that Jacob is the name of "the generation of those who seek him", as seen in the Koren Jerusalem Bible and New King James Version.
  3. It was thought to be either ambiguous or problematic, so some translations rely on the ancient versions (like the Septuagint) to say that "the generation of those who seek him" are seeking the face of the God of Jacob, as seen in the Revised Standard Version and the New International Version.

What are your thoughts on this subject? Does the Hebrew text say "thy face, O Jacob", "thy face, O God of Jacob" or "those that seek thy face are Jacob"?

u/Then_Reader_6011 — 6 days ago
▲ 12 r/Christianity

The Jewish Annotated New Testament:

I've been thinking about buying this book for while now. It's currently available in its second edition and uses the NRSV whereas the third edition will likely come out by November and will use the NRSVue.

What do you think? If you read through the book, I'd like to read about how it helped you and how it explores certain topics.

u/Then_Reader_6011 — 6 days ago
▲ 7 r/Christianity

Christian Twitter is in a meltdown over Amy-Jill Levine

What in the world is going on in that godforsaken place? Christian Twitter is melting down because Amy-Jill Levine, a highly respected Jewish biblical scholar, was elected President of the Catholic Biblical Association.

Seem all the far-right Christian Nationalist antisemitism is being put on full display because they vehemently hate Jews, regardless of their amazing contributions to biblical scholarship. The amount of hatred and vitriol that "Christians" on Twitter have is unbelievable.

reddit.com
u/Then_Reader_6011 — 6 days ago