Replies

On using the LXX to "fix" the Hebrew text, that'd be like trying to reconstruct the "true" Greek NT by using the KJV as a source--or worse, the NIV, since the LXX often paraphrases and interpolates to better explain the text to its audience.

I find that a tricky challenge when choosing how to render text into another language. Do you translate word by word even though that sounds clunky in the new language, or do you translate to maintain the overall meaning but flow smoothly paragraph by paragraph? Maintaining the precise meanings and connotations can be hard with either option. I mostly like Young's Literal Translation for study purposes, but I would not recommend it to a new Christian as a Bible for reading. LXX does not tell one what the original said, but a word by word translation often misses the mark by at least as large a margin for anything but scholarly study.

Exactly. And it's worse when trying to translate from the Hebrew. The Greek is so precise that the biggest problems for translators is how to handle the loss of precision when going to English. It's the exact opposite with Hebrew, since one word in Hebrew can cover the meanings of ten or more words in English.

For example: "Sh'ma Israel, Hashem Eloheynu, Hashem Echad." It's not just a matter of literally vs. dynamic equivalency; you can translate that phrase literally several different ways, from the classic, "Hear O Israel, the Lord your God, the Lord is One" to "Hear [and respond], Israel, the Lord is your God, the Lord alone" to "Hear O Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord."

And that's not even getting into trying to convey the Tetragrammaton.

That's why quite a few Jewish translations provide the Hebrew on the page opposite the translation--it's acknowledged that it's practically impossible to "properly" translate the Hebrew to convey its full range of meaning. It's a convention that I wish more Christian Bibles would pick up on.

Shalom

I find that a tricky challenge when choosing how to render text into another language. Do you translate word by word even though that sounds clunky in the new language, or do you translate to maintain the overall meaning but flow smoothly paragraph by paragraph? Maintaining the precise meanings and connotations can be hard with either option. I mostly like Young's Literal Translation for study purposes, but I would not recommend it to a new Christian as a Bible for reading. LXX does not tell one what the original said, but a word by word translation often misses the mark by at least as large a margin for anything but scholarly study.

This would be true even in today's time WRT translation from one language to another. Some words simply may not exist in another language and we see many times the word itself is just not even translated but used as is. That is why any good translation MUST have multiple scholars proficient in Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew to put together a reliable translation of the Bible and it entails not just word for word but context. They also need a good understanding of the culture and times in which they were written.

I remember in Bible College this salient point being brought home when we studied the Gospel of John. In John 10:28, Jesus said, "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.". We found that the word "never" was actually a triple negative and where the Greek used four words, the English version just translated as "never". In Greek the words were: οὐ μή εἰς αἰών , and really were saying: never, certainly not, not at all, by no means, at any time, at any place, for any purpose, whether male, female or even neuter, forever, perpetually, eternally. WOW! Jesus really meant something, didn't he? That is why I am grateful for multiple translations as well as concordances and lexicons, so we can actually have a real glimpse at the true intent of the words and so we can know, even today, exactly what God wanted us to know.