Posted on 01/28/2005 3:15:12 AM PST by paudio
I guess I commented a little prematurely.
:-S
Still, if this was done for "PC" reasons...yeck.
But what differs is that the LXX is NOT what was used to translate the Kng James, the Masoretic Text was for thr OT.
That is why the Protestant Bibles from John Wycliff and onwards speak different things in many passages, and it is also why verses are missing from other Bibles that are in the King James.
But are you saying that St. Symeon, who was one of the translators between 20-150 BC was still alive at 1AD? He would have been over 150 years old!
Cool beans! Of course, the RSV translation of the Canticle of Simeon is a little different :-).
Do Orthodox Churches us the "deuterocanonical" Old Testament books: Sirach, Maccabbees, and all that?
Long ago when I was in high school Latin was a requirement. I haven’t heard of it being taught in years.
It is also the Canticle for Night Prayer in the Liturgy of the Hours. I love saying that as a prayer before falling asleep.
***That's not what was implied. Simply that Zondervan shouldn't take liberties with the translation FROM those languages, especially to change the meanings to be more palatable to the gender-sensitivity police.***
For clarificatoin. Zondervan did not take any liberties.
Zondervan did absolutely no trasnlation of the NIV or of the TNIV.
The translation of the TNIV* was done by the IBS (International Bible Society).
Zondervan is the publisher and they do not hold the copyright on the TNIV* or the NIV.
***That's not what was implied. Simply that Zondervan shouldn't take liberties with the translation FROM those languages, especially to change the meanings to be more palatable to the gender-sensitivity police.***
Correcting my own error. IBS (International Bible Society) did not actually do the translation themselves. The Committee for Bible Translation, the same organization and many of the same scholars that translated the NIV, was hired by the International Bible Society to do the translation of the TNIV*.
Still, the IBS is who holds the copyright and Zondervan is an independent publisher.
Yes. The Orthodox church in general will always prefer the original translation. Thus the preference of the LXX Hebrew scholars in earlier times over the later Masoretic Text upon which the KJV is based. This also accounts for our Psalter having a different numbering than that of the Western churches (I believe the difference is two toward the end).
But are you saying that St. Symeon, who was one of the translators between 20-150 BC was still alive at 1AD? He would have been over 150 years old!
Yes I am. That is the sublime beauty of the Orthodox faith. We have tradition handed down by the Fathers of the Church from Apostolic times. Nothing is added or taken away. This is different from Western churches which continue to change and evolve (hope i'm not stepping on anyone's toes here). What you write is part of the received tradition of the Church (not sure how the RC's view St. Symeon).
From the OCA website at:
http://www.oca.org/pages/orth_chri/Feasts-and-Saints/february/Feb-03.html#simeon
Righteous Simeon the God-Receiver was, according to the testimony of the holy Evangelist Luke, a just and devout man waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him (Lk 2:25). God promised him that he would not die until the promised Messiah, Christ the Lord, came into the world.
Ancient historians tell us that the Egyptian pharaoh Ptolemy II Philadelphos (285-247 B.C.) wished to include texts of Holy Scripture in the famous Library at Alexandria. He invited scholars from Jerusalem, and the Sanhedrin sent their wise men. The Righteous Simeon was one of the seventy scholars who came to Alexandria to translate the Holy Scriptures into Greek. The completed work was called "The Septuagint," and is the version of the Old Testament used by the Orthodox Church.
St. Simeon was translating a book of the Prophet Isaiah, and read the words: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bring forth a Son" (Is 7:14). He thought that "virgin" was inaccurate, and he wanted to correct the text to read "woman." At that moment an angel appeared to him and held back his hand saying, "You shall see these words fulfilled. You shall not die until you behold Christ the Lord born of a pure and spotless Virgin."
From this day, St. Simeon lived in expectation of the Promised Messiah. One day, the righteous Elder received a revelation from the Holy Spirit, and came to the Temple. It was on the very day (the fortieth after the Birth of Christ) when the All-Pure Virgin Mary and St. Joseph had come to the Temple in order to perform the ritual prescribed by Jewish Law.
When St. Simeon beheld their arrival, the Holy Spirit revealed to him that the divine Child held by the All-Pure Virgin Mary was the Promised Messiah, the Savior of the world. The Elder took the Child in his arms and said, "Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, according to Thy word, for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation, which Thou hast prepared before the face of all people, a light to enlighten the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people Israel" (Lk 2:29-32).
He blessed the All-Pure Virgin and St. Joseph, and turning to the Mother of God he said, "Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be spoken against. Yea, a sword shall pierce through your own soul also, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed" (Lk 2:34-35).
The holy Evangelist continues: "And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel of the tribe of Aser. She was of a great age, and had lived with a husband for seven years from her virginity; and she was a widow of about eighty-four years, who did not leave the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. And coming at that very hour, also gave thanks to the Lord, and spoke of Him to all those who looked for redemption at Jerusalem" (Lk 2:36-38).
The holy righteous Simeon the God-Receiver died at a great age (Tradition says he was 360). His holy relics were transferred to Constantinople in the sixth century. His grave was seen by the Russian pilgrim St. Anthony, the future Archbishop of Novgorod (October 8) in 1200.
The 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia, available online at newadvent.org, does not mention St. Simeon's being one of the translators of the Septuagint. However, that doesn't mean that this traditional belief is not present in the Roman Catholic Church, since the encyclopedia doesn't cover *everything*.
Many thanks --me fuzzy brain is best suited for gettin this old man in toruble thanit is for helpin others out in
understanding.Thanks again that is indeed the passage I was trying to remember.
Actually, his name was most probably pronounced "Yeshu" or "Yeshua". The spelling of Jesus was taken from a text in a language, I believe German, in which J is pronounced Ya. Anyway, during the translation, the translators used the spelling from the text. English people pronounced it with the normal English pronunciation of J, and the name Yeshua became Jesus. Oh, also, Jehovah is a product of translation. The original text was YHWH, probably pronounced YahWeh.
have always liked the New American Standard, but one thing I noticed was that they cleaned up several Old Testament passages, which were actually pretty rough in the original texts. For example, in threatening a city, David stated that he would kill any male that could piss on a wall. This was a pretty direct threat that any male that wasn't a baby in it's mother's arms would be killed. The NASB alters that text. While I understand the desires of the translators to avoid offending people, and have honestly never heard a preacher read the original King James text of that passage from the pulpit, this type of modification of the original is inherently destructive to the teaching of Scripture.
"All them that pisseth against a wall." Anybody know if that's in the original Hebrew, or just 1611 English?
Modern translations of that are certainly less interesting.
I think it is a bit ironic that a Bible translation that is accused of being "gender neutral" and in-line with the feminist agenda translates the reference to the eagle as "it" as opposed to the feminine "her" that the KJV uses.
You would think that a Bible translated to appease feminists would keep any feminine reference.
I believe that it is 100% "literal" (meaning factual considering hyperbole, symbolism, etc..) and the correctness of interpretation is something we just have to pray doesn't mislead us. But intentionally changing text to fit modern philosophy or political correctness is not acceptable to me.
Tell it straight and let me put it into historical context.
As a user of the NIV, I think the TNIV is idiotic.
It's not an "error rate". Unless you're silly enough to believe there is such a thing as a "verbatim translation" from one language to another.
Yeah--but why pass up an opportunity to beard the PETA crowd
by referring to an animal as an inanimate.
***This translation blurs the lines between male and female ( something the feminist want to do ).***
Could you give me an example of where the TNIV* "blurs the lines between male and female"?
Do you even have a copy to quote from? Or are you just going on what you heard people say the TNIV* is like?
I have a copy of the full Bible in the TNIV* and I read many references specifically to male and female.
As an example, Ephesians 5:22-33 still distinguishes between the roles of husbands and wives.
1 Timothy 2 still tells us that women shall not teach or have authority over a man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.