Posted on 06/18/2010 12:16:49 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
NEW YORK, June 17 /PRNewswire/ -- The Ten Commandments don't forbid coveting or killing, claims Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, a noted Bible scholar and linguist who has applied modern translation techniques to the Bible.
Hoffman reports that the commandment commonly quoted as "thou shalt not covet" is more accurately translated as "do not take," and that the commandment applies only to actions, not to states of mind.
"We now know that the Ten Commandments take no position on how you feel, only on what you do," he says.
Hoffman claims that flawed translation techniques led to the familiar but inaccurate rendering of the Hebrew in this case. His evidence comes from how the Hebrew verb in the commandment is used elsewhere in the Bible.
"Perhaps more than any other part of the Bible, the Ten Commandments have shaped Western culture," Hoffman suggests. "The good news is that most of the commandments have been translated accurately. The bad news is that two have not."
According to Hoffman, the other mistranslated commandment is the one that concerns killing. (It's the sixth commandment for most Protestants and Jews, the fifth for Catholics.)
One familiar rendering, "do not kill," is too broad, he says, because the original Hebrew did not prohibit all kinds of killing. So recent high-profile political claims that the Bible categorically forbids killing are in error, says Hoffman.
But the other common variation, "do not murder," is too narrow, because the commandment included not just murder but also the equivalent of manslaughter and other illegal homicide.
The Ten Commandments are not the only parts of the Bible to be misrepresented in translation, Hoffman argues.
The well-known opening of Psalm 23, "The Lord is my Shepherd," is misleading, Hoffman says, because shepherds in the Bible were "brave, strong, valiant," and "regal," while the modern shepherd is "a marginalized loner who spends more time with sheep than with people." Hoffman explains that using the word "shepherd" to translate Psalm 23 "suggests all of the wrong images and none of the right ones."
Other translation gaffs include the prophesy of the virgin birth in the book of Isaiah --- Hoffman translates the word there as "woman," not "virgin" --- and the exhortation from Deuteronomy (quoted in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke) to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul," which is considered theologically central by Christians and Jews alike.
The words "heart" and "soul" there are mistranslations, Hoffman says. The first Hebrew word refers to all of the intangible aspects of life, including emotions and intellect, while the second connotes the physical flesh, blood, and breath.
Unlike most others who study the Bible, Hoffman's training is in linguistics and translation. "English speakers who read Ovid or Aristotle or Pushkin in translation have a better sense of the original texts than do readers of any existing English translation of the Bible," claims Hoffman, who has taught graduate-level translation courses in both religious and secular university settings.
Most Bible translations are produced by theologians, not translators, and their training doesn't generally include modern translation techniques.
Hoffman published his findings in his latest book, And God Said: How Translations Conceal the Bible's Original Meaning (www.AndGodSaid.com). The book, released in February by Thomas Dunne Books/St. Martin's Press, is already in its second printing.
“In the latter formulations, e.g., with regard to adultery, Jesus was crystal clear about sins of the inner self, the core being, or “cardia,” for the human heart.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I always took this to mean a man who becomes obsessed with a woman he knows is married to another and fantasizes about her. I have heard it presented as meaning any man who sees an attractive woman and experiences desire, I don’t buy that one, such a reaction is an involuntary thing.
We tend to categorize sin according to how it affects others on earth. All sin (big or little) is worthy of eternal separation from God.
Thou shalt not commit adultery unless the woman throws herself upon you and the husband is not your best friend. I believe folks around here have it interpreted it this way...
“The author claimed otherwise about 2000 years ago.”
Really? Want to think that over??
This author is not claiming the Bible is wrong, only that some parts of some modern translations are. Except fot the Septuagint I don’t think there were that many translations in Jesus’ day, and I do not think he referred how well any were translated.
Hank
As an example from another part of Scripture Paul uses a term that in the King James is translated "too superstitious" but in the New American Standard is translated "very religious." Without looking up the original word, I recall it as meaning "has a great belief in supernatural beings and events." This meant it could be translated either way. Neither would be wholly correct or incorrect.
Keep in mind with respect to the bible the “golden rule”. He who has the gold determines to a large part how certain “proof” texts are translated.
The other consideration is that “context is everything”. The meaning of a specific verse has to be determined by its context. Be very careful about pulling out one verse or one phrase to “prove” something. If a verse is difficult, read every translation that you can get your hands on. Don’t believe every commentary unless you have determined that the author is not grinding his own particular axe.
I, uh, may uh, have uh, there was uh, this uh, guy uh, wait uh, I haven’t had much sleep, uh, Larry uh, well uh, it wasn’t my fault,...........uh, where was I? Sinclair uh, got me all uh, wee weed up uh, cocaine, it uh, well see, uh, Larry uh, Michelle, who’s Michelle, oh, yeah, her, the one with the big uh, yeah, uh, I just couldn’t help myself.
I think the problem here lies in the accuracy of the words in translation, based on languages not being 1 to 1 translatable.
For example, the English word “have”, is very difficult to translate into Arabic, Bengali, Finnish, Hebrew, Hindi, Hungarian, Irish, Japanese, Turkish, Urdu, Russian or Welsh, while keeping a meaning accurate to its different English common uses.
So what this translator said was that, to start with, accurately translated was instead of “do not covet”, it was “do not take”. Well, not really.
What he could have said and been more accurate was that “do not covet” actually translates as “do not (something in Hebrew that doesn’t translate well into English).”
And from *there*, he would have to go on at length as to what the Hebrew word meant, based on its context found elsewhere, that can be explained in English, but we don’t have an accurate word for in English.
This should be important for religious people, because while “covet” has a great poetic resonance, it doesn’t convey the whole meaning of what that sacred law meant, more likely just part of it.
This becomes extra important, because he then points out that what is translated as “murder” means more than we, in English, typically associate with that word. Ironically, we do recognize several varieties of murder, manslaughter, and other killing, by several degrees in our law. It’s just that we don’t have unique words for each variation.
So what is meant in Hebrew by their equivalent of the word “murder”?
This becomes very important. Much of Hebraic law got into what could be called “case law”, for example distinguishing killing a burglar at night from killing one during the day. This would be integrated into what they meant by their version of the word “murder”.
And like our modern laws are supposed to reflect constitutional law, the lesser Hebrew laws, statutes and judgments were supposed to all reflect the Ten Commandments.
So don’t be too quick to dismiss translation that may hold deeper meanings. The poetic version may be lovelier, but it may be a case of “We just don’t have a word for that, so let me elaborate.”
“Stop right there. NOBODY is going to be discovering anything new about the bible in 2010.”
It’s not about the Bible itself, but modern translations. Unless you think translations are “inspired,” (I know some do), what’s the problem?
As for learning any more about the Bible, guess they might as well end Biblical archeology, heh?
Hank
Not that it will save you from the damnation of Freep biblical scholars.
Agreed. Temptation is going to always be a part of every day life. Regarding this particular sin, temptations are all around us ... billboards, TV, movies, etc. How we handle the tempation is where the line is. If we accept these temptations and let them dwell in our minds and hearts (occupy our thoughts) then we're crossing the line into sin. If the tempation is a fleeting thought that we put aside and move on, then it remains merely a temptation.
He said, “Women think like that, too?”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Didn’t know much about women, did he?
I don't think your pun is particularly funny, or respectful.
As for the other meaning, I have to say that reading Hoffman's discussion on levav and nefesh in the Vi'ahavta made me squirm a bit, but it's hard to disagree with his reasoning.
ML/NJ
I just did a brief word study at Dictionary.com. It is interesting because you can “take” something without stealing it. “Take” may have an element of force to it while stealing can lack the element of force. Stealing is taking something that doesn't belong to you. Taking is removing it from someone’s possession. I suppose stealing always taking but taking is not always stealing.
I gotta quit thinking about this.
If the Bible word really does mean “take” then it could offer a fantastic interpretation.
Good answer.
Yes, I say Tanakh, but I didn't know I was speaking to someone who would understand that term.
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.