Replies

"And behold thy cousin Elizabeth, she also hath conceived a son in her old age; and this is the sixth month with her that is called barren: THIS IS FROM YOUR OWN CATHOLIC DOUAY-RHEIMS BIBLE...What's the matter with you people???"

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Iscool, you do know that the original of the book of "Luke" was NOT originally written in English, and that the words quoted in it were NOT actually spoken in English, don't you?

With that fact in mind, as every Bible scholar and translator knows (and will readily admit if they are honest), there is NO SUCH THING as a perfect translation of the Bible -- not one. Language-to-language translation of ANYTHING always involves many alternative choices of words/phrases/word order/etc. which the translators have to make and which do not have a precise word-for-word match in both languages. That is simply the nature of language-to-language translations. There is never a perfect one-to-one correspondence of all words or phrases between any two different languages.

Now, for an honest explanation of the Bible text you referenced (in this case referring to another translation of the New Testament, but which applies to the Douay-Rheims translation also), read this:

First, let me take a moment to comment on the translation in Luke 1:36 in the New American Bible of sungenis (the feminine form of sungenes) as "cousin." This is a terrible rendering that has caused confusion for countless faithful Catholics. It is just another one of the seemingly countless flaws with this translation. The meaning of the Greek word sungenes (pronounced sun-gen-ace) is too general to be translated "cousin." "Relative," "kinsman," or (in the feminine) "kinswoman" would be acceptable translations. "Cousin" is simply wrong, and so clearly wrong that in Luke 1:36 in the current version of the NAB, they’ve stopped rendering it that way and translated it as "relative" instead. If only the translators hadn’t been so irresponsible as to do the misrendering in the first place, countless Catholics would have been spared confusion.
(SOURCE: Cousin, Kinswoman . . . Aargh! by Jimmy Akin)

Now, if you take an honest, truth-seeking look (not a sneering, sarcastic, dishonest one) at this Interlinear Greek/English translation of Luke 1:36, you can see that the term is more accurately translated "relative of you", NOT "cousin", just like Mr. Akin said it should be.

Luke 1:36 - Interlinear Greek/English New Testament

(That same point applies to the obvious mistranslation of that same set of words in the "King James Version" translation as well.)

I hope this clears up any confusion and distortions you have about those Biblical word translations.

(The object for all of us should be to really learn the honest truth, not score "debating points".)

Thanks for the comment.

Actually, in common usage the word “cousin” is frequently used carelessly, and it can mean anything from a first cousin to any kind of in-law or cousin-by-marriage.

The phrase “Jesus and his brothers” has caused a lot more trouble among literal-minded misinterpreters of the Bible. There, again, of course, “brother” was an unfortunate way to translate, but the earlier translators probably didn’t figure that people would be so literal-minded and dogmatic about it, based on an English word which, taken literally, violates the teachings of all the Church Fathers and the early commentators on the Bible.

Just as “brethren” now has to be explained as meaning brothers, sisters, and little kids, too—something that wouldn’t have bothered anyone before the feminist language revolution confused everything.

With that fact in mind, as every Bible scholar and translator knows (and will readily admit if they are honest), there is NO SUCH THING as a perfect translation of the Bible -- not one. Language-to-language translation of ANYTHING always involves many alternative choices of words/phrases/word order/etc. which the translators have to make and which do not have a precise word-for-word match in both languages. That is simply the nature of language-to-language translations. There is never a perfect one-to-one correspondence of all words or phrases between any two different languages.

If we don't have God's bible as he intended we would have it, guess God's a liar then, eh???

No it isn't...Your interlinear Greek is from Nestle-Aland which is a purely Catholic version of it's Greek texts so the author's opinion of what is the correct Greek or what it means is meaningless to me...It has a vested interest in eliminating the term 'cousin'...

Luke could have been translating any one of these more general terms (or, rather, their feminine equivalents) as sungenēs, or he could have been translating a different, general term, or he could have been paraphrasing what the angel said rather than translating from the Aramaic.

This Catholic apologist, like the others can not come to grips with the fact that there is no ancient Aramaic text...It doesn't exist...

The text is translated by the KJV translators as cousin...The text is translated by the Douay-Rheims Catholic translators as cousin...There have been no new texts discovered since then that would change that translation...

While the word also means kinsman or relative, The correct translation is cousin...

And how do we know that...Because we know what cousin means...

a : a child of one's uncle or aunt
b : a relative descended from one's grandparent or more remote ancestor by two or more steps and in a different line

Outside of a brother, sister, mother or father, just about any kinsman can be a cousin in one form or another...