Evolution Of Language? I Had Problems With Translations Of The Bible

Discussion in 'Evolution of Language' started by Mary Stetler, Nov 22, 2023.

  1. Mary Stetler

    Mary Stetler Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    May 30, 2021
    Messages:
    5,446
    Likes Received:
    10,128
    I don't care much for fiction. A friend just lent me the Diaries of the Lewis and Clark expedition. Looking forward to reading it as it contains several of my interests.
    I recently opened the Bible but did not get very far, starting at the first cover. I've looked at sections but can't get straight through.
    But I found a guy on youtube, Michael Rood. I think he posts under 'Rood Awakenings'. He explains the evolutions of languages involved in the Bible and how they change our understanding of what is going on in there.
    It helps.
    I have several versions of the Bible including a translation from the Aramaic.
    It is a little frightening being that one can see things prophesized going on today. But people have seen things in the past as well.
    Warning, he does not sugar coat--just straight talk.
     
    #1
    Ken Anderson and Yvonne Smith like this.
  2. Ken Anderson

    Ken Anderson Senior Staff
    Staff Member Senior Staff Greeter Task Force Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    24,124
    Likes Received:
    41,946
    Some translations are better than others, but not being a translator, I have to depend on other people to point out the flaws. Most are reliable enough, except for the translations and transliterations that are agenda-driven or intended to make the Bible say something that its authors did not intend. After thousands of years of translators, I am skeptical of people who come along today with a new idea of what the Bible actually says. I am also skeptical of a lot of the YouTube channels that I have come across because so many of them are agenda-driven, and, even when they might be trying to be honest, I have to wonder why someone with a YouTube channel has insight that generations of translators and apologists were unable to figure out. I watch some of them, but I am wary of any new meanings they may have uncovered.
     
    #2
    Bobby Cole likes this.
  3. Faye Fox

    Faye Fox Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2019
    Messages:
    6,086
    Likes Received:
    12,201
    The only copy of the bible I have, is the one translated by Dr. Lamsa from the original Aramaic. No translation will ever be more accurate than the Lamsa version, simply because Lamsa took it from the oldest available writing of the bible that were in Aramaic. He also was Aramaic and understood the customs and language completely. He also understood English to a high degree and in his other writings he explains that English doesn't always have an accurate word that meshes with the Aramaic so that is why it is important to read his footnotes and other writings.

    While guys like Rood may shed some light on how the English language may have evolved from the old King James English, it still is based on several mistranslations from the most original text available.
     
    #3
  4. Bobby Cole

    Bobby Cole Supreme Member
    Task Force Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    12,942
    Likes Received:
    24,261
    I don’t know anything about Lamsa but that’s a mighty small book. There were only 268 verses in 10 books in the Bible that were originally written in Aramaic.
     
    #4
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2023
    Ken Anderson likes this.
  5. Faye Fox

    Faye Fox Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2019
    Messages:
    6,086
    Likes Received:
    12,201
    That is the consensus of bible scholars that have been raised, trained, or studied in the protestant and evangelic western way.

    When I first heard Dr. Lamsa speak, I was skeptical of his claim that his New Testament translation was from older manuscripts than the translations from Greek. Once I studied his writing and claims and the fact that most of his life was dedicated to publishing a more accurate version in English than was possible from the Greek, it was evident to me that the Greek was taken from Aramaic manuscripts and those translating didn't have the knowledge of Arameric that Lamsa did.

    I would submit Christ words on the cross ... "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani."

    The Greek to English version has it as ... "My God My God, why has thou forsaken me."

    Now compare that to the Arameric .. "My God My God, for this I was spared."

    Why would Christ in all his agony from extreme torture say something stupid like, "why have you forsaken me" to God when he claimed to be the son of God and sent to earth to teach, then die for the sins of all mankind? It just doesn't make sense. If the Greek is correct, then Christ was second doubting his own teachings that God was the almighty or accusing God of abandonment.

    Now, in agony to say, " For this I was spared" makes sense and fits his purpose here on earth according to the New Testament teachings.

    There are several more passages that are clarified by Lamsa's translation. The one about it being "easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than" ..... is a good example.

    The translation that makes sense is Lamsa's ... 'It is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle." I know the scholars spin about the arch in an entry way (being called an eye) and how a camel on their knees might get through with difficulty, but that is weak IMO to simple logic that makes sense and agrees with the ancient Arameric text.

    I would suggest anyone interested, read Lamsa's writing and at least his entire New Testament translation.
     
    #5
  6. Ken Anderson

    Ken Anderson Senior Staff
    Staff Member Senior Staff Greeter Task Force Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    24,124
    Likes Received:
    41,946
    I'd rather adjust my thinking to make sense of the Bible than adjust the Bible to make sense to me.
     
    #6
    Yvonne Smith and Bobby Cole like this.
  7. Bobby Cole

    Bobby Cole Supreme Member
    Task Force Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    12,942
    Likes Received:
    24,261
    I’m not going to debate the issue but Aramaic wasn’t even spoken nor written before the Babylonian exile. It’s a stretch but in a way, Aramaic was then as Yiddish is today.

    Now, how in the world could Lamsa translate Aramaic from New Testament manuscripts when there were none written in Aramaic to begin with is indeed a mystery to me.
    Heck, it was Jewish scholars who first translated their Hebrew manuscripts into Greek some 70 years before the advent of Jesus because they were a conquered people and the overwhelming language that was spoken and written was Greek or rather Koine Greek.
    The bottom line is that there were no Aramaic passages in the New Testament that could be translated unless of course, someone translated them back into Hebrew and then into Aramaic for which there is no history of that happening.
     
    #7
  8. Faye Fox

    Faye Fox Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2019
    Messages:
    6,086
    Likes Received:
    12,201
    Jesus spoke a Galilean dialect of Aramaic. The apostles spoke Aramaic and it seems silly to me that they talked in Aramaic but wrote in Hebrew and then the "original" New Testament manuscripts were in Greek.

    I was not trying to start a big Bible discussion here, but rather answer Mary's question if the evolution of language was what caused her troubles with all the many Bible translations. I suggested the Lamsa translation since in my opinion it is the most accurate and does help clarify several scriptures.

    The reason many western theologians don't like the Lamsa version, is because it puts them out of work writing Bible commentaries and study guides. I have a problem with any translation that a person of average intelligence and reading skills cannot read and understand without the help of theologians.
     
    #8
  9. Bobby Cole

    Bobby Cole Supreme Member
    Task Force Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    12,942
    Likes Received:
    24,261
    Uh huh.
    Among His own people a form of Aramaic was spoken but the Gospels were written in Greek and not Aramaic. Again, there are only 268 verses in the entire Bible that are written in Aramaic.

    In the end, believe what you wish.
    If in your heart you know that God loves us so much that he sent Jesus Christ to be born, die on the cross for your sins, was resurrected and revealed Himself to His Apostles (and others) before ascending in heaven, THAT is all that one really needs to know.

    All the rest is just lace. It’s there for a reason but it isn’t like forensic science and doesn’t have to be totally understood.
     
    #9
  10. Von Jones

    Von Jones Supreme Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    6,448
    Likes Received:
    8,765
    @Mary Stetler, just keep searching for a Bible that speaks to your spirit.
     
    #10
    Mary Stetler and Bobby Cole like this.
  11. Bobby Cole

    Bobby Cole Supreme Member
    Task Force Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    12,942
    Likes Received:
    24,261
    I am pretty sure I have written it before but one method of choosing a Bible that I do encourage is to download a free app called E-Sword.
    There are numerous translations of the Bible to choose from, a Strong’s concordance, a Dictionary, a section just for Study notes, teaching illustrations, commentaries, explanations and more.

    The only version that isn’t free is the NIV because the NIV is copy written and the producers will not allow a reprint unless one pays for it.
    Note: I do not know why but the folks who produced the NIV chose to omit around 21-22 verses from the New Testament. Unlike some very ardent KJV users, I’m sure that reading the NIV will not affect one’s salvation but if one is so inclined to want as much information as possible and is a passionate student of the Word, I don’t recommend it.
    That said, if a person just wants a Bible that is easy to read and in pretty plain English, the NIV is okay.
     
    #11
    Ken Anderson and John Brunner like this.
  12. Celia Jenkins

    Celia Jenkins Active Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2024
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    175
    There are a lot of mistakes in the Bible, which has led to misunderstandings. The English language is complicated, with several words having more than one meaning. This applies to other languages too. It's important to get it right because it has such an impact on our beliefs. Most of the Old Testament has come from other sources and, if possible, true scholars need to study the original.
    For instance, the story of Abraham is quite brief, but if you read the true life story of the man, it puts a different aspect on him. If people read the Bible with an open, logical mind, they can see for themselves how religious teachers have manipulated history to suit their own purpose.
     
    #12
  13. Marie Mallery

    Marie Mallery Veteran Member
    Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2021
    Messages:
    9,253
    Likes Received:
    8,115
    No big deal, I have a few English Majors here who help me now and then. When they just can't take it anymore they correct me, lol.
    Thanks to several quacks I lost part of my vision when they caused me to have a stroke, and I can't type,which of course they didn't cause that.
     
    #13
    Mary Stetler likes this.

Share This Page