Talk:Matthew 1-9 (Translated)
Question: Divine Guardian
I'm curious why "Holy Ghost" was translated as "Divine Guardian" (Matt 1:18). What is the thinking here? Why not choose a phrase like "Holy Spirit" which might better suggest both his connection to the Holy Trinity and also his spirit nature. Just curious.
Having already stated my position on the Talk:Conservative Bible Project page, including that a word for word type translation can overall be the only faithful one, believing even the precise meaning of individual words is critical, here is my input so far on selected verses,
Mt. 1:1 This leaves out book, bib'-los, which is in the Gk., as if that was superfluous. Worse, son is replaced with the liberal gender-neutral descendant. This sets a bad precedent, as if "sent His only begotten decedent" might be acceptable.
Mt. 1:2 "Abraham begat Isaac" vs "Abraham was the father of Isaac" The latter conceivably allows for adoption.
1:18 pregnant with the child of the Divine Guide (really!) Likewise in v.20, 3:11, etc.) Using Divine for the Holy (hagios, otherwise translated in KJV as holy, or saints) disregards His specifically denoted sanctity (which liberals dislike, and do not consider God that holy). Also, Guide for Ghost interprets breath as according to His guiding function, while His primary distinctive effect in the N.T. is that of giving life, a purely Divine attribute, and which the human pneuma also denotes. "The body without the spirit is dead". (Jn. 2:26). The Holy Spirit best denotes both His sanctity and nature, and should remain unchanged.
1:19 Jospeh, typo. Wished is a poor choice for minded - boo'-lom-ahee Middle voice of a primary verb; to “will”. "Make a wish and blow out the candle" indicates superficiality. [Strongly] desired would have more substance.
1:24 and wed Mary. Married is clearer to the young.
2:4 I'm wondering if the phrase "where Christ would be born" shouldn't rather be "where the Christ would be born." The former makes it sound as if Christ is a surname, rather than a title. "Where the Messiah would be born" would make it more clear that Herod was worrying about the impending birth of the King of the Jews.--Cory Howell 14:05, 22 October 2009 (EDT)
2:7 "which would announce Christ's birth." This is not in the original, and though it is not inaccurate, such supplied words should be placed in italics or [brackets] (i notice both used in other places) so the reader can distinguish between God's word and mans helpful additions.
2:12 Analysis: "That God gave the warning directly is an assumption. That God was instrumental in the giving of that warning is certainly a safe assumption. " That leans toward liberal Deism. The text states that "being warned of God in a dream." That God purposely gave them a dream to warn them is conveyed a fact, not an assumption.
3:3 cf. Is. 40:3. Infers Jesus Deity.
3:7 "You jerks! Who has warned you to flee from the divine sentence that's coming to you? Jerks for generation of vipers[snakes], is hardly fitting, while divine sentence is hardly as strong as wrath, which liberals would avoid, and wrath (orgē ) denotes what manner of sentence it will be.
5:4 "Blessed are the sad". Mourn better denotes continuous grieving, which is the thought here, not simply being emotionally sad, which lacks continuity. Mourn is used 45 times in the KJV.
5:6 "hunger and thirst for justice". Justice denotes things like social equality, and is used by liberal social gospel advocates, while righteousness (Dikaiosunē) denotes a personal condition of heart, satisfaction coming in Christ. (Rm. 4) These saying are best seen as relating to Psa 34:18: "The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit." Some other modern translations even use justice in Rm. 4 and that is a poor rendering for today. Dikaiosunē Total KJV Occurrences: 93 righteousness, 91
5:9 Likewise. Liberals are not persecuted for standing for moral righteousness, but promote justice as in equal rights for immorality. Those who oppose them see this verse fulfilled.
5:22 Moron rather than fool. Denotes "A person of subnormal intelligence," but do not use in other places where it is about being a fool, as being foolish.
6:16 "I tell you truly: they will get what's coming to them." Not will have, but have. Reward is not the that difficult a word, and should be used for the sake of consistency. misthos Total KJV Occurrences: 29: reward, 24 hire, 3 wages, 2.
6:22 "your whole body will be bright", versus "full of light". "Full of" is not in the Gk, but light is correct, as it relates to spiritually speaking, inwardly, and light is a powerful and abundantly used metaphor in the N.T. This verse correlates to 2Cor. 4:6; Heb. 12:2
"Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." vs "The bad things that happen today are enough to worry about today." . A day's evil is enough for itself. Daniel1212 19:47, 10 October 2009 (EDT)
Was Jesus born of a virgin? In the analysis segment of the translation, it states that Matthew refers to Isaiah 7:14 from the Greek LXX. The LXX translated the Hebrew word almah in Isaiah 7:14 as parthenos. But while parthenos may mean virgin in Greek, almah in Hebrew means young woman. Betulah is the Hebrew word used to mean virgin. In Genesis 24:16, where Abraham's servant was sent to find a wife for Isaac, Rebekah is described as a "maiden [who] was very beautiful, a virgin [betulah] whom no man had known". (From the JPS Torah Commentary) The word maiden here is naarah, which Strong's defines as a young, adolescent girl. It might be assumed that she is a virgin, yet the text further explains that she is a virgin, and then qualifies that with the phrase "whom no man had known". Nahum Sarna, in the JPS Torah Commentary, writes that even betulah by itself doesn't connote a virgin without a qualifying phrase, as in Gen. 24:16. He mentions Joel 1:8, where a betulah laments the husband of her youth. He also cites "an Aramaic incantation text [that] speaks of a 'bethultha' who is pregnant". When Isaiah wrote that an "almah shall conceive and bear a son", without using any qualifying phrases that even the term betulah seems to require to connote a virgin, can we then say that Isaiah was foreseeing a virgin birth? Was Matthew reading too much into the Greek word parthenos? Comments? - Danielitld
Should be 'people', not 'men': the issue is faithfulness to the original text.
Copied from Conservative Bible Project talk page:
The Greek texts for this verse are completely consistent, barring diacritical marks: 'καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, δεῦτε ὀπίσω μου, καὶ ποιήσω ὑμᾶς ἁλεεῖς ἀνθρώπων' (Tischendorf text). Details here. άνθρωπος is translated as 'human being' by Wharton, Etyma Graeca: an Etymological Lexicon of Classical Greek and by Powell, Lexicon to Herodotus:. In Modern Greek, άνθρωπος normally means 'person' (gender-neutral) but is also a slang term for a man, equivalent to 'bloke' or 'guy'.
In Tyndale's time (early 16th century), 'men' was a gender-neutral word to refer to people, male and female. This was already becoming archaic by the time of the KJV (much of the language in the KJV was old-fashioned partly because that seems to have been a prestigious writing style and partly because it relied very heavily on Tyndale's work). In any case, 'fishers of people' is a more accurate translation into modern English than 'fishers of men' and the notion that 'people' might sound politically-correct and gender-neutral to those familiar with the KJV is neither here not there. JosephMac 20:01, 13 November 2009 (EST)
- A mere three minutes between commenting and changing is obviously not long enough. Moreover, your comment does not respond to mine: the "fishers of ____" is a masculine analogy akin to a football analogy today. The person must be masculine to fit the metaphor. Moreover, the Greek word is typically translated as "man" or "men", not as "people".--Andy Schlafly 20:17, 13 November 2009 (EST)
- Andy, you know perfectly well, because you participated in the discussion, that I wrote about the meaning of άνθρωπος on the Conservative Bible Project talk page on Friday, 24 hours before (not 3 minutes after) editing this paper. If you can cite an authoritative dictionary which translates άνθρωπος in New Testament Greek (not modern urban slang) as 'man' in the sense of a masculine person, we have something to discuss. Otherwise, I suggest you accept the translation as 'person' (gender-neutral), supported by authoritative sources. I don't think anonymous claims of expertise help very much in a Bible translation project. JosephMac 17:58, 15 November 2009 (EST)
Alternative to "Begat"
Could the word "fathered" be used in replacement of "begat"? It carries the same meaning while being more contemporary. --ChrisY 10:50, 15 January 2010 (EST)
- Looks like a good improvement to me. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 10:59, 15 January 2010 (EST)
- I'll get right on it. --ChrisY 11:02, 15 January 2010 (EST)
Question about 3:7
I would think that "wicked fools" could replace "jerks" in this passage, conveying the original intent with words that don't sound like slang. The decision is up to the senior editors, though. --ChrisY 11:02, 15 January 2010 (EST)
Double verses in chapter 5
It seems that User:BertSchlossberg inserted his translations of these verses as additional versions (1, 1b, 2, 2b, etc.) See edits to chapter 5 by BertSchlossberg. Andy, I don't know how you wish to handle this situation.