Thought I would start a thread about the various errors we feel we have come across while reading various Bible translations.
This is in the New Living Translation (NLT). I have issue with verse 20 and using the word "shame". I feel it takes away from the total point being made - forgiveness, generosity and acts of kindness.
Quote:
Romans 12:19 Dear friends, never take revenge. Leave that to the righteous anger of God. For the Scriptures say,
“I will take revenge;
I will pay them back,”[a]
says the Lord.
(20) Instead,
“If your enemies are hungry, feed them.
If they are thirsty, give them something to drink. In doing this, you will heap
burning coals of shame on their heads.”[b]
(21) Don’t let evil conquer you, but conquer evil by doing good.
Quote:
[B] Proverbs 25:21-22 "If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the LORD shall reward thee."
Quote:
The Amplified says this: 1. Proverbs 25:22This is not to be understood as a revengeful act intended to embarrass its victim, but just the opposite. The picture is that of the high priest (Lev. 16:12) who, on the Day of Atonement, took his censer and filled it with "coals of fire" from off the altar of burnt offering, and then put incense on the coals to create a pleasing, sweet-smelling fragrance. The cloud or smoke of the incense covered the mercy seat and was acceptable to God for atonement. Samuel Wesley wrote: "So artists melt the sullen ore of lead, By heaping coals of fire upon its head: In the kind warmth the metal learns to glow, And pure from dross the silver runs below."
I, therefore, feel that the NLT is incorrect in their interpretation. Not only because verse 20 contradicts verses 19 and 21, but the reference in the Amplified lends a good supporting argument.. Another point being, in Bible lands almost everything was carried on the head, i.e., water jars, baskets of various food items, or any other article. In many homes they kept a brazier which they used for simple cooking and for generating warmth. They always planned to keep it burning. If the Brazier should go out, a member of the family would go to a neighbor's house to borrow fire. They would then put the Brazier on their head and start for home. If the neighbor was very generous, she would heap the Brazier full of coals - hence - "Thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head."
It is not an act to bring shame, IMO, but a beautiful act of forgiveness and of generosity in the face of evil.
Last edited by Pressing-On; 04-28-2010 at 12:01 PM.
your first problem is you are using NLT which is about on the same level as NIV which like many allows way to much personal view and subjection to the text....
thought-for-thought is not literal which allows for more for theology base translation. Again just my opinion. I never use them for quoting or serious argument.
When people start quoting "The Message" and others like it. I just ignore pretty much everything they just said because it is pretty much a theological opinion piece disguised as what the Bible says.
Last edited by TheLegalist; 04-28-2010 at 12:58 PM.
your first problem is you are using NLT which is about on the same level as NIV which like many allows way to much personal view and subjection to the text....
thought-for-thought is not literal which allows for more for theology base translation. Again just my opinion. I never use them for quoting or serious argument.
When people start quoting "The Message" and others like it. I just ignore pretty much everything they just said because it is pretty much a theological opinion piece disguised as what the Bible says.
I don't care for a whole lot of other translations. I thought that I would like the NLT, but I am finding out that I don't. But, it's like any other translation - there are some scriptures that give a good meaning and better understanding that isn't wrong. It's just that I can't rely on the whole of it.
I think the KJV could be likened to the expression of the Spanish language, in that, the beauty is lost when you translate it.
For example, We say, in English, "You are welcome." In Spanish, it is much more expressive as you say, "De nada", which means, "it is nothing."
I have the Message and I don't care for it either.
your first problem is you are using NLT which is about on the same level as NIV which like many allows way to much personal view and subjection to the text....
thought-for-thought is not literal which allows for more for theology base translation. Again just my opinion. I never use them for quoting or serious argument.
When people start quoting "The Message" and others like it. I just ignore pretty much everything they just said because it is pretty much a theological opinion piece disguised as what the Bible says.
And, as everyone knows, opinions on the Bible should always be ignored.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
your first problem is you are using NLT which is about on the same level as NIV which like many allows way to much personal view and subjection to the text....
thought-for-thought is not literal which allows for more for theology base translation. Again just my opinion. I never use them for quoting or serious argument.
When people start quoting "The Message" and others like it. I just ignore pretty much everything they just said because it is pretty much a theological opinion piece disguised as what the Bible says.
Your analysis just isn't accurate. And you don't have a faint clue how much personal opinion was actually inserted into any of the translations, including the KJV. And...the NLT nor the NIV is NOTHING like "The Message" bible, although I do enjoy The Message.
But just to make sure, I don't use any of the translations one can find in the store. I went to the Middle East and dug up original manuscripts. Then I learned to speak every language. Now I only preach in those languages because I insist on being accurate. It sucks for the audience because they don't have a clue what I'm saying, but what the heck, I'm accurate!
How do we know the translations in the KJV are legit......
we don't and I my personal opinion after study shows the KJV has many issues with translation and inconsistent treatment of the word "faith" for example. It does have some things correct that have still not been corrected and scholars know the base texts for the other versions needs to be corrected but have not done it yet.
When Daniel interpreted the handwriting on the wall as recorded in Daniel 5:25-28, was it a translation or interpretation? was it dynamic equivalent or formal equivalent?
Hybrid Mode
