hjalti

spin, I'm curious, have you read "Truth in Translation"? (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Here are some things one might add to the list, here's a great example:

hjalti

How about this:

1. (a lot of places): yhwh
bad: LORD
good: Yahweh

They are injecting christian bias by not actually translating the name of the main deity of the book, and instead substitute it with a title.

2. John 8:58
bad: having a sentence that is gibberish
good: having a grammatically correct sentence

English is not my first language, but "Before Abraham I am." doesn't sound like a well-formed sentence.

Vivisector

Does Mk 1:1 fit in (i.e., "the prophets" vs. "Isaiah the prophet")?

Cheers,

V.

mrsonic

no

spin

Personally, I don't think "lord" for yhwh is a mistranslation. It is a cultural habit to use the LXX notion κυριος used by diaspora Jews and inherited by christians.

And the sense difficulties of Jn 8:58 should point to the verse's non-tendentious translation. The text is literally translated from the Greek.

(And I haven't read Truth in Translation.)

[hr=1]100[/hr]

1. Gen 1:1,
   In the beginning god created... (forcing creation from nothing)
   In the beginning when god created... or ... of god's creating...
   
   
2. Deu 32:8,
   sons of Israel, (hiding polytheism)
   sons of El
   
   
3. Ps. 22:16,
   "pierced", (faking prophecy)
   
   
4. Is. 7:14,
   "virgin", (faking prophecy)
   "young woman"
   
   
5. Jer. 7:22,
   "I did not just give them commands", (hiding contradiction, NIV)
   "I did not give them commands"
   
   
6. Dan 9:25,
   "seven weeks (sevens) and sixty-two weeks (sevens);...", (allowing the 7 & 62 to be added together, separating the 62 from what follows) (faking prophecy)
   "seven weeks (sevens); and sixty-two weeks (sevens)..."
   
   
7. Mk 1:2
   written in the prophets, (attempt to hide misattribution of citation in 1:2b, KJV tradition)
   written in Isaiah
   
   
8. Rev 1:13 and 14:14,
   like the son of man, (making christian messianic title)
   like a son of man

stephan huller

This isn't exactly what you are looking for again but maybe you could make sense of the Samaritan woman reportedly saying ""I know the Messiah called Christ is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us. Then Jesus declared, 'I who speak to you am he.'" (John 4:25-26) First of all the concept of messiah is totally foreign to Samaritanism and second of all messiah means the same thing as Christ. I wonder whether nomina sacra were originally confused. Since the Samaritans know nothing of the concept of Christ the original reading must have been the Chrestos called Christ, Chrestos being an exact equivalent of Shilo which of course is very much at the heart of the Samaritan 'messianic' interest.

The Peshitta reads ܐܡܪܐ ܠܗ ܐܢܬܬܐ ܗܝ ܝܕܥܐ ܐܢܐ ܕܡܫܝܚܐ ܐܬܐ ܘܡܐ ܕܐܬܐ ܗܘ ܡܠܦ ܠܢ ܟܠܡܕܡ but the Old Syriac is different from memory.

stephan huller

I found the Old Syriac reading. The clause "which is called Christ" is apparently missing. Some have argued that these are not the words of the woman explaining the Hebrew word Messiah. I am not so sure. I think it is again 'the Chrestos called Christ.' The Arabic and Ethiopic versions, and some copies, read in the plural number, "we know that Messias cometh"; the knowledge of the coming of the Messiah was not peculiar to this woman, but was common to all the Samaritans. Again this must be Shilo aka 'Chrestos' and not the Christ

avi

1. Is there not another Hebrew word, both written and spoken, which does translate as "lord"? If so, then is it not a mistranslation to equate yahweh with that word?

2. Is the concept of yahweh, as defined in the original Hebrew texts, compatible with the concept of "lord"--> a designation employed to describe humans of lofty social bearing and status.

3. the LXX does indeed employ kurios, but, where is the evidence that the original, prechristian, Alexandrian LXX confounded yahweh with adonai? Isn't it a fact that our oldest extant copy of LXX dates from the time of Constantine, (six centuries after creation of LXX) an era when widescale forgery was the norm, accompanied by wholesale destruction of older, non-orthodox parchments, papyri and codices?

4. Do you mean that religious, diaspora Jews, used post Constantine LXX rather than a Hebrew text?

avi

stephan huller

Acts uses despotes (= slave owner) as a name or title of God.

hjalti

Well, I don't think it's a mistranslation either, it isn't a translation at all

It's a jewish and a christian tradition to substitute. What if christians had the tradition of writing "the holy one" whenever the Nt had Iesous? Would you also be OK with that?

If you were translating the New testament, how would your finished translation of Jh 8:58 look?You should! :P