Sheshbazzar

This statement is obviously false. The Jewish scholars who provided us with the JPS translation most certainly did not concur with Ramban on the proper interpretation of Genesis 15:6
Now this is downright silly. The JPS was published in America by American Jews. In 1917 Hitler was unknown.
The Jews of 19th century America were NOT under the control of the RCC.
And perhaps even more importantly with respect to this particular verse is that the common Catholic Bible, the Douay–Rheims does not even have a 'He' at all in this verse.
Here is the Catholic reading;
The RCC was not forcing these American Jews into putting a 'He' into their Jewish texts that does not even occur within the Catholics standard Bible.

To repeat. That 'he' is NOT capitalized in the KJV.

That 'he' is not even present in the Douay–Rheims Catholic Bible.

Christians did NOT require it of them, this reading was not even present in either the Protestant KJV or the Catholic Bibles.

These Jewish scholars put 'He' there, and chose to capitalize it totally upon their own persuasions and initiative.

sotto voce

'If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.'

RC Council of Trent, Canon IX on Justification

Sheshbazzar

That pronouncement was in respect to Christians claiming to holding to Christian beliefs and practices.
(reflecting on that sharp difference of opinion between Catholic doctrine and Protestant doctrine wrt 'Justification by Faith')

Catholicism, as well as most of her Christan daughters do not expect Jewish persons to be subject to the rules or interpretations of Christian beliefs.

The JPS Jewish scholars translated Genesis 15:6 in line with their own Jewish persuasions. In this preferring Rashi's view over the arguments of Ramban.

sotto voce

It was made by people who, it is claimed here, promoted justification by faith and prevented Jews from translating Ge 15:6 in opposition to it!

It's perfectly ridiculous and shameful to bring the discussion to this primitively erroneous level.

Of course they did. If the thread has got to this level of idiotic clowning around it has no further proper purpose.

semiopen

Doh, I copied the older (1917) JPS instead of the more recent (1985) TNK

Righteous is not considered completely correct nowadays, this was discussed in Anbar's article which I posted.

Your article doesn't distinguish between the two words.

Onias

God accounted Phinehas righteous for the deeds he had done.
This is not controversial as there is no phrase "and he accounted to him righteousness" as there is in Gen 15:6. And I see no problem in God praising men for their righteous deeds. My problem is that I see no evidence for God imputing righteousness to men for their faith or beliefs.

Onias

Modern Jews continue to quote Rashi's view of Gen 15:6, apparently just from respect for a 700 year tradition (that was originally formulated during a period of Xian persecution of our Jewish people). I think modern Jews really need to break out of this rut and view things anew.

Onias

Yes, but are you saying the Jews had not been persecuted in the centuries before 1917?? Jews have always been careful not to offend Xians, because Xians have usually had the power and the opportuinty to persecute the Jews without interruption for the last 2000 years. You should know this if you are Jewish.

Onias

How can you get into the mindset of these translators? How do you know they were not just preserving the tradition of Rashi out of respect. Modern Jews need to reexamine these views now that there is less threat of a pogrom against them.

Onias

This was in 1566 and was not in the era of Rashi. Moreover, it does not directly dispute Paul in Rom 4:3. It seems to see James' view in the forefront.