Author Topic: a bad translation  (Read 3009 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sven

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 623
  • Gender: Male
a bad translation
« on: December 07, 2008, 08:21:48 PM »
its something interesting, the english Darby bible - i think its the equivalent of the german Elberfelder bible, all in all a quite accurate translation, except one verse:

1. timothy 4,10

for this we labour and suffer reproach, because we hope in a living God, who is preserver (soter, savior) of all men, specially of those that believe.

in the german version its the same, they translated soter always with savior except this one verse, where they used a word which simply means, someone who keeps animals or humans alive.

i think they translated wrong with better knowledge

Romans 16,25:

Now to him that is able to establish you, according to my glad tidings and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to [the] revelation of [the] mystery, as to which silence has been kept in [the] times of the ages,

Darby translated here aionon with "in the times of ages", knowing its meaning i quess, he translated many places with age instead of world like Luther or the KJV, knowing the meaning of aion i quess, i think the Darby translation isnt known that much in the US, but the Elberfelder is quite common in Germany. It banned "hell" out of the whole Old Testament.
In the meanwhile i am almost sure, these guys translated wrong with better knowledge.

Hebrews 9,26 - Darby translation

since he had [then] been obliged often to suffer from the foundation of the world. But now once in the consummation of the ages he has been manifested for [the] putting away of sin by his sacrifice.

KJV

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

its a very good example how people translate the bible wrong with knowing better in my eyes and how the opponents of universalism fight against the word of the bible.



« Last Edit: December 07, 2008, 08:35:34 PM by sven »

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13127
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2008, 09:02:42 PM »
its something interesting, the english Darby bible - i think its the equivalent of the german Elberfelder bible, all in all a quite accurate translation, except one verse:

1. timothy 4,10

for this we labour and suffer reproach, because we hope in a living God, who is preserver (soter, savior) of all men, specially of those that believe.

in the german version its the same, they translated soter always with savior except this one verse, where they used a word which simply means, someone who keeps animals or humans alive.
Isn't that what Jesus does? Saving us from (2nd) death?
Even the animal part is correct in a way if you remember the parable about the sheppard with the 100 sheep.



Quote
Hebrews 9,26 - Darby translation

since he had [then] been obliged often to suffer from the foundation of the world. But now once in the consummation of the ages he has been manifested for [the] putting away of sin by his sacrifice.

KJV

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Isn't the universe (world) uncreated at the end of the ages?




1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline sven

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 623
  • Gender: Male
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2008, 09:15:34 PM »
Quote
Isn't that what Jesus does? Saving us from (2nd) death?

the problem is, the german word the Elberfelder Bible uses, means someone who keeps animals or humans alive in this life, it had has not the meaning of savior - who really saves one but - only who holds someone alive in this world, the german word Luther used, has a very stronger meaning, like liberator, redeemer, savior (Heiland) you know what i mean?
and so i think he did in the english translation, or does preserver mean savior? - if so, why didnt he use savior?

the second point that i wanted to point out is, that i´m sure Darby knew that aion means age, but in many places he uses eternity anyway with maybe better knowledge, i quess the translators of the king james bible or Luther just didnt know, but this guy knew and this is not correct in my view, do you know what i mean?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2008, 09:24:05 PM by sven »

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13127
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2008, 09:50:06 PM »
Quote
Main Entry: 1pre·serve 
Pronunciation: \pri-ˈzərv\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): pre·served; pre·serv·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Medieval Latin praeservare, from Late Latin, to observe beforehand, from Latin prae- + servare to keep, guard, observe — more at conserve
Date: 14th century
transitive verb
1: to keep safe from injury, harm, or destruction : protect
2 a: to keep alive, intact, or free from decay b: maintain
3 a: to keep or save from decomposition b: to can, pickle, or similarly prepare for future use
4: to keep up and reserve for personal or special use
intransitive verb
1: to make preserves
2: to raise and protect game for purposes of sport
3: to be able to be preserved (as by canning)
— pre·serv·abil·i·ty  \-ˌzər-və-ˈbi-lə-tē\ noun
— pre·serv·able  \-ˈzər-və-bəl\ adjective
— pres·er·va·tion  \ˌpre-zər-ˈvā-shən\ noun
— pre·serv·er  \pri-ˈzər-vər\ noun
Quote
Main Entry: sav·ior 
Variant(s): or sav·iour  \ˈsāv-yər also -ˌyȯr\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English saveour, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin salvator, from salvare to save
Date: 14th century
1: one that saves from danger or destruction
2: one who brings salvation ; specifically capitalized : jesus 1

I think this is a question for those who have English as their 1st language but my feeling is that they are almost the same but savior save from harm that is taking place. Preserver tries to keep out of the harmful situation.
One rescues. Other prevents.

Quote
i quess the translators of the king james bible or Luther just didnt know, but this guy knew and this is not correct in my view, do you know what i mean?
Picking the words that support the translators doctrine.
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

alihaymeg

  • Guest
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2008, 07:33:52 AM »
Quote
Isn't the universe (world) uncreated at the end of the ages?

Correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I understood it to say that the universe is to be recreated or simply transformed.
Is there proof otherwise?

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13127
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #5 on: December 08, 2008, 11:42:45 AM »
Proof....? Eeks!  :laughing7:

I have to admit I use regular science in my reasoning. But it doesn't seem to clash with the Bible sofar so I see no harm in using it.

Roughly I see it as this.
a] There was nothing (besides of God ofcourse)
b] Universe was created. Because matter and time are a team; time came into existance at creation. (same as the big bang model describes. And Naimodes btw)
c] Universe exists as we know it right now.
d] Renewal takes place (not so sure about that point)
e] At the end of the ages time is no more so there can't be matter anymore either.

At point e we are in the realm where God was before creation. How that realm looks I have no idea of.
There is a lengthy article about it. Of course I no longer have it  :sigh:

A few hints:
- elements melt
- all old things flee away
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

alihaymeg

  • Guest
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2008, 01:49:01 PM »
That is my understanding as well.
Oh the sweet sound of harmony!

Offline rosered

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 3691
  • Gender: Female
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2008, 04:11:01 PM »
 :thumbsup:    :happy3:
Jesus is the reward  !!

Offline sven

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 623
  • Gender: Male
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2008, 07:54:12 PM »
Darby´s english translation isnt that bad all:

revelation 22,5

And night shall not be any more, and no need of a lamp, and light of [the] sun; for [the] Lord God shall shine upon them, and they shall reign to the ages of ages.

the german version has a phrase meaning for ever and ever, Darby wasn´t an universalist therefore its amazing, that he didn´t translate forever and ever here.
for me its always interesting comparing bibles.







Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13127
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2008, 08:13:43 PM »
I think there is a reason why he didn't use forever and ever.

Jesus (and the Saints) reign for a certain amount of time
The reign ends when Son hands over everything to Father.
So indeed it ends.

The reign of the Father doesn't end. I'm not sure reign is the correct word because reign is linked to things like a kingdom. And such things are no more. Ranks and govenment are only needed when there isn't perfect harmony.

Quote
In Revelation 20-22, we have: 

Still rule (Rev_20:6; Rev_22:5)
Son still reigns (Rev_22:1-5; Rev_21:5)
Authority (Rev_21:24-25)
Power (Rev_21:24-25; Rev_22:2)
Kings (Rev_21:24-26)
Saints reign (Rev_22:5)
Second death still exists (Rev_21:8)
The nations still mortal (Rev_22:2)" 

Quote
In 1Co_15:22-28, we have:
 
No more rule
No more authority
No more power
No more enemies
No more reigning
All subjected
No more death, death destroyed
All made alive, immortal 
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline rosered

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 3691
  • Gender: Female
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2008, 08:24:03 PM »
Darby´s english translation isnt that bad all:

revelation 22,5

And night shall not be any more, and no need of a lamp, and light of [the] sun; for [the] Lord God shall shine upon them, and they shall reign to the ages of ages.

the german version has a phrase meaning for ever and ever, Darby wasn´t an universalist therefore its amazing, that he didn´t translate forever and ever here.
for me its always interesting comparing bibles.








  I agree Sven
   it is nice , I do as well like to compare the verses   in different bibles  
 
 here is an online parrallel  bible source for free , I use occasionally , not often enough though  :thumbsup:
 
 http://bible.cc/mark/10-30.htm
Jesus is the reward  !!

Offline rosered

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 3691
  • Gender: Female
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2008, 08:25:02 PM »
I think there is a reason why he didn't use forever and ever.

Jesus (and the Saints) reign for a certain amount of time
The reign ends when Son hands over everything to Father.
So indeed it ends.

The reign of the Father doesn't end. I'm not sure reign is the correct word because reign is linked to things like a kingdom. And such things are no more. Ranks and govenment are only needed when there isn't perfect harmony.

Quote
In Revelation 20-22, we have: 

Still rule (Rev_20:6; Rev_22:5)
Son still reigns (Rev_22:1-5; Rev_21:5)
Authority (Rev_21:24-25)
Power (Rev_21:24-25; Rev_22:2)
Kings (Rev_21:24-26)
Saints reign (Rev_22:5)
Second death still exists (Rev_21:8)
The nations still mortal (Rev_22:2)" 

Quote
In 1Co_15:22-28, we have:
 
No more rule
No more authority
No more power
No more enemies
No more reigning
All subjected
No more death, death destroyed
All made alive, immortal 
:thumbsup:   good word bro!!
Jesus is the reward  !!

Offline sven

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 623
  • Gender: Male
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2008, 08:43:26 PM »
Quote
I think there is a reason why he didn't use forever and ever.

but why didnt he than do so in the german translation?, Darby must have knew the meaning of aion  :dontknow:

it´s a pity, he could have banned hell and ET whole out of german bibles before the 20th century

Luther in 1545 translated sheol 58x with "hell", so the first luther bible might contain 80x the word hell!  :mshock:

the Elberfelder/ Darby Bible banned hell out the complete old testament, translated hades with hades and said it doesnt mean hell but there is both joy and pain in hades - it seems a missinterpretation of the lazarus parable, but still translated gehenna with hell, if he went one step further, it would have been a translation like the concordant literal translation

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13127
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #13 on: December 08, 2008, 08:56:49 PM »
Quote
I think there is a reason why he didn't use forever and ever.

but why didnt he than do so in the german translation?, Darby must have knew the meaning of aion  :dontknow:
Maybe he changed his mind between the two translations?
Maybe those who payed for the translation work forced him to do so?
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline sven

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 623
  • Gender: Male
Re: a bad translation
« Reply #14 on: December 08, 2008, 09:02:18 PM »
Quote
Maybe those who payed for the translation work forced him to do so?

this might be a possibility, the german revision of 1985 has footnotes concerning aion, in a later revision by christian "fundamentalists" i´ve read, they removed all this footnotes