OT translation by Jewish scholars

[WhiteWings]

I just happen to think such translations are on average better than western church influenced translations.
Does someone know such a translation?

[Cardinal]

  When I go to Crosswalk.com they have a couple of Jewish bibles on there for comparison, I think. I'd google it and see what most of the Messianics or even the Orthodox for the Tanakh only, are reading. If you find one, let me know. Blessings....

[WhiteWings]

Cardinal,
I'll Google and list what I found.
It's just that I have no clue what's good and what's not. I was, and still am, hoping someone can give me a hint.
Jabcat got me a perfect NT only Bible. Now I'm looking for the perfect OT Bible.
Perfect is as good as reasonbly possible.

[WhiteWings]

http://www.jewishpub.org/product.php?id=243
Also availble as a free e-Sword module
Gen 1:5 is the first verse that's different from the 'norma;' translations.
OK- lets explain the terminology first:
Torah= Five Boks of Moses
Nevi'im= Prophets
Ketuvin= Writings

The three combined together are known by the acronym- Tanakh.

Is the Tanakh identical to the "Old testament". Nope. It is in Hebrew and the chapter breaks, verse numberings and sometimes even book splits differ from what you find in the OT- changing emphasis and meaning. On top of that, the language used carries mulitiple meanings and translators very often make errors by utilising the wrong meaning due to not being familiar with the layered meanings or the legal meaning of a word vs a popular usage vs the mystical meaning etc.

Can you get it in translation? Yep- probably the best English translation (with a summary of a few Rabbinical commentaries), is the Tanach produced by Artscroll/Metsorah publications. It can be ordered directly from their website http://www.artscroll.com or from Amazon, Barnes and Noble, a local Judaica or bookstore etc.
Source(s):
Orthodox Jew

http://www.artscroll.com/Categories/bsv.html
http://www.amazon.com/Chumash-Commentary-Bereicraph-Shemoth-Bemidbar/dp/0873060199




PC/Online versions. Free
http://www.davka.com/cgi-bin/product.cgi?product=46
http://www.davening.net/jpstanach.html
http://www.jewishsoftware.com/products/Soncino_English_Tanach__Talmud_1215.asp?bhcd2=1256627971
http://www.karaite-korner.org/tanach/index.html
http://www.judaicapress.com/product_info.php?ref=1339&products_id=221
http://www.hebrewworld.com/Rashi.html



To be continued. Hopefully...

[sven]

I own a very old German translation from Jewish scholars, under the leading of Leopold Zunz; the German "Buber-Rosenzweig" translation is a very literal translation, almost concordant as far as I know, but I don't own it.

I would say Jewish translations are also biased, not regarding the subject of hell/everlasting punishment but regarding prophecies to Christ; and Jewish translators might follow Talmudic tradition, I'm thinking about buying a Septuagint translation.

But this may be interesting for you:

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0.htm

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/63255/jewish/The-Bible-with-Rashi.htm

[Cardinal]

  WW and Sven......of course the Jews changed some of it. Jesus basically said they did. But I think this is one reason why God took them in their own craftiness by having them build the Tabernacle to His exact specifications, to be used as a pattern for the heavenly things as Heb. 10 says.

IMO, they didn't realize IT was going to bear witness against them if they changed the written, so they probably thought nothing of preserving it's pertinent scriptures. After all, they were all about the "outer show" on everything. Blessings.....

[WhiteWings]

WW and Sven......of course the Jews changed some of it. Jesus basically said they did.

Did they make changes in the actual book or in their commentaries and oral traditions?
I think all. But hope to a lesser extent the written actual "OT".

A Jewish scholar translating to English just translates the bias that's already in the Hebrew.
A, say, protestant scholar translates the biased Hebrew and adds his own bias on top of that.
Plus the Jewish scholar is likely more aware of ancient Jewish tradition/society.
Some of my personal finding from 'other angles' favor Jewish translations too.

All that combined I think gives a good possibily the translations done by Jewish scholars has a good chance to be superior to western translations. I'm not planning to buy every translation on the market so I try shift the odds into my favor a little bit. That's all.

[Cardinal]

  I think the Torah portion is perfect in it's entirety if no other reason, the Bible codes have been going on for some time, and the first 5 books are the only ones the codes consistently work on, which means, letter perfect.

Some of the hits I've seen, the statistics on probability are in a million to one or more, and they are quite detailed. Chance doesn't have a "chance", LOL. But, I do think some of the other writings in SMALL ways may have been altered a letter here or there to try to hide the Messiah AFTER He came. Remember these are people who know what the very letters themselves mean, not just the words and sentences those letters make. So literally changing a letter here or there, could make a difference to Jewish scribes.

And of course they altered interpretations with their writings and oral traditions. Blessings.... 

[jabcat]

So Card, you think some very minor tinkering here and there, but nothing that would drastically change large portions of meaning in the OT?  I've read where the manuscripts harmonized with each other like 98%, with by far, much of any discepancies being a letter left out here or there, perhaps punctuation, etc.  No scholar here, I just believe what God originally said is exactly what He meant, and the closer we can get to that the better. 

[WhiteWings]

All agreed. The main question is who has the least imperfect translation?

Anyway I'm still looking. It's not as easy as I hoped for. A zillion of useless hits on Google.
http://www.artscroll.com/Products/STGM.html is my favorite sofar. Translation plus little extra's like drawings and commentaries.

There seems to be a multi-volume version of the same translation with more commentary. But I can't find it.

[jabcat]

I'll look some more.  WW, what do you think of the Young's OT?  Also, isn't there a Concordant Version out or coming out soon?

[WhiteWings]

I'll look some more.  WW, what do you think of the Young's OT?  Also, isn't there a Concordant Version out or coming out soon?

You should ask that to Tony N.
Currently they sell the OT per book. Not all books are done yet.

As for Youngs. Certainly not bad. It's just as I wrote above, I somehow put more value in Jewish translations.
Just a feeling.
Read the 144 raving reviews on Amazon on the artscroll.com Stone translation. The only critique is that soem people want more commentaries.
But lets search a bit more. Surely there must be more than 2 translations...

[rosered]

 
  I dont know  
 
 Paul was big on preaching a  new and simpler way   to serve  God
  seem the old testament was messed with  pretty badly
 
  why would Paul point  this out to us   if it were not valuable info ?
 
 
  this old wine is  
what they get drunk on  "violent " in other words  

 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;  


 Tts 1:8   But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;  


 Tts 1:9   Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.  


 Tts 1:10  For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:  


 Tts 1:11   Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.  


 Tts 1:12   One of themselves, [even] a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians [are] alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.  


 Tts 1:13   This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;  


 Tts 1:14   Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.  


 Tts 1:15   Unto the pure all things [are] pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving [is] nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.  


 Tts 1:16   They profess that they know God; but in works they deny [him], being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.  
 

 makes me wonder alot  if  the new wine is all we should  really be drinking now ?

   what say you all ?  
 
 
 

[rosered]

i cannot find a post about  the  wine and us being wineskins ?
  it was good ,
 
 seems the old is better  to those  who  are used to it 
 

[jabcat]

So WW, moving back to your OP and what I understand to be the intent of your thread, it sounds like you've found 2 possible really good OT translations.  I didn't know if you had seen this, but it's a clip of the Stone Chamush - http://www.artscroll.com/images/insides/s/stohl-1.jpg.

Thanks, James.

[Cardinal]

So Card, you think some very minor tinkering here and there, but nothing that would drastically change large portions of meaning in the OT?  I've read where the manuscripts harmonized with each other like 98%, with by far, much of any discepancies being a letter left out here or there, perhaps punctuation, etc.  No scholar here, I just believe what God originally said is exactly what He meant, and the closer we can get to that the better. 

  Yes, I don't think there's any major tinkering done, and what was done was to try to hide the Messiah AFTER He came, so they could remain in control. The Bible code research and the Dead Sea scrolls research so far bear this witness. Blessings....

[jabcat]

   Thanks.

[rosered]

 
  Thanks Guys
  I guess WW found two different  types of writtings of the OT
   I was  wondering  what  Jewish fables are  anyways, the aprocrypha   maybe  ? 
 I am  not sure here ...........
  anyone   got any ideas   what they are ? 
 
 
 
 
 

[jabcat]

I wondered the same thing.  I did a little looking, and from what I can tell, I would describe it as not necessarily anything that's written in scripture, but how they interpreted it, pulled it out of context, added their own beliefs to it out of their own blindness.  This clip I found may be helpful;


"The New Testament church's mind set was full of examples of Jewish fables. These fables hindered the early church in carrying out the great commission. For example, in Acts 11:2-3, And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem , they that were of the circumcision contended with him. Saying Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and did eat with them.   

Eating with a Gentile was considered a sin by all the Jewish population. This fable seems very silly to us gentiles, but to the Jews it was a sin. How did this fable come to be established in the Jewish community? Lets look at Deuteronomy 7:2-6, " make no covenant with them; nor shew mercy unto them: 3) Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, or his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. 4) For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you and destroy thee suddenly.

The biggest Jewish fable is this " Only Jews or the descendants of Abraham will be saved." in Deuteronomy 7:6 For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto his self above all people that are upon the face of the earth. Did the Jews take this verse totally out of context? Yes. See Acts 11:18.   

It is unlawful for a Jew to keep company with a gentile. See Acts 10:28   

It is impossible for a gentile to receive the Holy Ghost. See Acts 10:45

It is not proper to preach the gospel to a gentile. See Acts 11:19   

Jesus addresses Jewish Fables starting with Matthew 5:17- 48 including chapters 6 and 7."

So yeah, maybe more what WW said...translations can be good or poor quality, but the oldest manuscripts very highly bear witness to each other.  It's perhaps more so their interpretations of those scriptures, their commentaries and teachings, their understandings, belief systems, myths from their distortions of truth that they held/hold to.  Could it have something as well to do with holding to the old letter of the law(s) rather than moving into the age and Spirit of grace - post-Calvary?     There's a scripture that states to this very day a veil remains on their eyes when they read the law and prophets.  Jesus also said it wasn't given them to understand.  Peter had the vision of all things now being clean, and that went against his Jewish, Old Covenant understanding.  He hadn't yet moved past the Law (in that particular portion of understanding) and into the freedom of Christ. Anyway, that's my .

God's blessing, James.

[Cardinal]

  Not going in to eat with gentiles was NOT a Jewish fable. The gentiles ate meat that was sacrificed to pagan gods, AND that meat was not prepared "kosher", ie. it still had the blood in it, which it still does today in OUR own culture, and they were told in the law not to eat blood.

God somehow penetrated me with this last one, because as long as I've cooked, I've cooked my meats first in salt water (it removes the blood, but I didn't realize that was what it was doing) before doing anything else with them. I had NO IDEA why I was doing this, it just seemed to me that I was "killing" any impurities with the salt. Blessings....

[rosered]

 

  Thanks Guys , very helpful....
  sorry   WW , when you read this tomorrow ,if i got off topic ..
 

[jabcat]

rosie, I found this too, as an example of actual Jewish fables/stories that apparently really existed.  Looks like stories apart from scripture, that it appears were things they told to teach lessons, morals, etc.

http://www.examiner.com/x-7069-Philadelphia-Judaism-Examiner~y2009m5d17-A-Jewish-fable-or-midrash-on-the-value-of-humility-from-Genesis-Rabbah-163

Quote - "A Jewish fable (or midrash) on the value of humility from Genesis Rabbah 16:3, told by Rabbi Kogan
In this delightful, pocket-sized book, Rabbi Kogan translated midrashim (Jewish fables) found in such traditional rabbinic texts as the Talmud Bavli, Tanchuma and Midrash Rabbah, among others. These texts span the rabbinic era of 300 – 700 CE.

As is true for all stories in the "fable" genre, these midrashic tales often reflect motifs found in the stories of other societies, such as Greece, Spain and Germany. In my next posting, I will share some of Rabbi Kogan's insights into the evolution and influences of Jewish fables."

Excuse me, WW, we got a little side-tracked.

[WhiteWings]

So WW, moving back to your OP and what I understand to be the intent of your thread, it sounds like you've found 2 possible really good OT translations.  I didn't know if you had seen this, but it's a clip of the Stone Chamush - http://www.artscroll.com/images/insides/s/stohl-1.jpg.

Thanks, James.

Found that James.
One oddity, for none Hebrew speakers, the book reads from what I call, back to front.

[WhiteWings]

So Card, you think some very minor tinkering here and there, but nothing that would drastically change large portions of meaning in the OT?  I've read where the manuscripts harmonized with each other like 98%, with by far, much of any discepancies being a letter left out here or there, perhaps punctuation, etc.  No scholar here, I just believe what God originally said is exactly what He meant, and the closer we can get to that the better. 

  Yes, I don't think there's any major tinkering done, and what was done was to try to hide the Messiah AFTER He came, so they could remain in control. The Bible code research and the Dead Sea scrolls research so far bear this witness. Blessings....

Then 'our' OT has been tinkered. Depends on who you ask....
If your read the reviews on Amazon you find one of a 'western woman' She's happy with the translation that has a beautiful flow and insightful commentaries and yet marginally diffrent from 'our' translations.
As a reply she gets: This proves how hard it is to bring subtilities across; because this translation is exceedingly different.

[WhiteWings]

  I dont know  
 
 Paul was big on preaching a  new and simpler way   to serve  God
  seem the old testament was messed with  pretty badly

So you suggest no OT at all?
That's a view  I can accept (not agree with). But then you never are 'allowed' to use the OT as proof to backup a NT claim. If you do so then the OT translation should be as good as possible.
Good is very subjective.

Jesus quoted from the LXX IIRC. So that's a good translation. But it's in Greek. Brenton translated it to English. I don't know how many bias was added then. But LXX-Greek may be a good source to work from.