The Mistranslation Argument

[omega2xx]

Every so often when debating an issue that depends on the support of Biblical scripture someone will bring up the point that some critical word in the Bible is mistranslated, leading to the wrong impression of the scripture. However, whatever one thinks the proper translation may be, the fact remains that the "incorrect" word is what the faithful reader is being led to believe is true: his Bible is misleading him. In short, it's untrustworthy.

One such case involves Isaiah 45:7 where God declares he creates evil.

(KJV)
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."​

Those objecting to this translation of the Hebrew רַ רַע (ra`) as "evil" say the proper translation should be something else (there are several notions as to what it should be* ). In any case, the Bible in which this supposed incorrect "evil" appears in Isaiah 45:7 continues to mislead hundreds of thousands (millions?) of Christians as to the true character of God. Hardly a decent thing to do.

Worse yet, it leads to the conclusion that if this one translation can be wrong and misleading, who's to say that the translations of other Hebrew and Greek words in the Bible can't be wrong?---some of them having gone unnoticed and perhaps quite critical to one's theology. It does no good to argue, as has been done, that such errors in translation are insignificant or meaningless to the over all message, because one doesn't actually know this to be the case. It would be wishful thinking at its most desperate. It's also sometimes argued that a particular word has to be correct because it also appears in the same context in different passages. But this only points to a translator's objective to be consistent. One wouldn't expect different words to be used to describe the same subject.

Moreover, given the assertion that Biblical scripture was at least inspired by God, one has to ask why these mistaken translations appear in the Bible at all. One can only conclude that either God was only concerned with the faith of those people contemporaneous with the Biblical writings and that He doesn't care that errors pop up in subsequent translations, OR he's incapable of insuring his word remains true to his intended meanings. Got your pick it seems.


*Translations of the Hebrew רַ רַע (ra`) in Isaiah 45:7 in 30 versions of the Bible.

"Bad times"........ 1.... 3%
"Calamity"...........3... 10%
"Disaster(s)"........5... 16%
"Discord".............1.... 3%
"Doom"................1.... 3%
"Evil"..................14.. 47%
"Hard times" .......1.... 3%
"Troubles"............2.... 6%
"Woe" ..................2.... 6%​

Am I right or am I right!


.

I am sure you figures are right but you have not give the full story.

Many Hebrew words have more than one meaning. Then then it becomes necessary to rely on the expertise of the translator. Also, as the scholars became more proficient in the language, later revisions changed some of the words.

For example the KJ says "you shall not kill." Now scholars know the word actually means "you shall not murder," and all good translations have made that correction. The KJ has "evil" in Isa 45:7; all good translations now have "calamity." If any one is really interested, there are resources that discuss the meaning of Hebrew words,


You also failed to tell us which versions use the various words. l It is doubtful that all 30 you referenced are actual translations of the Bible. Thee is a good chance some of them arr paraphrases, which are not meant to be 100% accurate. It is also very likely that some of the translators were not well qualified to do Hebrew to English translation. For example the JW bible was done by 4 men and only one of them knew Hebrew but he was not an expert in the language, and I bet on of the 30 you mention is their Bible.

So you exercise is just an effort in futility, unless you give all the information necessary to make a good decision.

 

[savagewind]

Then then it becomes necessary to rely on the expertise of the translator.

Psalms 146:3
Isaiah 2:22
Jeremiah 17:5

Rely is a lot like the word depend. If you rely on someone for help, you also depend on her. But rely is even more powerful! When you rely on someone, you have total faith and trust that she will come through. It comes from the Latin word religare which means "to fasten or bind."

 

[omega2xx]

Psalms 146:3
Isaiah 2:22

Now we must rely on God that He inspired Paul to write 2 Tim 3:16. There is a big difference on relying on man to tell us something that is true, than in trusting that God, through men, He inspired to tell us the truth.

This is the main reason liberal theology is false. It has men telling what in the Bible is inspired by God and what is not. The Bible is full of warning about false prophets, false teachers and false christs. The only way we can identify them is by what they teach. Is it from God's word or from them selves.

You might want to add Jn 2:24 to your list.

 

[savagewind]

@omega2xx Did God inspire Paul to write that New Testament scripture is all inspired and that all translated scripture is inspired, or are you adding those to it? Are YOU inspired? Why or why not?

 

[savagewind]

Every fool should realize that "all scripture inspired" refers only to each scripture which was written with God's will be done in mind. When you ever get in sync with it, you will not champion false words any more.

 

[rosends]

one has to ask why these mistaken translations appear in the Bible at all. One can only conclude that either God was only concerned with the faith of those people contemporaneous with the Biblical writings and that He doesn't care that errors pop up in subsequent translations,
.

Just a side note about mistranslations -- here is one reason given in the Bereishis Rabba

R. Samuel b. Nahman said in R. Jonathan's name: When Moses was engaged in writing the Torah, he had to write the work of each day. When he came to the verse, AND GOD SAID: LET US MAKE MAN, etc., he said: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Why dost Thou furnish an excuse to heretics?’ ‘Write,’ replied He; ' Whoever wishes to err may err.’
-------------------

The text was given to the audience it was intended for, along with the tools to understand it and the theological context for which it can make sense. The fact that others can find other things in it? God has already said, "Whoever wishes to err may err."

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Your statistics may be right, but you understanding is way off.

Evil was not created, it came into being because of disobedience. All of the good translations translate the word as "calamity."

Isn't the difference between evil and intentionally inflicted calamity really just hair-splitting?

It's all fine and good to figure out the specific word the author intended, but I don't see how this semantic quibble really addresses the underlying issue that people are getting at when they cite this verse.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Every fool should realize that "all scripture inspired" refers only to each scripture which was written with God's will be done in mind. When you ever get in sync with it, you will not champion false words any more.

I always took "all scripture" to mean "whatever the author (presumably Paul) considered to be 'scripture' at the time that he wrote his letter."

 

[savagewind]

I always took "all scripture" to mean "whatever the author (presumably Paul) considered to be 'scripture' at the time that he wrote his letter."

Maybe. It is obvious by reading the context that it means, "15From infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures," therefore "all scripture" is what Timothy knew from his believing mother and grandmother.

5I am reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also. 2 Timothy 1:5

What it isn't is scripture which was written after that. It is not as though God became silent, but why not consider this? When he opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour.

Anywho......those who wrote scripture before Jesus Christ (not his real name) were under a covenant with God, therefore what they wrote was all inspired of God because God was with them.

Show me where it is written that your Jesus instituted another convenant.....or is it merely assumed?

 

[savagewind]

The importance of the scripture which THEY use to prove the Bible is God's words is that what God says is fine for "teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness". What it isn't important for is to prove to people that everything in the Bible is the truth.

Poor Paul (or whoever wrote 2 Timothy 3:16) because the writing of it sent the world off course due to the misunderstandings. Whoever would use what someone wrote under inspiration in a bad way is doing the opposite of helping a least one of The Lord. They be goats.

For instance, if I wrote something and you took it the wrong way and ran with it, even sharing it, it would be a real insult to me. Wouldn't it?

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

The Hebrew Verb – רָעַע/רַע – raʿaʿ/raʿ; Masculine Noun – רָע/רַע – raʿ; and Feminine Noun – רָעָה – raʿah all share one thing in common, they all mean “evil,” “wicked,” “bad,” etc. The very thought of the “Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Calamity” is completely absurd.

There are in fact Hebrew words used in the Hebrew Scriptures which can accurately be translated “calamity” such as – שׁוֹאָה – shoʾah and – אָסוֹן – ʾason; however – רָע/רַע/רָעַע/רָעָה – all mean “evil.”

The bottom line is that the God of Israel is the Creator of all things, including evil. If chr-stians believe that someone other than God created evil, who is this other creator that they believe in? And by believing that someone other than God created anything, including, but not limited to evil, doesn’t that prove that they are polytheistic?

 

[omega2xx]

Isn't the difference between evil and intentionally inflicted calamity really just hair-splitting?

No. God caused calamities to make the Jews return to him. That is a good thing.

It's all fine and good to figure out the specific word the author intended, but I don't see how this semantic quibble really addresses the underlying issue that people are getting at when they cite this verse.

It is not semantics. God is not the author of evil. So the word used in the proper context can mean evil in the Isaiah verse.

 

[omega2xx]

The Hebrew Verb – רָעַע/רַע – raʿaʿ/raʿ; Masculine Noun – רָע/רַע – raʿ; and Feminine Noun – רָעָה – raʿah all share one thing in common, they all mean “evil,” “wicked,” “bad,” etc. The very thought of the “Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Calamity” is completely absurd.

There are in fact Hebrew words used in the Hebrew Scriptures which can accurately be translated “calamity” such as – שׁוֹאָה – shoʾah and – אָסוֹן – ʾason; however – רָע/רַע/רָעַע/רָעָה – all mean “evil.”

The bottom line is that the God of Israel is the Creator of all things, including evil. If chr-stians believe that someone other than God created evil, who is this other creator that they believe in? And by believing that someone other than God created anything, including, but not limited to evil, doesn’t that prove that they are polytheistic?

God did not create evil. Evil is not a create thing. Adam and EVE brought evil into God's world when they disobeyed God.

 

[omega2xx]

@omega2xx Did God inspire Paul to write that New Testament scripture is all inspired and that all translated scripture is inspired, or are you adding those to it? Are YOU inspired? Why or why not?

I don't write Scripture. I accept what the Bible says. If you don't tell God, not me.

 

[allfoak]

Every so often when debating an issue that depends on the support of Biblical scripture someone will bring up the point that some critical word in the Bible is mistranslated, leading to the wrong impression of the scripture. However, whatever one thinks the proper translation may be, the fact remains that the "incorrect" word is what the faithful reader is being led to believe is true: his Bible is misleading him. In short, it's untrustworthy.

Yup.
The change that was made to Luke 17:21 changes the entire nature of Christianity.
There are others.
We won't even go into all of the verses that have been removed.

 

[allfoak]

God did not create evil. Evil is not a create thing. Adam and EVE brought evil into God's world when they disobeyed God.

God says he created evil.
Isaiah 45:7

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No. God caused calamities to make the Jews return to him. That is a good thing.

Whether the ends are good is debatable, but we're still talking about evil means.

It is not semantics. God is not the author of evil. So the word used in the proper context can mean evil in the Isaiah verse.

If your god is the cause of suffering, and if he did this wilfully, then your god is evil.

 

[savagewind]

I don't write Scripture. I accept what the Bible says. If you don't tell God, not me.

I do not think you do accept what was written and has morphed into "the Bible".

"The Bible says" is many things and each person or fundamental group accepts the same scripture says different things. It is probably why it is written.......Psalms 146:3 and Proverbs 3:5

And how do I accept Psalms 146:3 means what it says? God told me. I think that God does not speak to you or you hear only what you believe the Bible says.

 

[Skwim]

Yup.
The change that was made to Luke 17:21 changes the entire nature of Christianity.
There are others.
We won't even go into all of the verses that have been removed.

Curious; what was the change in Luke 17:21?


.

 

[allfoak]

Curious; what was the change in Luke 17:21?

The kingdom of heaven is within you is how it was originally translated.
Now it says among you or in your midst.

The kingdom is to be found within.
Know thyself