Translation vs. Interpretation

[Difflugia]

When choosing a translation, what kinds of interpretations by the translators are legitimate and what aren't?

Aside from acknowledged paraphrases, most Bible translations present themselves as being some combination of accurate and readable. What kinds of decisions sacrifice accuracy beyond what is reasonable? When is it reasonable for a translator to interpret potentially confusing ambiguity?

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 8 by Eloi]

The fact remains that the translation as "freedom" is entirely consistent with the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry while "forgiveness" is not. "Freedom" from committing sin is what Jesus had in mind throughout the gospel preached by Him during His ministry. From Luke 4:18 through Matthew 26:28.

In Luke 4:18 Jesus is speaking about the reason for which He was "anointed" - to FREE the captives.
In John 8 Jesus explains that those who abide in His word are made FREE from committing sin.
In Matthew 26:26 Jesus continues the same theme when He speaks of FREEdom from committing sin.

Jesus is consistent throughout.

It is only your biases that keeps you insisting that the correct translation is "forgiveness". There is nothing in Matthew 26:28 other than "biases or preconceived ideas" that would lead anyone to choose a translation of "forgiveness". It is inconsistent with the gospel preached by Jesus.

[Eloi]

[Replying to post 11 by WeSee]

That is not right, you are trying to give the word the meaning you think is the right one, but you are not taking the context in account. Translating is not a task for everyone ... Many people think they can rectify versions and translations of the Bible without even knowing the grammar of their own language.

[Difflugia]

How about changing gender-specific language to gender-neutral?

Matthew 25:40 reads in the ESV:

And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

NIV:

“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

NRSV:

And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’

The Greek is "τῶν ἀδελφῶν μου," or, "the brothers of me."

If Jesus meant to include women (as I'm certain He did), is "brothers and sisters" or "members of my family" justified in a translation that isn't considered a paraphrase?

[Eloi]

[Replying to post 13 by Difflugia]
He said BROTHERS not brothers and sisters. Obviously he was reffering to both men and women, but in Greek it is not necessary to say both to mean it. Translation is not about modern ideas that need to be included in the Bible, but about translating and interpreting the text as originally written.

I think that is a ridiculous argument to add to the Bible what it does not say. I am not misogenous or anything like that; the point is that is a question about interpretation, NOT TRANSLATION.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 12 by Eloi]

Actually I am taking the context into the account and I've backed it up with examples. You on the other hand speak of context and thus far have only backed it up with your conviction in your "biases and preconceived ideas". Actually back it up with examples if you're going to continue making that assertion.

Many people think they can rectify versions and translations of the Bible without even knowing the grammar of their own language.

This seems to be an underhanded way of claiming that I don't know "the grammar of [my] own language". I'll match my knowledge of English against yours any day. Especially given that you wrote "sintax" multiple times instead of "syntax" in your first post on this thread.

[Eloi]

Before going to the bigger context, go to the closest one, or you may miss a lot ...

How many languages do you speak? Just curiosity ... not need to answer if you don't want.

My first language is Spanish. I speak other languages too ... but this is not about me or you; what I said was not about you ... but now you are trying to personalize the debate. Focus on the thread and stop doing that.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 16 by Eloi]

As I said:
"Actually I am taking the context into the account and I've backed it up with examples. You on the other hand speak of context and thus far have only backed it up with your conviction in your 'biases and preconceived ideas'. Actually back it up with examples if you're going to continue making that assertion."

[Eloi]

That you say. These are the closer contexts:

1) freedom to the captives

2) forgiveness of sins

Same greek word, different correct meanings.

[WeSee]

That you say. These are the closer contexts:

1) freedom to the captives

2) forgiveness of sins

Same greek word, different correct meanings.

What exactly is that supposed to prove? It brings absolutely nothing of substance.

To illustrate:

1)freedom to the captives

2)freedom from sins

Same greek word, same literal meaning.

You're insisting on substituting a figurative translation for the literal translation even though there is nothing in the immediate context that calls for it.

[Eloi]

One word can have LITERALLY two or more meanings, like "bank" in English.

I have other things to do now. Have a good day.