RE: NIV people can't translate

From: pbrunt (pbrunt@xtra.co.nz)
Date: Sat Jun 08 2002 - 05:22:39 EDT

  • Next message: Guy Blanchet: "Re: Giving YECs the Boot"

    Jim
    As I understand it the NIV is an ideas tranlation whereas the NASB and RSV
    are more a words traslation. This introduces the idea that to get the real
    sense and meaning we should use both types of translation.

    Look up the Preachers Soapbox from Dallas Theological Seminary for a good
    explanation on translations and versions.
    Regards
    Peter Brunt

    Genesis 1:5

    (NASB) "And there was evening and there was morning, one day."
    (NIV) "And there was evening and there was morning-the first day."

    I've been thinking about this recently. What would possess the NIV
    folks to take the leap from "one day" to "the first day."? The RSV
    also uses "one day."

    Could it be that Bible translators make presuppositions. Who is
    correct? The NIV folks, or the NASB and the RSV folks?

    Certainly, both cannot be correct. The proper translation is
    either "one day" or "the first day."

    I'm going with the NASB. I guess the NIV folks just figured no one
    would notice. Wouldn't it be nice if Bible translators didn't
    promote misunderstanding? Maybe ONE DAY I'll get a chance to make
    my feelings known to someone who has decision-making power.

    Jim Eisele
    Genesis in Question
    http://genesisinquestion.org



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 08 2002 - 05:21:47 EDT