CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholic Continuing Education > Teaching Series - Bible Study
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 24th May 2008, 01:57 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,603
Default Comparison of select verses

Gensis 1:2

NJB: Now the earth was a formless void, there was darkness over the deep, with a divine wind sweeping over the waters.

JB: Now the earth was a formless void, there was darkness over the deep, and God's spirit hovered over the water.

RSV-CE1: The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. [footnote: or wind]

NAB (1970): the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss, while a mighty wind swept over the waters.

Challoner: And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.

Rheims: And the earth was void & vacant, and darkness was upon the face of the depth: and the Spirit of God moved over the waters.

Wycliff: Forsothe the erthe was idel and voide, and derknessis weren on the face of depthe; and the Spiryt of the Lord was borun on the watris.

CPDV: But the earth was empty and unoccupied, and darknesses were over the face of the abyss; and so the Spirit of God was brought over the waters.

Clementine (1598 ): Terra autem erat inanis et vacua, et tenebrę erant super faciem abyssi: et Spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas.

Hebrew interlinear: and the earth she-became chaos and vacancy and darkness over surfaces-of abyss and spirit-of Elohim vibrating over surfaces-of the waters
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 24th May 2008, 05:45 PM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

Ron,

Are you going to keep this one going or are we suppose to add to it?

N.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 24th May 2008, 07:25 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,603
Default

post whatever comments on this subject you would like.

[my mistake: let's keep this discussion focused on translation issues.]

let's discuss this verse and the different translations of it before we move on.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 24th May 2008, 09:07 PM
Rob Rob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sicily, Italy
Posts: 966
Default

Why does the NAB version misses entirely a reference to God, mentioning only a wind?

NAB (1970): the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss, while a mighty wind swept over the waters.

All other versions do at least mention God, or Lord or Elohim, but this version does not.
__________________
For to me, to live is Christ; and to die is gain (Phil 1:21)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 24th May 2008, 09:22 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,603
Default

Modern scholars translate and interpret Scripture without faith, as if the text were the same as any ancient text. Thus they have a tendency to give the translation that requires the least amount of faith.

powerful wind would be a tenable reading of the Hebrew, if this were not a verse in the Bible.

Notice that the NJB has 'divine wind' which is a type of absurd compromise between Spirit of God and powerful wind. But of course a wind cannot really be Divine. The result is worse than saying powerful wind.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 24th May 2008, 09:29 PM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

NJB: Now the earth was a formless void, there was darkness over the deep, with a divine wind sweeping over the waters.

~"formless void" in one sense seems to imply that the elements of the earth were not yet firmly set into place. "Darkness over the deep" could also mean a lack of life in the oceans. "divine wind" seems more eloquent but it is erroneous.

JB: Now the earth was a formless void, there was darkness over the deep, and God's spirit hovered over the water.

~"God's spirit" is much better than "divine wind"

RSV-CE1: The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. [footnote: or wind]

~"Spirit of God" is the most insightful in the Catholic understanding of God and the Trinity.

NAB (1970): the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss, while a mighty wind swept over the waters.

~"wasteland" is nice since it gives the reader a picture in his mind of what the earth must have been at that time. "abyss" is more eloquent.

Challoner: And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.

Rheims: And the earth was void & vacant, and darkness was upon the face of the depth: and the Spirit of God moved over the waters.

~I'm surprised Challoner lowercased "spirit"

Wycliff: Forsothe the erthe was idel and voide, and derknessis weren on the face of depthe; and the Spiryt of the Lord was borun on the watris.

~does anyone know what "idel" & "borun" means?

CPDV: But the earth was empty and unoccupied, and darknesses were over the face of the abyss; and so the Spirit of God was brought over the waters.

~in Ron's notes he mentioned that Spirit of God was brought over the waters; passive tense

Clementine (1598 ): Terra autem erat inanis et vacua, et tenebrę erant super faciem abyssi: et Spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas.

~"ferebatur" is the passive tense of the Latin verb

Hebrew interlinear: and the earth she-became chaos and vacancy and darkness over surfaces-of abyss and spirit-of Elohim vibrating over surfaces-of the waters

~"she" is interesting it implies the earth is recieving its existence from God. "Elohim" if I recall correctly was a Hebrew word for deities or angels, in other words higher beings than humans but lower than the One God. They had no understanding of the Trinity.

Last edited by Climacus Areopagite : 24th May 2008 at 09:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 24th May 2008, 09:48 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,603
Default

Climacus

you are interpreting these verses based on differences between the translations which might not be justified by the source text.

I don't know if Challoner lowercased 'spirit'; that may be merely due to the particular online edition that I was citing.

The purpose of comparing these verses is to discuss different translation approaches and their strengths and weakness, not to give an interpretation of each variation in the wording.

I don't think your explanation of Elohim is correct.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 24th May 2008, 10:04 PM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
Climacus

you are interpreting these verses based on differences between the translations which might not be justified by the source text.

I don't know if Challoner lowercased 'spirit'; that may be merely due to the particular online edition that I was citing.

The purpose of comparing these verses is to discuss different translation approaches and their strengths and weakness, not to give an interpretation of each variation in the wording.

I don't think your explanation of Elohim is correct.

Ok, Ron I got carried away. I didnt realize I was intrepreting based on differences. Its true though that different translations can lend different & deeper insights into the truth expressed, right?

What is the criteria for judging strengths and weaknesses in various translations?

In any case I usually dont use this many versions anyway.

So does Elohim refer to God? I think I was taught Elohim refers to angels by some modern scholar in some book, so I'm not surprised.

N.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 24th May 2008, 10:38 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,603
Default

Its true though that different translations can lend different & deeper insights into the truth expressed, right?

Yes, you are right about that. Generally, I find your interpretations of Scripture to be faith-based and insightful.

What is the criteria for judging strengths and weaknesses in various translations?

Well, we will get into that as we go along.


So does Elohim refer to God? I think I was taught Elohim refers to angels by some modern scholar in some book, so I'm not surprised.

No, not specifically to angels. It is a word used by the Jews to refer specifically to the one God. It is grammatically plural, but does not imply that there is more than one God. The word is understood by Christians to refer implicitly to God as Three yet One, since the world is plural but yet used as if singular.

Elohim is the third word in Genesis, referring to the Creator of heaven and earth: in the beginning, Elohim created heaven and earth.

As is common in modern Biblical scholarship, there is a tendency to interpret and translate in a way that is faith-less and even which undermines faith.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 24th May 2008, 11:18 PM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

Now I see about the term Elohim. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.