04-29-2012, 02:16 AM
The fact that his translation isn't completely original doesn't bother me. Many of the modern day translations borrow from or build on other translations (such as Lamsa with the King James Version). I know that David Stern has a similar view of Torah observance to Andrew Roth. He admitted to getting pretty free with his translation, which I don't think is necessarily inaccurate. Here is an excerpt from David Stern's Complete Jewish Bible translation of Galatians 3:1-2,10-12-
'You stupid Galatians! Who has put you under a spell? Before your very eyes Yeshua the Messiah was clearly portrayed as having been put to death as a criminal! I want to you from you just this one thing: did you receive the Spirit by legalistic observance of Torah commands or by trusting in what you heard and being faithful to it?...For everyone who depends on legalistic observance of Torah commands lives under a curse, since it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not keep on doing everything written in the Scroll of the Torah." Now it is evident that no one comes to be declared righteous by God through legalism, since "The person who is righteous will attain life by trusting and being faithful." Furthermore, legalism is not based on trusting and being faithful, but on a [misuse of] the text that says, "Anyone who does these things will attain life through them."'
Here is the King James Version's translation of these verses:
"O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?...For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them."
To answer an earlier question: I wish to say that I am fine with both formal (word-for-word) equivalence and dynamic (thought-for-thought) equivalence. I know that Roth's translation is supposed to be a more literal translation of the Peshitta. I'm guessing that Bauscher is more dynamic?
'You stupid Galatians! Who has put you under a spell? Before your very eyes Yeshua the Messiah was clearly portrayed as having been put to death as a criminal! I want to you from you just this one thing: did you receive the Spirit by legalistic observance of Torah commands or by trusting in what you heard and being faithful to it?...For everyone who depends on legalistic observance of Torah commands lives under a curse, since it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not keep on doing everything written in the Scroll of the Torah." Now it is evident that no one comes to be declared righteous by God through legalism, since "The person who is righteous will attain life by trusting and being faithful." Furthermore, legalism is not based on trusting and being faithful, but on a [misuse of] the text that says, "Anyone who does these things will attain life through them."'
Here is the King James Version's translation of these verses:
"O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?...For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them."
To answer an earlier question: I wish to say that I am fine with both formal (word-for-word) equivalence and dynamic (thought-for-thought) equivalence. I know that Roth's translation is supposed to be a more literal translation of the Peshitta. I'm guessing that Bauscher is more dynamic?