07-08-2008, 07:27 PM
Shlama all,
By Akhi Dawid's logic, a translation of the Hebrew Bible by an atheist should be more reliable than one done by an orthodox Jew; a Greek NT translation by a Greek primacist should be less reliable than a Greek NT translated by an Aramaic primacist.
Please correct me if I am wrong.I know theology is not the main issue for Dawid, but the primacy issue is not really relevant or emotionally important to those with no theology whatsoever, so such translators should be sought out to translate The Bible, for whom its text has no personal significance or ramifications.
Such logic seems fallacious to me. I would think that the more important the text is to the translator, the more seriously the translator will take the task of translating, and conversely, the less important it is to him or her, the less will be the concern for accuracy and precision.
If a person could "care less", he will be "careless".
If he is motivated by great care, he will be "careful".
This is common sense.
Objectivity is overrated; it is also falsely touted by opponents of a particular viewpoint to recommend the opposite viewpoint, as if they are indifferent to said viewpoint.
Since when is a Greek primacist indifferent to Peshitta primacy? Is such a person immune to bias, especially in such a work as translating The New Testament? Would not a Greek primacist lean toward toning down any possible superior readings in The Peshitta if he were translating it, as compared to the Greek, and give preference (even if unconsciously) to Greek readings?
What was Murdock thinking when he consistently translated "Marya" as "Lord" 239 times in The New Testament? That is exactly the same as any translation of the Greek reading "Kurios" would produce. Etheridge did the same. Is that objectivity, or simple Greek bias? They assumed Greek "Kurios" was behind the Aramaic "Marya" (Lord Yehovah) and therfore translated the Greek term and ignored the Aramaic name, supplying the Greek title "Lord,Master".
This kind of bias is easily demonstrated in Etheridge and Murdock.
Dave
By Akhi Dawid's logic, a translation of the Hebrew Bible by an atheist should be more reliable than one done by an orthodox Jew; a Greek NT translation by a Greek primacist should be less reliable than a Greek NT translated by an Aramaic primacist.
Please correct me if I am wrong.I know theology is not the main issue for Dawid, but the primacy issue is not really relevant or emotionally important to those with no theology whatsoever, so such translators should be sought out to translate The Bible, for whom its text has no personal significance or ramifications.
Such logic seems fallacious to me. I would think that the more important the text is to the translator, the more seriously the translator will take the task of translating, and conversely, the less important it is to him or her, the less will be the concern for accuracy and precision.
If a person could "care less", he will be "careless".
If he is motivated by great care, he will be "careful".
This is common sense.
Objectivity is overrated; it is also falsely touted by opponents of a particular viewpoint to recommend the opposite viewpoint, as if they are indifferent to said viewpoint.
Since when is a Greek primacist indifferent to Peshitta primacy? Is such a person immune to bias, especially in such a work as translating The New Testament? Would not a Greek primacist lean toward toning down any possible superior readings in The Peshitta if he were translating it, as compared to the Greek, and give preference (even if unconsciously) to Greek readings?
What was Murdock thinking when he consistently translated "Marya" as "Lord" 239 times in The New Testament? That is exactly the same as any translation of the Greek reading "Kurios" would produce. Etheridge did the same. Is that objectivity, or simple Greek bias? They assumed Greek "Kurios" was behind the Aramaic "Marya" (Lord Yehovah) and therfore translated the Greek term and ignored the Aramaic name, supplying the Greek title "Lord,Master".
This kind of bias is easily demonstrated in Etheridge and Murdock.
Dave