Mistranslations of the OSB
- I just wanted to know has anyone noticed the mistranslations in the first few chaters of Genesis in the Orthodox Study Bible? If i'm wrong, which I hope I am, please let me know. The mistranslations that I noticed are:
Genesis 3:15 & Genesis 4:8
I especially noticed that Genesis 4:8 is omitting a specific passage found in the Septuagint where Cain tells Able "Let's go out to the field." This phrase is missing from the Orthodox Study Bible, but is clearly present in the Septuagint. What's going on?
Peter A. Papoutsis
This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information intended only for the addressee named above. If you are not the addressee or the intended recipient of this message, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the addressee, then be notified hereby that any dissemination or duplication of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please telephone us immediately, return the message to the sender, and delete the original message from your system.
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Ken Penner" <ken.penner@...> wrote:
> POxy.ï»¿237 vii 37-38 (2nd century CE) seems to mention an hERMENEUS(court interpreter).
> á¼Îºá½³Î»ÎµÏ [ÏÎµ]Î½ Î´Î¹á¾½ [á¼`Ï]Î¼Î·Î½á½³ÏÏ Î±á½Ïá½´Î½ á¼Î»ÎµÎ³ÏÎ¸á¿Î½Î±Î¹http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text.jsp?doc=P.Oxy.+237&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.05.0181
This is good evidence that they did use court interpreters, at least
sometimes. I don't have time to read the context before I leave on a
week-long trip, so I have not been able to verify whether that
interpeter mentioned is courtroom staff, or an interpreter mentioned
in the events narrated in the legal document. I'm not even sure
whether the quoted text is from the case immediately at hand or from
Teitian's Memorandum. Perhaps you would be willing to add your own
interpretation of the context.
So it may not yet quite be evidence that they "would have used
interpreters for the trials of even (by their
standards) insignificant persons." But it is at the very least a good
> Ken M. Penner, Ph.D.the 30s.
> Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies,
> Acadia Divinity College
> Matthew Johnson wrote:
> "We should presume that, if we have any historical evidence that they
> would have used interpreters for the trials of even (by their
> standards) insignificant persons. I never saw such evidence in my
> classics/history classes. Instead, I always presumed that like so many
> other conquerers in history, they simply expected others to use the
> language of the conqueror, much like the Japanese in East Asia in
> "So if you could point out such evidence, that would be a valuable
> contribution to the thread."