THE CATACOMBS
You are here: Home
> Catacombs > Articles
Nine Questions from an
ISV Reader
I have
been examining the ISV of the New Testament and am finding it quite
intriguing. I would appreciate your answers to a few questions which have
risen in my mind:
1. Why
did the translator choose to feminize Love by using “she” in verses 5, 6,
and 7 of 1 Cor. 13?
Because the Greek noun is
feminine and because we are using poetry rather than prose.
2. I myself have thought
that Jesus probably did write on the ground the sins of the accusers of the
woman caught in adultery, but did not know there was any manuscript evidence
for such. Your footnote on John 8:8 indicates there is manuscript
evidence. Would you kindly identify the manuscript?
This
is a textual issue; see your textual apparatus or Metzger’s
Textual Commentary.
3. Do
you agree with the translation of John 1:5(katelaben) “…and the darkness did
not put it out.”
Yes.
4. I noted that the
translators omitted the sentence in the Lord’s Prayer “For thine is the
Kingdom, the power and the glory.” Do you believe that those words were
spoken by Jesus to conclude the Disciple’s prayer? (Matthew 6:13)
Again, this is a textual problem on which
Bible scholars disagree; our committee felt the omission to be more likely
original.
5. Why did the
translators not translate theopneustos in 2 Timothy 3:16 as “God
breathed.” Dr. Warfield of Princeton made much of the fact that the Holy
Scriptures were “breathed out” in his great study on the authority of Holy
Scriptures one hundred years ago.
I will first let you look up this one in
BDAG!
6. Do you believe Mark
16:9-20 and also John 8:1-11 were in the original autographs?
Yes, and yes.
7. Why did the
translators choose to transliterate baptizontes, baptisttheto
(Matthew 28:19; Acts 2:38) rather than translate them? Also apostolon
in Matthew 10:2?
Transliteration is a very difficult subject
as you know, especially with such theologically loaded words. We sided with
convention on this one.
8. On the front cover
of the ISV these words appear, “The most readable and accurate translation
ever produced.” I assume that this means that the ISV is superior in both
its accuracy and readability when contrasted to the NASB, ESV and all
others. I am certainly not qualified to say this statement is not true.
However, knowing that you and your peers on the translation committee must
have solid reasons for such a superlative evaluation, I would appreciate
your sharing these reasons.
That’s a publisher’s blurb. You’ll have to
ask that question elsewhere.
[The above statement was David Black's
response. Davidson Press answers that the phrase was sent to the publisher
by a reader, whose identity has long ago been forgotten. But the comparison
statement was rendered by an ISV reader, and it was appreciated so much that
it was made into a service mark for the ISV. Not that other translation
producers haven't said the same thing in previous decades about their
translations, mind you. For example, enter the phrase
"readable and accurate translation" into just about any
internet search engine and you'll see what we mean!]
9. Were the
translators unanimous in arriving at the translations of questionable words
or phrases?
Mostly, yes.
|
