ALPB Forum Online

ALPB => Your Turn => Topic started by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 16, 2022, 07:16:44 AM

Title: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 16, 2022, 07:16:44 AM
I've recently completed reading the English Standard Version (ESV) in chronological sequence, as presented in the Today's Light Bible. The chronological order of reading is at the end of the book for those who are interested.

I'm now starting on a leisurely reading of the Holy Bible, Evangelical Heritage Version (EHV) from Northwestern Publishing House (2019). I would note my thanks to the layman who gave me this copy.

I will share thoughts about the translation and publication on this thread. If others are reading this new translation, I invite them also to share their thoughts. And as always, where persons wish to comment on topics relevant to the thread, I hope they will.

GENESIS 1
The text is published in a single column and in paragraph format with content headers in the body of the text. The Bible paper is light grey, making the print clear without glare. Very readable. The footer includes a two sentence introduction to Genesis, regarding authorship, date, and contents. There are translator notes at the foot of the page in a smaller font. If there are other features like this as I read, I may comment on them. Otherwise, this should be enough to describe the basic appearance of the text.
1:9 The text includes a sentence from the Septuagint manuscripts, marked off by half brackets.
1:27 Set as poetry.
2:1 "along with everything in them." Footnote says, "Literally all their armies." The text presents a freer translation; the footnote is more literal, though I think the word for "armies" is actually singular in the Hebrew.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Jim Butler on February 16, 2022, 09:44:01 AM
Among some of the WELS people I know, the EHV is often referred to as the "John Brug Version." A few years ago, there was an overture to their convention asking the WELS to come up with their own translation. This was voted down after Northwestern Publishing said it would be too expensive of an undertaking. Brug disagreed and launched this project. IIRC, many of the translators and editors were parish pastors. Brug was convinced that the WELS training was good enough so that their pastors could actually do this kind of work.

I used it for my devotions a couple of years ago. It struck me as a solid contribution.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 16, 2022, 11:33:39 AM
Among some of the WELS people I know, the EHV is often referred to as the "John Brug Version." A few years ago, there was an overture to their convention asking the WELS to come up with their own translation. This was voted down after Northwestern Publishing said it would be too expensive of an undertaking. Brug disagreed and launched this project. IIRC, many of the translators and editors were parish pastors. Brug was convinced that the WELS training was good enough so that their pastors could actually do this kind of work.

I used it for my devotions a couple of years ago. It struck me as a solid contribution.

It is likely a very good and worthwhile translation. I was looking forward to exploring it but wanted to finish my chronological reading.

I think that capable pastors would do a good job translating, especially if they were able to consult with more expert persons. Pastors hear the lay person's manner of speaking more than the experts and I think that would help with readability.

I will also be interested to see how they handle issues and passages along the way. I'm not aware of any controversy surrounding the work.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 17, 2022, 10:01:28 AM
Genesis 2:4
"Development" is a different choice for translating a key word in Genesis (toledoth). I searched on Bible Gateway and found that EHV consistently uses this translation throughout Genesis. I wonder whether anyone has seen this translation in other versions. It perhaps signals the independence these translators have for exploring possibilities.
2:7 "living being." The more widely used translations also move away from KJV "living soul" for this passage. EHV does use "soul" often throughout the work.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 18, 2022, 08:35:50 AM
Genesis 3:24
EHV has "in front of the Garden" rather than "east of the garden" as in most translations. The NIV has " in front" in a footnote.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: therevev on February 18, 2022, 09:56:04 AM
Please keep this up. I don't have any experience with the EHV, but I appreciate how you look at the word usage.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 19, 2022, 08:47:58 AM
Genesis 4:1
Translated quite literally, "I have gotten a man with the LORD." Luther's translation is footnoted as well as a Targum about the angel of the LORD. Both hint that Eve has messianic expectations.
4:5--6 Instead of the literal "face fallen," their freer translations are, "his face showed it [anger]" and "angry look on your face?" These examples, just verses apart, show the range of the translators. They are not following one approach strictly but choose literal or idiomatic style as they consider readability.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 21, 2022, 08:35:35 AM
Genesis 5:24
"Enoch walked with God. Then, he was not there, for God took him." A reasonable, conservative rendering.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 22, 2022, 08:41:31 AM
Genesis 6
This section includes interpretive footnotes that go beyond the typical translation footnotes. They regard "sons of God" (2:2; Sethites) and the Nephilim (2:4), described as "powerful, famous men (v. 4c). They choose the traditional transliteration "gopher wood" (v. 14) over translating as cypress, which is footnoted as a popular interpretation.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 23, 2022, 08:53:12 AM
Genesis 7:3
Half brackets here, including text from the Septuagint based on a proposed scribal error.
7:6 A footnote gives "deluge" as an alternative for "flood." Do any recent translations use "deluge"?
7:15, 21 Footnotes state the literal reading "all flesh"; the body text translates with "all the animals" and "all living creatures." Why not translate both in the same way?
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on February 24, 2022, 07:54:19 AM
Genesis 8:19
"Species by species" in the body text; "Literally by their families" in the footnote. It clarifies that narrow scientific species are not intended but this is, I think, an unusual choice. Others have families or kinds, typically.
8:21 "the thoughts he forms in his heart." This is a freer translation. The verb "forms" is supplied. The singular noun for thought in Hebrew is usually translated "intention" or "inclination."
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 01, 2022, 08:52:36 AM
Genesis 10:5
This passage is variously translated in the different versions. EHV has "peoples" where others have "Gentiles"; "ethnic groups" where others have "clans" or "families."
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 03, 2022, 09:00:59 AM
Genesis 11:13
Extensive footnote about textual issues in the Septuagint. The translation team seems to show special interest in the Septuagint and its variants.
12:8 "proclaimed the name of the Lord," literally, "called on." This is a common expression in Hebrew that, I think, typically describes prayer. The EHV presents passages with this expression as examples of preaching. Cf. Genesis 4:26.

I looked over Holladay's lexicon and could not find a specific example translated "proclaimed" when the verb appears with the preposition. I searched other translations and found no other examples of translating this passage as "proclaimed." This appears to be a unique understanding of the idiom. I invite others to share further examples if they are aware of them.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 10, 2022, 07:51:11 AM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Harvey_Mozolak on March 10, 2022, 09:19:16 AM
"silver-used-as-money"...  hyphens used as word connectors...

I suppose for an archeologist or someone studying the history of money or cultural economics... for them the distinction between translations of terms is helpful.  But some words have nothing to do with theology or any salvic content of Scripture and should be treated as such.  In fact, do we know if the material cited was actual silver, what quality of silver by our present day standards or just something that looked like silver but really was another mineral (if there is such a thing comparable to fool's gold)? 

This topic of yours is interesting to follow because it does heighten our understanding of the products of translators. Thank you.  It would also be interesting to know what standards are used and subscribed to by translators and how well they followed them and any discussion or decision making that went on as the translation was accepted for print. 
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: peter_speckhard on March 10, 2022, 09:32:49 AM
I, too, just want to chime in and say this thread is extremely interesting. Please keep it up.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Jim Butler on March 10, 2022, 09:33:02 AM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.

The NIV, ESV, CSB, and NASB all translate the word as money. I'm wondering if the footnote is necessary.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Harvey_Mozolak on March 10, 2022, 10:10:55 AM
Just a small for instance that can and be and is argued vociferously.  In Psalm One, "blessed is the man" or "blessed is the one" or "blessed are those" (etc.) is often argued on the basis of the Hebrew text which uses man and in the male sense the psalm can be applied strongly to a Messianic reading that sees the man as Christ-- hopefully I have stated that correctly.  But if one reads it in only a male sense or only as a single male to reference only Christ then the psalm might not, as clearly, speak to us as those who are called to walk the blessed path that God reveals and of course reveals uniquely and perfectly in Christ.  So it really should be a BOTH CHRIST AND US reading if one takes the second approach.   I like to avoid using man/men unless they are referring specifically to a male or several males and not including female reference.  On the face of it, I assume there is nothing intrinsically wrong with that. We do not have to make English into Hebrew (or Greek).  So a reading that says "Blessed is the one" can refer to the Christian's path and the path of Christ.  Unless one uses a hyphen and says "One/one".   Christological references or messianic prophecy is not a question of capitalization in the Hebrew.  In another topic we have been talking about imprecatory psalms and how much they can only mean (in Bonhoeffer fashion) the prayers/songs of Christ or how much they can mean our prayer for justice, abatement and conquest of evil or just, even in some extreme fashion-- "Heaven, bash in the heads of infants!"  ...or some other measurement on the sliding scale of good applied to evil.  The psalter gets loved in its Psalm 23 tones but has many difficult verses throughout that are best chanted before God and each other allowing God to interpret them.   Ah, that's a thought... we struggle to interpret and translate that which is God's voice and with which he hears and understands perfectly without critical markings and footnotes as our feet walk the path, as sinners, in front of us.  --I know, "One point of view."
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 10, 2022, 12:34:02 PM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.

The NIV, ESV, CSB, and NASB all translate the word as money. I'm wondering if the footnote is necessary.

I don't think the translation "money" matters for the casual reader. It does obscure the historical setting, which is important for understanding the antiquity of the story. The account clearly pre-dates the use of coinage. Later in Genesis we'll learn that a slave costs twenty pieces of silver, which historically dates that account to the time of the patriarchs. So the translation may affect one's understanding of the Book of Genesis as history. I wonder, why not just use "silver," which I think even the casual reader would understand as a basic commodity of trade.

In either case, I'm enjoying the EHV, which is so far a good read.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Jim Butler on March 10, 2022, 12:44:11 PM
If you are interested in the background of the translation and the people who worked on it, you can go to https://wartburgproject.org
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 10, 2022, 12:51:13 PM
"silver-used-as-money"...  hyphens used as word connectors...

I suppose for an archeologist or someone studying the history of money or cultural economics... for them the distinction between translations of terms is helpful.  But some words have nothing to do with theology or any salvic content of Scripture and should be treated as such.  In fact, do we know if the material cited was actual silver, what quality of silver by our present day standards or just something that looked like silver but really was another mineral (if there is such a thing comparable to fool's gold)? 

This topic of yours is interesting to follow because it does heighten our understanding of the products of translators. Thank you.  It would also be interesting to know what standards are used and subscribed to by translators and how well they followed them and any discussion or decision making that went on as the translation was accepted for print.


A basic difference in translations is how "literal," i.e., a "word-for-word" translation, e.g., "silver," "denarius" vs. "dynamic equivalence," or "thought-for-thought" or "meaning of phrases," e.g., "money" or "a day's wage." One seeks to convey the meaning of the source word. The other seeks to convey the meaning that word might have in our time in our language.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Michael Slusser on March 10, 2022, 01:04:09 PM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.
RSV uses "money," "he that was bought with your money."

I'm curious about your statement that there was no coinage at the time that is referred to or at the time this account was written. When are you thinking about, and when did coinage begin?

Peace,
Michael
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 10, 2022, 07:08:04 PM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.
RSV uses "money," "he that was bought with your money."

I'm curious about your statement that there was no coinage at the time that is referred to or at the time this account was written. When are you thinking about, and when did coinage begin?

Peace,
Michael

Coinage shows up in the seventh century. I think it becomes common in the Persian Era. The Books of Moses present themselves as compiled in the fifteenth century and Genesis reaches back centuries earlier. Genesis 37:28 tells us that Joseph sold for twenty bits of silver, which was the going price from the patriarchal era according to ANE literature. (It's interesting that the EHV for Genesis 37:28 has "pieces of silver.")
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Chuck on March 10, 2022, 07:30:52 PM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.
RSV uses "money," "he that was bought with your money."

I'm curious about your statement that there was no coinage at the time that is referred to or at the time this account was written. When are you thinking about, and when did coinage begin?

Peace,
Michael

Coinage shows up in the seventh century. I think it becomes common in the Persian Era. The Books of Moses present themselves as compiled in the fifteenth century and Genesis reaches back centuries earlier. Genesis 37:28 tells us that Joseph sold for twenty bits of silver, which was the going price from the patriarchal era according to ANE literature. (It's interesting that the EHV for Genesis 37:28 has "pieces of silver.")


If you meant seventh century bc, that would be correct. The oldest coins that have been found are from Anatolian kingdom of Lydia, approximately 630 bc
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Michael Slusser on March 10, 2022, 07:34:37 PM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.
RSV uses "money," "he that was bought with your money."

I'm curious about your statement that there was no coinage at the time that is referred to or at the time this account was written. When are you thinking about, and when did coinage begin?

Coinage shows up in the seventh century. I think it becomes common in the Persian Era. The Books of Moses present themselves as compiled in the fifteenth century and Genesis reaches back centuries earlier. Genesis 37:28 tells us that Joseph sold for twenty bits of silver, which was the going price from the patriarchal era according to ANE literature. (It's interesting that the EHV for Genesis 37:28 has "pieces of silver.")
RSV: twenty shekels of silver. Whwn did the shekel come into use?

Peace,
Michael
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 10, 2022, 09:58:35 PM
Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.
RSV uses "money," "he that was bought with your money."

I'm curious about your statement that there was no coinage at the time that is referred to or at the time this account was written. When are you thinking about, and when did coinage begin?

Coinage shows up in the seventh century. I think it becomes common in the Persian Era. The Books of Moses present themselves as compiled in the fifteenth century and Genesis reaches back centuries earlier. Genesis 37:28 tells us that Joseph sold for twenty bits of silver, which was the going price from the patriarchal era according to ANE literature. (It's interesting that the EHV for Genesis 37:28 has "pieces of silver.")
RSV: twenty shekels of silver. Whwn did the shekel come into use?

Peace,
Michael

Shekel is mentioned in Genesis 23:15. In early texts, it is a weight for precious commodities rather than a coin. It becomes the name of a coin closer to NT times.

Cf. English "pound."
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 11, 2022, 08:15:10 AM
Genesis 19:31
"normally takes place." The Hebrew literally has "according to the way of all the earth." Forms of "normal" are uncommon in Bible translations, I find. (E.g., KJV never uses it. It comes from late Latin.) Far more common are forms of "custom." One might translate here, "as is customary everywhere on earth." Or, more briefly and simply, "as happens everywhere on earth."
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 12, 2022, 09:09:26 AM
Genesis 20:1
"lived as a resident alien." This is an expansive but clearer translation than ESV "sojourned," a verb that is rare in modern English. There is wordplay in the Hebrew. The verb has the same consonantal sounds as Gerar, perhaps a hint at ancient storytelling technique and memory device. The translation helps the reader understand why Abraham, a powerful sheikh, feels afraid of this regional king who perhaps has foreign culture (this is the sea people's region rather than the Semitic region of the Highlands).
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 12, 2022, 11:09:23 AM
Genesis 20:1
"lived as a resident alien." This is an expansive but clearer translation than ESV "sojourned," a verb that is rare in modern English. There is wordplay in the Hebrew. The verb has the same consonantal sounds as Gerar, perhaps a hint at ancient storytelling technique and memory device. The translation helps the reader understand why Abraham, a powerful sheikh, feels afraid of this regional king who perhaps has foreign culture (this is the sea people's region rather than the Semitic region of the Highlands).

גּוּר
Is ai difficult word to translate. Its definition seems to be: to dwell for a definite or indefinite time in a place that is not one's place of birth or origin. It can refer to foreigners living in the land, e.g., Israel living in Egypt; or being guests in a house. "To sojourn," might be the best English word to express this idea. Otherwise, phrases are used for the verb: "to live as an alien," "to be an immigrant." The noun, גֵּר, gets translated as "sojourner," "alien," "immigrant," "resident alien," "stranger."

Such people also didn't have quite the same rights or status as the native Israelites. They are often put in the same category as orphans, widows, and sometimes the poor (Zechariah 7:10). Although they are to be treated as equals.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: George Rahn on March 12, 2022, 01:57:02 PM
Genesis 20:1
"lived as a resident alien." This is an expansive but clearer translation than ESV "sojourned," a verb that is rare in modern English. There is wordplay in the Hebrew. The verb has the same consonantal sounds as Gerar, perhaps a hint at ancient storytelling technique and memory device. The translation helps the reader understand why Abraham, a powerful sheikh, feels afraid of this regional king who perhaps has foreign culture (this is the sea people's region rather than the Semitic region of the Highlands).

גּוּר
Is ai difficult word to translate. Its definition seems to be: to dwell for a definite or indefinite time in a place that is not one's place of birth or origin. It can refer to foreigners living in the land, e.g., Israel living in Egypt; or being guests in a house. "To sojourn," might be the best English word to express this idea. Otherwise, phrases are used for the verb: "to live as an alien," "to be an immigrant." The noun, גֵּר, gets translated as "sojourner," "alien," "immigrant," "resident alien," "stranger."

Such people also didn't have quite the same rights or status as the native Israelites. They are often put in the same category as orphans, widows, and sometimes the poor (Zechariah 7:10). Although they are to be treated as equals.

These resident aliens were charged interest on monetary transactions as opposed to fellow Israelites.  It was forbidden to charge interest on transactions with your own kin.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 13, 2022, 03:20:29 PM
Genesis 20:1
"lived as a resident alien." This is an expansive but clearer translation than ESV "sojourned," a verb that is rare in modern English. There is wordplay in the Hebrew. The verb has the same consonantal sounds as Gerar, perhaps a hint at ancient storytelling technique and memory device. The translation helps the reader understand why Abraham, a powerful sheikh, feels afraid of this regional king who perhaps has foreign culture (this is the sea people's region rather than the Semitic region of the Highlands).

גּוּר
Is ai difficult word to translate. Its definition seems to be: to dwell for a definite or indefinite time in a place that is not one's place of birth or origin. It can refer to foreigners living in the land, e.g., Israel living in Egypt; or being guests in a house. "To sojourn," might be the best English word to express this idea. Otherwise, phrases are used for the verb: "to live as an alien," "to be an immigrant." The noun, גֵּר, gets translated as "sojourner," "alien," "immigrant," "resident alien," "stranger."

Such people also didn't have quite the same rights or status as the native Israelites. They are often put in the same category as orphans, widows, and sometimes the poor (Zechariah 7:10). Although they are to be treated as equals.

These resident aliens were charged interest on monetary transactions as opposed to fellow Israelites.  It was forbidden to charge interest on transactions with your own kin.


Even in modern days, an Orthodox Jew likes to have Gentile friends who can do things on the sabbath that are forbidden for the Jews, e.g., light a fire in the furnace if it should go out, or take someone to the hospital. We tend to forget that, for the most part, the Torah commands were seen as for the Jews. Gentiles were not bound by them.


To your point, I believe that it was the Gentiles who funded the Jewish owned banks throughout Europe.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 14, 2022, 09:40:51 AM
Genesis 21:3
Note says, "Hebrew narrative style is often repetitious. We have tried to preserve that style." I suppose a paraphrase might try to eliminate repetition. For contrast, see the CEV.
21:10 The note distinguishes Hebrew words shiphchah and amah, which may distinguish statuses, then states that the terms do not clearly indicate change in status, deconstructing the point. It then challenges critical assumptions, "Critics, of course, see the shift as evidence of two source." The note seems both helpful, making a distinction, and unhelpful, offering only speculation and criticism. It might have simply told the reader the distinction and said Hagar's status may have changed because of the birth of Ishmael.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 14, 2022, 12:55:32 PM
Genesis 21:3
Note says, "Hebrew narrative style is often repetitious. We have tried to preserve that style." I suppose a paraphrase might try to eliminate repetition. For contrast, see the CEV.
21:10 The note distinguishes Hebrew words shiphchah and amah, which may distinguish statuses, then states that the terms do not clearly indicate change in status, deconstructing the point. It then challenges critical assumptions, "Critics, of course, see the shift as evidence of two source." The note seems both helpful, making a distinction, and unhelpful, offering only speculation and criticism. It might have simply told the reader the distinction and said Hagar's status may have changed because of the birth of Ishmael.


שׁפחחis the more common word, occurring 25 times in Genesis


אמה occurs 6 times in Genesis.


Both are used to refer to Hagar:

שׁפחח 
16:1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8; 25:12
אמה
21:10, 12; 21:13

Both are also used of Zilpah and Bilhah later in Genesis.

Brown Driver Briggs indicate that they are equivalent words. A translation question is whether they should be translated with different words to indicate there are different words in Hebrew, or with the same English word because they mean the same thing. A key passage where such a situation arises is John 21 where Jesus asks Peter if he loves him. Jesus used one word for love the first two times, and Peter responds with a different word. John uses both words in reference to the disciple whom Jesus loves. While there can be differences between ἀγαπάω and φιλέω, John seems to use them as synonyms.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 16, 2022, 07:32:31 AM
Genesis 22:3
"split." The translation gives a very specific mental image of what Abraham is doing since splitting wood implies dividing blocks of stump or large limbs. Other translators have more general terms such as chop or cut, which would encompass all forms of woodcutting.
22:10 "slaughter." A stunning expression that well captures the sense. Painful to consider.
23:3 Excellent note explaining that the Canaanite descendents of Heth are not related to the Anatolian Hittites.
23:4 "in their final resting place." A euphemism for literal "out of my sight" as provided in the note.
23:10 "Hittites." Why not use Hethites and reject the custom confusing these people with the Anatolians?
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 18, 2022, 03:26:58 PM
Genesis 24:8
Good example of an idiomatic translation. Instead of the literal, "Only you will not," EHV has "But under no circumstances."
Regarding content, Laban here speaks in the Lord's name (vv. 31, 50). Later he is known to have household gods (31:19, 30) though he also speaks in the Lord's name at that time (v. 49).
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 22, 2022, 02:59:34 PM
Genesis 26:8
"Caressing." The same word that forms Isaac's name, meaning "he laughs." Context suggests something more is happening than mere laughter, which is how other translations are reached.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on March 22, 2022, 07:03:05 PM
Genesis 26:8
"Caressing." The same word that forms Isaac's name, meaning "he laughs." Context suggests something more is happening than mere laughter, which is how other translations are reached.


Interesting word, צחק. Some translation use "laughing together" or "laughing with," but more often terms like "frolicking, caressing," and even, "fondling" (NRSV) are used. The same word is used of Ishmael playing with Isaac (Gn 21:9), which, likely, does not carry any sexual innuendos.


The LXX uses παίζω, which BDAG defines: "to engage in some activity for the sake of amusement, play, amuse oneself." It's only NT use is 1 Cor 10:7, which quotes Ex 32:6, which also uses צחק. This Greek word is based on παῖς = "child." Thus, the verb carries a sense of "to act like children, play (like children)."
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 28, 2022, 11:13:14 AM
Genesis 30:8
Idiomatic handling of the Hebrew intensive, "desperate struggle." Literally, "Wrestlings of God have I wrestled with my sister."

30:32,40
Inconsistent translation for the color of the dark animals, perhaps because of the ambiguity in the Hebrew term and the English expression "black sheep." EHV has "dark brown" and "black." Other translations use one or the other in both places.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 29, 2022, 09:02:42 AM
Genesis 31:2
"From the look on Laban's face. . . attitude." Good idiomatic translation. Literally, Laban's face (plural in Hebrew) "was not with him."
31:35. "having my period." Idiom for a euphemism, "the way of women [belongs] to me."
There are several helpful translation notes throughout the chapter due to the use of Aramaic and reference to the hide patterns on livestock, which are not especially clear ("streaked, speckled, and spotted").
The differences between Hebrew and Aramaic are interesting as one thinks about the origins of the Hebrew language. Both Hebrew and Aramaic are west Semitic languages but here differences in expression are manifest, implying change from the time Abraham leaves Haran until when Jacob settles there. The Canaanite dialects are perhaps influencing Hebrew developments.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 30, 2022, 06:43:22 PM
Genesis 32:7
"camps." The footnote expresses preference for "groups" but states they settled on "camps" to show connection with "Manahaim" in v. 7. Holliday's lexicon translates the Hebrew term with "camps," whether of temporary settlements, armies, or nomads. The point seems to be they were ready to move.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on March 31, 2022, 09:35:09 AM
Genesis 33:19
"Pieces of silver." The thrice mentioned qesitah, appearing here and in Job, Joshua. It's value/weight is not known. Possibly points to the antiquity of these books.
Abraham purchased land in Canaan; Jacob does so, too. The purchases are in the highlands, centered in Judah and Ephraim.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 01, 2022, 08:12:24 AM
Genesis 34
Helpful set of translation notes for this chapter, describing various euphemisms in the Hebrew and also the difference between bride price and dowry.

"Marriage in patrilineal societies is accompanied by asset exchange, wherein brideprice offsets the cost to the natal family of raising the bride."
https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/42/1/7/12164/In-Plain-Sight-The-Neglected-Linkage-between

The financial exchange also bonds the families and the marriage completed the young man's status as an adult.

This article helpfully illustrates financial and social practices surrounding bride price in modern sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, where it is the norm. I ran into this with a friend from Africa trying to raise a bride price, which was challenging for him as a church worker student.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 04, 2022, 06:55:23 AM
Genesis 35:29
"Long, full life" is idiomatic. Literally, "old and full of days."

An interesting stylistic example appears from vv. 16--26. At the beginning of the passage we are told of Benjamin's birth near Bethlehem Ephrath. Then follows a mother-based listing of the sons, which includes Benjamin, ending with "These are the sons of Jacob who were born to him in Paddan Aram." By itself the last statement would not be accurate but the author expects one to delete/distinguish Benjamin in the list since his story was just told. In other words, the author expects an active, empathetic reader to adjust understanding based on context rather than have a wooden, literal reading.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 07, 2022, 07:07:33 AM
Genesis 37:4
"a friendly way." The word for peace rendered as "friendly," a good translation.
37:5 "Once Joseph had a dream." Lit. "And Joseph dreamed a dream." Hebrew likes to use this verb/noun combination of the same root to modify, intensify. In this case, a particular instance is meant so a temporal translation is fitting. Other translations have "Now/Then Joseph . . ."
37:19 "master of dreams." More literal and an improvement over the KJV tradition.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 08, 2022, 09:04:01 AM
Genesis 38:7
"It turned out that." Loose, idiomatic translation for a simple waw consecutive. More literal translations have "But . . ."

"killed him." Similar to KJV "slew." Some translations hedge or use a euphemism to soften the idea. The verb is causative: caused him to die.

38:17 "security deposit." A reasonable, modern rendering.

38:21 "sacred prostitute." Literally, "sacred/holy woman." An ironic, Hebrew euphemism that perhaps reflects things happening in Canaanite culture.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 09, 2022, 07:47:04 AM
Genesis 39:7
"Sometime after this." Idiomatic. Literally, "And it came to pass after these things."

"Had her eye on." Idiomatic. Literally, "she lifted up her eyes to Joseph."

These are good examples of idiomatic translation throughout the chapter.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 11, 2022, 08:00:19 AM
Genesis 40:8
"We each had a dream." I commented on this Hebrew syntax above in Reply 43. In this case the translators add "each" to begin distinguishing the dreams. Literally, it says, "A dream we have dreamed."

"don't they?" The translators accommodate English style by arranging Joseph's statement this way. Literally, "Do not interpretations [belong] to God?"

40:15 "I was kidnapped." Another noun-verb construction using the root for stealing. Kidnapped is a good technical term for the activity.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 12, 2022, 09:49:16 AM
Genesis 41:7
"realized that." Literally, "Behold."

41:11 "dreamed a dream." An inconsistency in the translation, which previously rendered this construction: had a dream.

41:16 "God will give Pharaoh an answer to give him peace of mind." The original is more terse: God will answer Pharaoh with peace.

41:49 Not a comment on translation but on math and numbering in Egypt. The statement makes one wonder whether they were reaching the limit of their ability to count or calculate. I wonder what we know about Egyptian math in the second millennium BC
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 14, 2022, 07:44:28 AM
Genesis 42:9
"where the land is exposed." Literally, "nakedness of the land." Others use the term "weakness."

42:38 "grave." Others use the literal "Sheol."  CEV has "I'll die from sorrow," which is very loose.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 20, 2022, 09:45:20 AM
Genesis 43
One thing I miss reading the EHV in this part of Genesis is headings that orient the reader. For example, the Joseph saga has few headers (just one for chs. 42--45). Since the goal of the translation is readability, I think this is a feature that needs further attention. I find myself working with youth and young adults who know little about the Bible. The headings help get them us to speed on what they are seeing and how to interpret and apply it.

43:28 The note comments on the LXX text, showing again the teams interest, which we saw early in Genesis.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 26, 2022, 10:06:56 AM
Genesis 45:7
"great act of deliverance." Literally, "great deliverance." Not sure why "act" was necessary. Perhaps sounds more fitting in contemporary English.
45:12 "pay attention." Traditionally, "Behold."
45:19 "carts." Others have "wagons." Carts is better historically, as the note explains.
45:26 "stunned." A good contemporary rendering. Note has, "Literally his heart was numb."

46:26 "direct descendants." Literally, "that came out of his thigh," which is an awkward euphemism for English.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on April 29, 2022, 08:05:14 AM
Genesis 47:21
"made . . . servants." Hebrew text has, "made to pass" or "transferred." The difference is a likely spelling variant. The Masoretes saw a resh, Samaritans and Greeks saw a daleth. The form of the letters is similar in Paleo-Hebrew and Aramaic script. Current translations are split on the reading. EHV sides with the Samaritan and Greek reading.

47:29. Here's an interesting rabbinic podcast on the practice of putting one's hand under the thigh when taking an oath:

https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1015273/rabbi-yitzchak-etshalom/%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%A0%D7%90-%D7%99%D7%93%D7%9A-%D7%AA%D7%97%D7%AA-%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%9B%D7%99-solving-a-bresheet-riddle/

47:31 "head post of the bed." There's a helpful note referring to potential wordplay since the words for staff and for bedding are very similar. Does he refer to a bed post or to the bedding or to a staff? It's not precisely clear. The EHV solution is reasonable.

48:2 "gathered his strength." A good idiom for "strengthened himself."

48:22 "ridge of Shechem." A note describes Hebrew wordplay on the noun/sound "Shechem," a ridge and a location. Literally, it says, "I have given to you one Shechem more than your brethren." Or, one one might punctuate, "I have given one Shechem to you, more than your brethren." Jacob's point is that he is again favoring Joseph with this specific gift of land. (The note says Shechem can mean "portion" but I don't find that in the lexicon.)
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on May 02, 2022, 05:59:57 AM
Genesis 49 in EHV includes many translation notes because of the poetry Jacob used to bless his sons.

49:10 "until the one to whom it belongs comes." A longer note explains the translation, which is drawn from the Septuagint and other ancient versions and comparison with Ezekiel 21:27 (v. 32 in Hebrew).

The word is Shiloh, which has traditionally been translated as a title for the Messiah (e.g., KJV). The lexicons identify Shiloh as a locative noun, a place. A note in the ESV translates this literally as "until he comes to Shiloh," which is the most straight forward rendering of the Hebrew but leaves one wondering. Shiloh is never mentioned elsewhere and no such location is known. A similarly spelled Hebrew verb means peace, which might help one understand the meaning of the place name or make one wonder whether it is an ancient name for Salem (Genesis 14:18), the city of peace. The interpretations typically move to one of the Messianic explanations since the passage describes future rule.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on May 03, 2022, 05:45:44 AM
Genesis 49:14
"saddlebags." A note shows that the meaning of this dual noun is uncertain. It appears only twice in the OT. BDB has "fireplaces" or "ash heaps," with "sheepfolds" as a suggestion. Holladay had "saddlebags," which is the chosen translation for EHV. However, in the other passage where the word appears, Judges 5:16, they translate "sheepfolds."

49:18 This verse of poetry is set off by itself, like an interlude or parenthetic thought. Some translations group it with the blessing of Dan.

49:21, 22, 24, and 26 have additional notes about poetic challenges in the Hebrew.

49:32 Here again is a note about Heth rather than Hittites. See above, Genesis 23:4, to which they might have cross-referenced.

50:1 "Joseph put his face against his father's face," making sense of the Hebrew idiom. A face-to-face embrace is intended. Literally, "Joseph fell upon his father's face."

50:15 "will pay us back in full." It's the common verb for "return" used in the sense of recompense or revenge. A sound rendering.

This concludes the notes I'll make on Genesis. I'll put together a summary of what I've observed about the EHV translation.
Title: Re: Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version
Post by: Rev. Edward Engelbrecht on May 04, 2022, 11:06:22 AM
REVIEW COMMENTS ON GENESIS
The Holy Bible, Evangelical Heritage Version. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2019. Copyright by the Wartburg Project, Inc. Front matter, pp. I--XX. Body text, 1813. The translation team presents their chief goal as "balance" between the poles of traditional, literal translation and newer, dynamic equivalent translation (p. ix).

Purpose of My Review
To explore the faithfulness and readability of this new translation, a gift from a WELS layman, while using the translation in personal devotions.

Method
Since February I've read each day about one chapter of the EHV translation for Genesis (excluding Sundays). As I read, I noted points that looked different based on my general reading experience with other translations. Then I explored those points in Hebrew, the Septuagint as needed, and in other widely used English translations. Finally, I made observations to share here. So I did not do a word for word, line by line study of the EHV text but explored it in connection with my daily devotions.

Scope of Comments
I commented on more than 80 verses/passages (just over 5%) out of the 1,553 verses in Genesis. I also read and commented on the EHV translation notes since they are part of the translation and helpfully reflect the views of the translation team. Here are matters addressed in my review comments.


CONCLUSIONS
Although I noted specific examples where the translation might have been too loose or less accurate, in most cases I found the text quite sound and very readable. This has been my experience with other current translations, which tend to be well managed but occasionally have points of weakness. (I did not see gaffs, as sometimes surface in translations like the NIV; in some cases I preferred the EHV rendering other against the more literal ESV.) The EHV team reached its major goal of presenting a thoughtful balance between literal and idiomatic translation. From my experience with Genesis, I conclude that the EHV is a faithful work.

EHV would serve as a readable translation for public worship, though I personally would prefer a more formal text for that purpose such as ESV or NKJV. EHV would also work well for Bible Study, though its idiomatic translations would interfere with a reader noticing the use of similar terms and phrases as they appear in other parts of Scripture. (Literal translations better reveal those connections.) I look forward to exploring more of the work as I read it devotionally.