Biblical Translation—Eden, 4

bertot: You misunderstood me. The computer HTML format makes it difficult to share this kind of translation on the Forum.But, if you are there we will give it a try. There is a great deal information to share in an interpres translation that does not apply any form of commentary, only translation. I will be giving you enough information so you can do your own translation of the Kethib Hebrew Text.Stay with me, and we'll give it a go.
Ger

AM I am glad you are there. Listen, please do not present the translation in your usual technical fashion. present it as if I would be reading it in a English translation Bible or regular or simple english, understand. I cannot understand he he technical version. Not like the above please.D BertotEdited by bertot, : No reason given.

bertot: The format screwed it up a bit. Let me know if you can still make sense of it.Gen. 2:4 thru 7— — ‘‘ ‘ — ‘ .4— = masculine & feminine plural pronoun: these
— = feminine plural noun: generations, account of man and his descendants
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew} & = masculine dual/plural noun: heavens {there is no singular noun regarding the sky & space)
= = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew} & = feminine singular noun: earth {as planet} or land {as territory)
‘‘ = ‘ = preposition bound morpheme prefix: in, by, at, with, through, as {to name the most commonly used} & ‘ = reflexive infinitive verb{‘ = to create}: are being created & = masculine plural 3rd person pronoun bound morpheme suffix: they
‘ = ‘ = preposition bound morpheme prefix: in, by, at, with, through, as {to name the most commonly used} & = masculine singular noun: day or time
= infinitive construct verb { = to make}: he/it makes
= Tetragrammaton: yhwh {four letter Name of Heb. God} that is generally not uttered. There is much we can learn from this Name when it is read as a verbal clause. This may be something you would like to pursue.
— = masculine plural noun often used to denote: God
= feminine singular noun: earth {as planet} or land {as territory)
= = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = masculine dual/plural noun: heavens {there is no singular noun regarding the sky & space)— ‘ —‘ — — .5
— —‘ ‘— = = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & — = the whole, all
= masculine singular noun: bush, shrub, plant {made plural by — = the whole, all} bushes, shrubs, plants
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the & = masculine singular noun: field, steppe, open country
= adverb of time: not yet, ere, before
= = masculine singular 3rd person pronoun bound morpheme prefix: he/it {made plural by — = the whole, all} they & = verb: to be - are
‘ = ‘ = preposition bound morpheme prefix: in, by, at, with, through, as {to name the most commonly used} & = feminine singular noun: earth {as planet} or land {as territory)
— = = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & — = masculine noun: the whole, all
= a maqeph: binder
‘ = masculine singular noun: herb, herbage {made plural by — = the whole, all} herbs, herbage
= definite article bound morpheme prefix: the & = masculine singular noun: field, steppe, open country
= adverb of time: not yet, ere, before
= = masculine singular 3rd person pronoun bound morpheme prefix: he/it {made plural by — = the whole, all} they & = verb: sprout, spring up
= conjunction: that, for, when
— = adverb: not
= causative perfect 3rd person singular masculine verb { = rain}: he/it cause it to rain
= Tetragrammaton: yhwh {four letter Name of Heb. God} that is generally not uttered: There is much we can learn from this Name when it is read as a verbal clause. This may be something you would like to pursue.
— = masculine plural noun often used to denote: God
— = preposition: upon - on the ground of, according to, on account of, on behalf of, concerning, beside, in addition to, together with, beyond, over, by, on to, towards, to, against
= a maqeph: binder
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew} & = feminine singular noun: earth {as planet} or land {as territory)
= = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = masculine collective/singular noun: humanity, mankind, human species, humans and rarely a male human being and never a personal name
= particle of negation: is not, are not, was not, were not etc.
—‘ = — = preposition bund morpheme prefix: to, for, at, in regard to, according to {to name a few of the most commonly used} & ‘ = verb: work, serve
= mark of the accusative; set before nouns and pronouns already definite: the thing itself, the same thing
= a maqeph: binder
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew} & = feminine singular noun: groundNote: the clause —‘ = to work the ground is used at the conclusion of the narrative in Gen. 3:23. — — ‘ .6 = = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = masculine singular noun: mist
— = = masculine singular 3rd person pronoun bound morpheme prefix: he/it & — = verb: goes up, ascends, climbs
= preposition: from, out of, surpassing, above, on account of, in consequence of, at, by {to name a few of the most common rendition)
= a maqeph: binder
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew} & = feminine singular noun: earth {as planet} or land {as territory)
= = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = causative verb { = water, irrigate, drink}: causes irrigation, irrigates
= mark of the accusative; set before nouns and pronouns already definite: the thing itself, the same thing: thus, the
= a maqeph: binder
— = masculine noun: the whole, all
= a maqeph: binder
= masculine plural noun: face, or faces, or surface
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew} & = feminine singular noun: ground — ‘ — .7
‘ = = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = masculine singular 3rd person pronoun bound morpheme prefix: he/it & = verb: to form, shape, devise, plan
= Tetragrammaton: yhwh {four letter Name of Heb. God} that is generally not uttered: There is much we can learn from this Name when it is read as a verbal clause. This may be something you would like to pursue.
— = masculine plural noun often used to denote: God
= mark of the accusative; set before nouns and pronouns already definite: the thing itself, the same thing
= a maqeph: binder
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew}& = masculine collective/singular noun: humanity, mankind, human species, humans and rarely a male human being and never a personal name
= masculine noun: dust, dry loose dirt on the surface of the ground
= preposition: from, out of, surpassing, above, on account of, in consequence of, at, by {to name a few of the most common rendition)
= a maqeph: binder
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew} & = feminine singular noun: ground
= = conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = masculine singular 3rd person pronoun bound morpheme prefix: he/it & = syncopated imperfect verb { = breathe, blow}: breathes, blows
‘ = ‘ = preposition bound morpheme prefix: in, by, at, with, through, as {to name the most commonly used} & = dual masculine noun with 3rd person singular masculine pronoun suffix: his/its (two) noses - from the singular masculine noun = nose, as organ for breathing & = masculine 3rd person singular pronoun suffix: his/its
= feminine noun construct { = breath}: breath
= masculine plural abstract emphatic noun: life {always in plural form)
= conjunction bound morpheme prefix: and, so, then, but, thus, therefore {to name the most commonly used} & = masculine singular 3rd person pronoun bound morpheme prefix: he/it & = apocopated imperfect verb { = to be}: becomes
= = definite article bound morpheme prefix: the {there is not indefinite article in Hebrew}& = masculine collective/singular noun: humanity, mankind, human species, humans and rarely a male human being and never a personal name
— = — = preposition bund morpheme prefix: to, for, at, in regard to, according to {to name a few of the most commonly used} = feminine noun: that which breathes, breathing
= feminine singular noun: animal, creatureNote: According to the BDB Lexicon, when employed in tandem “always of animals” Gen. 2:19, 1:20, 24, 30; 9:12, 15, 16; Ez. 47:9.

I guess my last message came in to late. This might as well be Vulcan.D bertot

bertot: You are asking me to tell you what the text says according to me; instead of learning what I can share with you and arrive at your own translation? I can do that but, it would be better if you worked with me and learned what I am sharing.If you want I can Email a copy to you; it will be easier for you to read and understand. The format on the Forum makes thins small and complicated. Know what I mean?Ger

AM, I dont mean to be obstinate here, but why cant you just write what its english equivolent would be. I dont mind studying it out further at some point, but lets start with the simplest process, because thats what I am very simple. I have no idea what you are talking about. But that should be no surprise to you at this point.D BertotD BertotEdited by bertot, : No reason given.

bertot:There's a lot of English explanation in there too, dude. But this format makes it more difficult than it needs to be. Let me try to send you an Email Attachment, and let's stick with Emails for a while until I can get you up and running, eh?All the best,
Ger

Give me a minute, and I'll try to put something together for you.Hang on, dude. I'm trying to work with you here.
Ger

Here is what I mean. Someone many years ago, translated the English Bibles, Spanish, Greek, Latin or whatever and put it in simple "terms" or understandable as if I was talking to someone in person, without the technical jargon. I went back to the first thread a while ago, where "Icant" gave you a simple translation of Gen 1:1, it was about post #30 or so of Eden 1.However, I will check my e-mail if you feel it is necessary.D Bertot

bertot: The following is a simple interpres translation of Gen. 2:4

quote:

---

— these — human generations the heavens and the earth ‘ as ‘ they are being created ‘ in day he makes yhwh — God earth and heavens.

---

If this is what you desire, I will edit this post with Gen. 2:5,6,7.Let me know.
Ger

Sorta, I mean if you could present it a it is presented in any present Bible.Also go to you email I need to discuss another issue with you.D Bertot

bertot:I am trying to empower you so that you won't have to take anyone else's word for what the word is conveying. I am on your side. Tell me what you think of the previous post.Ger

Yes AM this is just about what I am looking for. I am sorry if it feels like I am making you perform like a circus monkey, trust me I am not. I was just wanting the English equivolents, with nothing else, no Hebrew word inserts or anything except the atual english word equivolents.Also, here is a question in consideration of what we are discussing. Would not the "board" of scholars that consisted of both Jewish and Christian scholars in each of the respective translations been aware of the "problems" you say exist in thier translations of the english translations. In other words, why did they not use the appropriate english words to indicate the "interpretation" you are suggesting instead of the one they did choose? These numerous scholars would not deliberatley misrepresent that which exists in the original would they?Just a thought for consideration.D BertotEdited by bertot, : No reason given.

My simple point here was that this process did not happen over night, it was very slow and maticulous and carefully done as all the evidence would indicate. That is point though, isnt it. A careful consideration of what they had (Gods Word), being translted from one "known" text to another, even if some of theealiest ones are not still in existence. The ones we do have and there faithful transmission would indicated thier very existence.Further, one cannot simply dismiss intervention and providence in the process. As much as one may not like the idea, the content of the documents lend great suppport for this concept. Aside from this however, one could still be confident ased on the documents themselves. As you put it below: Is the BNHK still in existence? AM deciding whether or not the scriptures is the word of God or not, is not like choosing between a movie or a concert. Ones indication and decision will determine how he or she approaches it before, during and after studies. One does not need to "prove" this or that, only that there is enough information and evidence to support a given conclusion. "believing whatever fires your rocket" hardly describes how one would consider or interpret the scriptures.To demonstrate this point I give you the example that we were discussing about Christ's ascension and decension. You were viewing the topic from a nearly a one verse (very literal "interpres) interpretation, in contrast I was viewing what the scritptures had to say on the topic overall, SEE THE DIFFERENCE? To me it is a body of consistent doctrine, you do not view that way. It makes all the difference in the world how you approach the scriptures. An examination of a bare text with no understanding of what it has to say overall or viewing it as not necessarily inspired, is ok but will only take you so far.As an example of this I offer what you said in another post early on. You indicated that you had not studied the "rest" of the scriptures as you have the Hebrew Eden narrative, SEE THE DIFFERENCEMore in a minuteD BertotEdited by bertot, : No reason given.Edited by bertot, : No reason given.Edited by bertot, : No reason given.

bertot wrote: Most Hebrew scholars are not secular; they are influenced by the various biblical traditions that they adhere to. It is very difficult for any scholar who embraces a certain religious doctrine to translate a source text in a manner that does not conform to his or her religious doctrine. No body is “deliberately misrepresenting” the source text, they are merely expounding on the text as they expositor translate it so that it fits their particular religious views; and the views of the audience they are translating for, since the expositor is reader oriented.For example: The scholars who rendered The Open Bible translate the personal name “Adam” quite often in their translation of the Eden Narrative. However, the scholars who render the New Revised Standard Version translate “the man” {since a personal name cannot take the definite article prefix}, thus indicating that there is no personal name “Adam” presented anywhere in the Eden Narrative.
Both of these “committees of scholars” are rendering the Hebrew Source Text in a manner that conforms to their “Religious Understanding” of what the Source Text is supposed to be conveying. Neither of these “committees of scholars” are interpres translating the Source Text so to actually learn what the Hebrew Source Text may actually be conveying.You state: Quite rarely is there just one adequate English equivalent translation for a give Hebrew prefix, suffix, verbal clause, phrase, verse, or Source Text. Hebrew is not like Greek or English that both pretty much “spell out” what the author is trying to convey. Kethib, letter, consonantal Biblical Hebrew does not “spell out” anything, since there are not vowels, and often there are more than one “meaning” attached to words, prefixes, suffixes, verbal clauses, phrases, etc. The actual context of a given narrative cannot be established until the entire Text has been interpres translated, and quite often what is being conveyed will not completely conform to any existing Religious Doctrine.I hope the above helps,
Ger