The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

Hi , I'm working on Psalm translation into one of Central Asian languages. I have question about Psalm 52:1. NIV is different from most other versions, while all non NIV versions are similar. But I am sticking to NIV and has been all the time. I don't need any version A vs to B, C, D, type fight. All i'd like to know is which is correct and why. Is it because of different manuscripts used by different bible versions?

Ps 52:1 NIV
Why do you boast of evil, you mighty hero?
Why do you boast all day long,
you who are a disgrace in the eyes of God?

NET:
Why do you boast about your evil plans, 4 O powerful man?
God’s loyal love protects me all day long! 5

All following versions are from bible.cc.
NLT:
Why do you boast about your crimes, great warrior?
Don’t you realize God’s justice continues forever?
NASB:
Why do you boast in evil, O mighty man?
The lovingkindness of God endures all day long.
KJV:
Why boastest thou thyself in mischief, O mighty man?
the goodness of God endureth continually.

Looking forward to your advice.

I am no linguist, but the NET notes indicate the Hebrew roots of the verse and say the following:

4 tn Heb “Why do you boast in evil?”
5 tn Heb “the loyal love of God [is] all the day.” In this context, where the psalmist is threatened by his enemy, the point seems to be that the psalmist is protected by God’s loyal love at all times.

Usually, translation issues are covered in the notes that come with the NET bible, so I do recommend that you look there.

But why translate from an English translation? Would it not be wiser to go to the original Hebrew for Psalms ? Even if that means you need to do some study first, I would think that that is the better way to approach a new translation.

I notice that Randy has already given similar advice, but in more detail here:
viewtopic.php?f=159&t=15416&p=148764#p148764

_________________
Avid Reader

“Lord, in my zeal for love of truth, let me not forget the truth about love.” - Thomas Aquinas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Code of Conduct
Forum Statement of Beliefs

I agree with Avid Reader. The NET is the closest to the Hebrew and LXX (Septuagint).

Let me mention some specific things. The Hebrew word gebor means hero or could refer to a mighty man. The Hebrew word chesed is an untranslatable word which conveys the ideas of love, mercy, steadfastness and strength; words such as mercy, lovingkindness, and love do not fully convey the idea when translating chesed into English.

How very, very perplexing! I've checked around a bit, and I still have no clue as to where the NIV gets its translation from. It's not from the standard Hebrew texts — the NASB is a literally exact rendering of the Hebrew here. It's not from the Greek of the LXX — that says, Why do you boast of evil, you mighty one, [and] of lawlessness all day long? (τι εγκαυχαι εν κακιαι, ο δυνατος; ανομιαν ολην την ημεραν;) It's not from the Syriac — that says Why are you boasting of evil, you mighty man, and over the righteous all day long? (Translations mine.)
 
I'd follow one of the others rather than the NIV, this time, I think!

For the sake of transparency, or possibly merely of playing with the character map, the verse in Syriac is ܠܡܢܐ ܡܫܬܒܗܪ ܐܢܬ ܒܒܝܫܬܐ ܓܢܒܪܐ ܂ ܘܥܠ ܡܚܣܝܐ ܟܠܝܘܡ
Pretty, isn't it?

Is there another way to send this? I would love to see it in Syriac.

For the sake of transparency, or possibly merely of playing with the character map, the verse in Syriac is ܠܡܢܐ ܡܫܬܒܗܪ ܐܢܬ ܒܒܝܫܬܐ ܓܢܒܪܐ ܂ ܘܥܠ ܡܚܣܝܐ ܟܠܝܘܡ
Pretty, isn't it?

_________________
Blessings in the Lord to all whose names are in the Lamb's Book of Life

We preach Christ, and Him Lifted Up!

It should be showing up on screen, Pam — if you're using Internet Explorer, I seem to remember there's a menu item somewhere called 'Page Encoding', or something like that, and that needs setting to 'Unicode'. Or maybe your system hasn't got the font — if you send me a pm with an e-mail address in, I can probably do something about that. Syriac is cute!

Thank you all for feedback.



1. Actually I looked into NET notes. I like its Hebrew roots being mentioned and discussed. And yet had this lingering need to check up.

2. Yes, it's a translation from translation. But Hebrew is not a language that I know. Also in some cases Hebrew words seem to be vague for Hebrew language experts. like in Ps 29:9 :

from NET notes: http://net.bible.org/#!bible/Psalms+29
21 tc Heb “the deer.” Preserving this reading, some translate the preceding verb, “causes [the deer] to give premature birth” (cf. NEB, NASB). But the Polel of חוּל/חִיל (khul/khil) means “give birth,” not “cause to give birth,” and the statement “the Lord’s shout gives birth to deer” is absurd. In light of the parallelism (note “forests” in the next line) and v. 5, it is preferable to emend אַיָּלוֹת (’ayyalot, “deer”) to אֵילוֹת (’elot, “large trees”) understanding the latter as an alternate form of the usual plural form אַיָּלִים (’ayyalim).

Different bibles I checked got this 'אַיָּלוֹת' either deer or oak / big tree. So then will I be any better having complete lack of Hebrew when English is not my native language.

Thus I end up in English as source material. Ps 29:9 is an unclear word case (, which possibly can change the whole sentence). While what started this thread, Ps 52:1 is an unclear sentence case for me.

here is a link to some bible history http://www.asia.si.edu/exhibitions/onli ... uction.htm
I have not checked it for accuracy... so reader beware....

Most all modern bibles use the The Masoretic Text as Hebrew text for the OT

Dan Walace as written an article on the history of the English bible http://bible.org/series/history-english-bible

_________________
David Austin (forum founder & Exec Director of bible.org): helping Christians mature in the Lord) 1 Cor 15:58
checkout the new set of study tools http://NetBible.org all free

The short answer:

The NIV translators followed the text of the Greek LXX.

The long answer:

The original text of Ps. 52:1(3) reads: מה־תתהלל ברעה הגבור חסד אל כל־היום

Literally translated "why - will you praise yourself - in evil - the mighty - love of - God - [is] all - the day"
the "-" is used to show the word divisions in the Hebrew text.


BHS suggests a possible vorlage of "מה־תתהלל ברעה הגבור חמס כל־היום" based on the Greek text.
Literally translated "why - will you praise yourself - in evil - the mighty - wickedness - [is] all -the day"

The Syriac text supports the Hebrew reading and there is no existent Hebrew text that support the reading in the LXX; most scholars believe the LXX text of this verse is corrupt; the NIV translators have decided that that it is the Hebrew and Syriac texts that are corrupt.

This isn't as vague as it appears in English. איל has a root meaning of "strength"; a strength that is seen in both the "buck" and the "oak"; In it's masculine plural form it can refer to both "bucks" or "oaks", but in its feminine plural form it typically only refers to (female) deer. The argument presented by the NET translators is that this is a unique case where the feminine plural is being used to describe "oaks" rather than "deer"; mistakes in gender forms are common in the OT Hebrew texts.

I think the NIV felt it doesn't make sense to talk about the faithful love of God in this context that is entirely focused on the evil of men. But they are indeed using the Masoretic text, not the LXX. The word chesed, faithful love, could also be taken as a different word (borrowed from Aramaic, I think), that means disgrace. It's used in Proverbs 14:34, "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people." So the second half of the verse could be translated, "a disgrace to God all the day." NIV was a little free in repeating the first half, probably to make the point that it is their evil actions that go on all day, and not just their disgraceful status.

I will concede this is a possible bases for the NIV translation; however, even if they NIV translators were proposing חסד II rather than the BHS supposition of חמס, it is still difficult to believe that the LXX translation wasn't the motivating factor for making this choice. Apart from the LXX, I know of no other ancient witness that supports such an interpretation.

On a different note: Good to see you here bookerG.

Good to see you too. I thought of making the same greeting, but I was just too excited about the fact that, for once, I found something in the Hebrew that you missed. But you're probably right about the LXX being a big influence on the choice to go against the tide of every other translation.

thank you.