ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

General Christian Theology
Post Reply
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

The church we've been attending switched over some time ago from NIV to ESV- I wasn't familiar with ESV (I prefer New King James) but they had a GIANT print edition so my husband being so handicapped visually, we purchased it there at 50% off-

I was reading 1 Corinthians 11 in this translation- specifically on headcoverings-
in verses 5 thru 13, they replaced the word 'woman' with 'wife'.

Then comes the footnote-

Greek gune. This term may refer to a woman or a wife, depending on the context. In verses 5-13, the Greek word gune is translated wife in verses that deal with wearing a veil, a sign of being married in first century. And then the footnote to 'angels' in vs 10 it says "Or messengers, that is, people sent to observe and report".


What? Is this an example of blatant error, ignorance, or deception? I don't know-
In other words, those of us who cover are simply 'misinformed' because apparently this was a 1st century practice for 'married' women?

I feel compelled to email one of the elders in the church about this- I do see women in the church that wear a covering but probably can count them on 2 hands (and obviously some of them are or were Mennonite, by the way they are dressed).

Anyone familiar enough with ESV and or Greek that cares to speak into this? Or just speak into this regarding what they know about it?
0 x
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by lesterb »

If I remember correctly Luther's translation said the same thing. That is one reason the Old Order Mennonites don't allow unmarried girls to be covered except for church.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Josh »

This one reason I really dislike the ESV; it's incredibly biased to translate the word in Greek for "woman" which can mean "woman" or "wife" as "wife", when the English word is very specific. The German word "Frau" is a lot closer in meaning to the Greek word.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

lesterb wrote:If I remember correctly Luther's translation said the same thing. That is one reason the Old Order Mennonites don't allow unmarried girls to be covered except for church.
Thanks lesterb
Hm. Interesting. For that I am thankful to know the Orthodox teaching about it- and that they do go back 2000 years so it is settled that it is NOT limited to married women. Of course, they didn't and don't use Luther's translations- but at least learning their teachings and the ancient ones removes that element of 'wives' only.

But also this understanding that 'was' a 1st century custom-

who gives them the authority to know this to be true??? Or to teach that it was??? :evil:
so what- for 1900 years all women covered, and they were misinformed that they could have dropped this centuries before? It's only been the last century that women really dropped it!

Sound doctrine- we need Sound Doctrine! I guess I felt like we had been lied to, when we took the time to seek truth about it- maybe it's taught in ignorance these days, the modern translation- not blatant lying. But it bothers me.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

Josh wrote:This one reason I really dislike the ESV; it's incredibly biased to translate the word in Greek for "woman" which can mean "woman" or "wife" as "wife", when the English word is very specific. The German word "Frau" is a lot closer in meaning to the Greek word.
So was Luther misleading people in his translation or when and where did this go wrong?
I like sticking with KJV or NKJV, I really have trouble trusting anything else.This is one example why.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Josh »

Valerie wrote:What? Is this an example of blatant error, ignorance, or deception? I don't know-
In other words, those of us who cover are simply 'misinformed' because apparently this was a 1st century practice for 'married' women?

I feel compelled to email one of the elders in the church about this- I do see women in the church that wear a covering but probably can count them on 2 hands (and obviously some of them are or were Mennonite, by the way they are dressed).
Blatant error, and another example of how a church like Alistair Begg's chooses to ignore the scriptures, and will go so far as to mis-translate scripture in order to support their agenda.

They really, really don't like head covering and would never teach it in a million years.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

Josh wrote:
Valerie wrote:What? Is this an example of blatant error, ignorance, or deception? I don't know-
In other words, those of us who cover are simply 'misinformed' because apparently this was a 1st century practice for 'married' women?

I feel compelled to email one of the elders in the church about this- I do see women in the church that wear a covering but probably can count them on 2 hands (and obviously some of them are or were Mennonite, by the way they are dressed).
Blatant error, and another example of how a church like Alistair Begg's chooses to ignore the scriptures, and will go so far as to mis-translate scripture in order to support their agenda.

They really, really don't like head covering and would never teach it in a million years.
There are a few women there who do- and they obviously were or are Mennonite -
I sent an email to one of the pastors/elders who was the Bible Study teacher of Hebrews we attended for a couple weeks.
These people are taught what they are taught, in their 'theolgoical' colleges of choice- I don't think it's on purpose but how he answers my email will make a difference- if Alistair Begg has an issue with it because he sees it as a stumbling block by way of evangelizing- I wouldn't be surprised. They may see it as something not to be contentious about or apply a Romans 14 type of application to it- I don't know- I don't fault women these days who have simply been taught incorrect explanations by those they trust at the pulpit, and those at the pulpit, may have been taught by those in school- but- there is absolute truth.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Josh »

Here's what Luther said, and keep in mind these words are fairly archaic and have a very different meaning now ("Weib" in particular pretty much a rude word in modern German):
Ich lasse euch aber wissen, daß Christus ist eines jeglichen Mannes Haupt; der Mann aber ist des Weibes Haupt; Gott aber ist Christi Haupt.
A modern, vernacular German translation does this:
Eine Sache allerdings möchte ich zur Sprache bringen, weil ihr darüber offensichtlich noch nicht Bescheid wisst: Der Mann Ich will aber, dass ihr wisst: Jeder Mann. hat Christus als Haupt über sich, die Frau hat den ihren. Mann als Haupt über sich, und Christus hat Gott als Haupt über sich.
"Frau" is a lot closer in meaning to "γυνε", which can mean wife, woman, unmarried woman, virgin, bride - just like our own English word "woman".

(If someone is more skilled in Greek than I am, please feel free to correct anything I said.)
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Josh »

Valerie wrote:if Alistair Begg has an issue with it because he sees it as a stumbling block by way of evangelizing- I wouldn't be surprised.
So, be like the world to win the world? I don't see where the Bible says we can ignore a part of scripture just because it makes evangelising hard. The gospel is indeed foolishness to men - and even describes itself as a stumbling block.
They may see it as something not to be contentious about or apply a Romans 14 type of application to it- I don't know- I don't fault women these days who have simply been taught incorrect explanations by those they trust at the pulpit, and those at the pulpit, may have been taught by those in school- but- there is absolute truth.
I do fault people who can't read the simple text of 1 Co. 11 (which in almost every translation just says "woman") and the choose not to obey it, just like I do fault people who find reasons not to obey Matthew 5, 6, and 7.

And Romans 14 doesn't trump obeying the Bible. Not embracing homosexuality is also a stumbling block to many people, and Christians who think homosexuality is okay often cite Romans 14 in defence of it. Romans 14 is not a toolbox to find ways to ignore obedience to scripture.
There are a few women there who do- and they obviously were or are Mennonite -
Then it seems like they are in the wrong church. They should go back to somewhere where the Bible is taught and respected instead of ignored, unless you expect us Mennonites to keep on teaching the Bible until people "graduate" from us and go to a place that is trending towards apostasy.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: ESV Translation on 1 Corinthians 11

Post by Valerie »

Josh wrote:Here's what Luther said, and keep in mind these words are fairly archaic and have a very different meaning now ("Weib" in particular pretty much a rude word in modern German):
Ich lasse euch aber wissen, daß Christus ist eines jeglichen Mannes Haupt; der Mann aber ist des Weibes Haupt; Gott aber ist Christi Haupt.
A modern, vernacular German translation does this:
Eine Sache allerdings möchte ich zur Sprache bringen, weil ihr darüber offensichtlich noch nicht Bescheid wisst: Der Mann Ich will aber, dass ihr wisst: Jeder Mann. hat Christus als Haupt über sich, die Frau hat den ihren. Mann als Haupt über sich, und Christus hat Gott als Haupt über sich.
"Frau" is a lot closer in meaning to "γυνε", which can mean wife, woman, unmarried woman, virgin, bride - just like our own English word "woman".

(If someone is more skilled in Greek than I am, please feel free to correct anything I said.)
It SEEMS to me then, that what's being done in translations like ESV- is that they are picking which 'word' fits what they want to convey in this case- obviously, 'woman' seems to be one of the choices, but they are in this case, choosing 'wife' where they want to say 'wife'- and also applying it to 1st Century wives at that- I imagine 15th century Luthern followers, of the female gender, covered their heads!
0 x
Post Reply