Lost with translations?

Sunday's Old Testament reading caused some interesting discussions regarding Leah (Laban's daughter) and her eyes (Genesis 29.17) because the NRSV - which is used by many churches as the standard volume of the Bible told those gathered that her eyes were 'lovely' BUT those who use other versions were left with the impression that she was in possession of dodgy eyesight!

As requested - I have compiled a list of thirty-eight Bible versions - six of which go with 'lovely, nice or attractive' whilst the rest all point to something else and point to the challenge of different translations and their take on things.

Many of the translations look back to the King James Version as their starting point - seeking to move forward from this start point and put the Bible into contemporary language and, using 'modern' linguistic tools,  change words translated incorrectly.

There are (as I recall) three main types of translation available to us: At one end of the spectrum we have the free translations (like the most excellent Message) whilst at the other we have the literal translations (English Standard Version, New American Standard Version to name but two) with the dynamic version (one of which is the New International Version) acting as the fulcrum.

1. Literal translation. Seeks to maintain exact words and phrases of original using modern style and grammar (including the King James - which fits the bill for time it was written!).
   Not always the easiest but most accurate of the translations.
2. Dynamic equivalent translation. Seeks to keep timelines and facts with modern writing style and grammar. Trade off between accuracy and readability.
3. Free translation or Paraphrase). Keeps the stories but modifies way they're told to give gist rather than 'word for word' or 'close enough' realities of the other two.
   Eminently readable, but rather loose - but you get the idea of what story/history/stuff is about.

Each translation has its strengths and weaknesses - Reading level is a good consideration, so here's some of the translations grouped by type and reading levels to help you compare (and perhaps select for yourself):

FREE TRANSLATIONS

The Message (MSG): Leah had nice eyes
The Living Bible (TLB): Leah had lovely eyes

DYNAMIC EQUIVALENT TRANSLATIONS

Contemporary English Bible (CEB): Leah had delicate eyes
Good News Bible (GNB): And Leah was tender eyed
New Living Translation (NLT): There was no sparkle in Leah’s eyes
New Jerusalem Bible (NJB): Leah had lovely eyes
Revised English Bible (REB):Leah's eyes were weak
New International Version (NIV): Leah had weak eyes
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB): Leah had ordinary eyes
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV): Leah’s eyes were lovely

LITERAL TRANSLATIONS

New American Bible (NAB): Leah had lovely eyes

English Standard Version (ESV): Leah's eyes were weak
Revised Standard Version (RSV):  Leah’s eyes were weak
New King James Version (NKJV): Leah’s eyes were delicate
Amplified Bible (AMP): Leah’s eyes were weak and dull looking
New American Standard Bible (NASB): And Leah’s eyes were weak
King James Version (KJV): Leah was tender eyed


So it's simple: Don't rely on just one translation of the Bible!

I try to take one of the free and one or two from the other types of translation when I consider the passage before me to ensure that I have a good grasp of what's on offer and the accuracy and tenor of the words before me.

I hope this is of some help

Pax


And if you're having fun - here's some more to consider:
ASV:And Leah's eyes were tender.
CJB: Le’ah’s eyes were weak
CEV: Leah was older than Rachel, but her eyes didn’t sparkle
DARBY: And the eyes of Leah were tender
DRA: But Lia was blear eyed
ERV: Leah’s eyes were gentle
ESVUK: Leah's eyes were weak
EXB: Leah had ·weak eyes [frail/tender eyes;  likely means unattractive]
GW: Leah had attractive eyes
GNT: Leah had lovely eyes
HCSB: Leah had ordinary eyes
JUB: Leah was tender eyed
KJ21:Leah was tender eyed
AKJV: Leah was tender eyed
LEB: Now the eyes of Leah were dull
NOG: Leah had attractive eyes
NABRE: Leah had dull eyes
NCV: Leah had weak eyes,
NET: Leah’s eyes were tender
NIRV: Leah had weak eyes
NLV: Leah’s eyes were weak
OJB: Leah had weak eyes
VOICE: There was no brightness to Leah’s eyes
WEB: Leah’s eyes were weak
WYC: but Leah was bleary-eyed,

The Sixth Day of Christmas - Creation

'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth' - the beginning of the 'beginning' narrative and the start of great assurance or general unease. Literal or figurative days? Young earth or old earth? Creation is the source of all that is, including controversy!

People speak of the seven days of creation, but of course, as accentuated by the six days of Christmas, there are but six - day seven being the day off after the labours!

This is not the place to discuss young or old earths and the like - for here the focus is what each day results in bringing about.

Day One
In the beginning there was nothing and then came a voice with it the first uttered words, 'Let there be light!' - and, of course being God, the light was good! So God separated the light from the darkness and there it is: Day one - light and darkness. Day and night.
















Day Two
In short water and sky make their entry. Science books tell me it's all about vapour, condensation and all that stuff!















Day Three
Dry ground appears and as we all know - have a bit of ground and stuff soon appears - creation is where this starts! So we have dry ground, with vegetation, and where it's not dry there are seas. Friends call this 'Tectonic day'!
















Day Four
Things are settling down and there are now visible in the sky the sun by day and the moon by night - and stars and seasons too I assume  for position, and appearance, of stars ( like Winter's Orion) bring us seasons (not just climatic you know).
















Day Five
Getting good (I'm bird watcher and fisherman) as we get out first, 'Be fruitful and multiply,' for sea creatures and birds.

















Day Six
What's left? Oh yeah, animals - and with them the pinnacle of creation, Human beings.


















So that, in a nutshell, is creation - is it any wonder that the next day was a day off?

Light - Dark
Water -Sky
Ground - Green stuff
Sun, Moon and Stars
Birds and Fish
Animals and People

Literal days or otherwise - friends (and books - what are merely written friends) tell me the order is right and the division logical and scientific - and that's a bit of a winner, isn't it ;-)

My gift to you today? The wonderful 'Days of Creation' by Burne-Jones (can be seen in the windows of St Editha's, St George's Chapel, and the brief summary of the Genesis account.