English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Proverbs 6:26 is a fairly well-known verse: it talks about how adulteresses are dangerous...."a harlot can be had for a loaf of bread but an adulteress" leads to death, etc. However, in alternate translations, the verse reads "a harlot reduces a man to a loaf of bread."
So there is a completely different meaning, depending on which translation you are reading. My Catholic Bible has the "had for a loaf of bread" line; my King James says "reduce to a loaf of bread."
So which one is correct? It is one of those verses with completely different messages depending on the translation.

2007-11-16 02:42:53 · 8 answers · asked by Digital Age 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

8 answers

This is the translation from a Greek literal translation of the Bible.

Proverbs 6:26 For on account of a woman, a harlot, a man comes to the last loaf of bread, and another man's wife hunts for the precious soul.

2007-11-16 02:50:53 · answer #1 · answered by Bible warrior 5 · 1 0

The King James Version of the bible is most assuredly not "the bible" the bible is a collection of ancient manuscripts in their original language. Translations rarely completely give the actual meaning of a phrase in a single language. For example the biggest and most glaring of the errors in the KJV is the "thou shallt not kill" translation. (If this were literal all of the armies of Judah that killed all those folks in various battles would be doomed to hell). There is no single english word for the original language--it best translates to "thou shallt no kill-unless in war or for self defense". Logic can be applied to the passage you quote. A harlot is basically a whore--woman who has sex with a man for compensation. to say a man can have a whore for a loaf of bread makes perfect sense,to say that having a whore makes him a loaf of bread makes no sense. An adultress, married woman who has sex a man not her husband--this is not really a stricture against morality. If a man has sex with a whore any children resulting from that union are not children of a marriage--Hebrew law then said that the first born son of a marriage inherited the whole nine yards from the father. Therefore man having sex with a whore just makes bastard children there is no effect on property rights. A married woman who has sex with someone not her husband-the parentage of any children she has would be in question--the husband or the lover. Therefore unless he was sure of the wife's faithfulness someone else child could inherit all that he had. This has a very adverse affect on society as a whole. therefore the "punishment" specifically for women who committed adultry was severe--DEATH. This was the origin of the double standard--these passages are not about morality--they are about protection of family assests and the lineof inheritance.

2007-11-16 03:00:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Accuracy is a better question, All are translations of God's Word, but which one does it better and without bias.

"26 because in behalf of a woman prostitute [one comes down] to a round loaf of bread; but as regards another man’s wife, she hunts even for a precious soul."

Prostitution reduces the value of a women to a loaf of bread,

At least a slave was worth 30 times more.

How accurate is the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures:

Old Testament:
In fact, the New World Translation is a scholarly work. In 1989, Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel said:
"In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translation, I often refer to the English edition as what is known as the New World Translation. In doing so, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this kind of work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew....Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain."

New Testament:

While critical of some of its translation choices, BeDuhn called the New World Translation a “remarkably good” translation, “better by far” and “consistently better” than some of the others considered. Overall, concluded BeDuhn, the New World Translation “is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available” and “the most accurate of the translations compared.”—Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament.

“Here at last is a comprehensive comparison of nine major translations of the Bible:

King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, Amplified Bible, Today's English Version (Good News Bible), Living Bible, and the New World Translation.

The book provides a general introduction to the history and methods of Bible translation, and gives background on each of these versions. Then it compares them on key passages of the New Testament to determine their accuracy and identify their bias. Passages looked at include:

John 1:1; John 8:58; Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 1:15-20; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1

Jason BeDuhn
Associate Professor of Religious Studies, and Chair
Department of Humanities, Arts, and Religion
Northern Arizona University

(Please note that according to Dr. Jason BeDuhn, only the NWT translated John 1:1 correctly)

.

2007-11-16 02:57:01 · answer #3 · answered by TeeM 7 · 0 0

Look at the text in other languages:

Latin:

pretium enim scorti vix unius est panis mulier autem viri pretiosam animam capit

Greek:

τιμη γαρ πορνης οση και ενος αρτου γυνη δε ανδρων τιμιας ψυχας αγρευει

Hebrew:

כי בעד־אשה זונה עד־ככר לחם ואשת איש נפש יקרה תצוד׃ ף

I don't know what "alternate translation" you are using - but - the point is clear:

"For on account of a harlot one is reduced to a loaf of bread, And an adulteress hunts for the precious life."

2007-11-16 02:51:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Look at the Hebrew, the original lannguage it was written in, if you have a translation concern. You can get this in just about any interlinear translation

You will find translation issues in most translations. Word for Word translations have the least.

2007-11-16 02:55:56 · answer #5 · answered by Cuchulain 6 · 0 0

The correct version is the letters written by the apostles in the original Greek. However since there so few of us, including me, who cannot read Greek, we have many translations.

Learned women and men of God work on many different versions to make sure they are correct.

TO make it simple, if it is not a salvation issue, by that I mean, Jesus died and rose again. Study and read the version you are comfortable with.

You can go on and on all day, is this version right, is that version right. The right version is the one you read and understand and it changes your life for Jesus.

2007-11-16 02:49:08 · answer #6 · answered by lilyflower 2 · 1 0

Stop reading the English versions. Get the original language if you want the correct one.

Chris: Catholics use the KJV, geniass.

2007-11-16 02:47:19 · answer #7 · answered by 雅威的烤面包机 6 · 2 2

KJV is the Bible.

Catholics changed their Bible. Catholics are not saved and are not Christians, because catholics believe a false gospel of works that leads to eternal hell (Galatians 1).

2007-11-16 02:46:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers