A critic of the KJV points to Deut. 8:9 as an error for its translation of "brass" since it is an alloy that is not dug out of the ground, and it is a difficult point to answer. I'm using the KJV here, but any translation can be criticized in like manner in various verses.
Brass, from the Encyclopedia Britannica
"Brass, as an alloy of copper and zinc without tin, did not appear in Egypt until about 30 BCE, but after this it was rapidly adopted throughout the Roman world, for example, for currency."
The KJV translators translated the Hebrew nchosheth 103 times as brass, 28 times brazen, fetters 5, chain(s) 3, copper 1, filthiness 1 and steel 1.
The KJV translators certainly knew about the alloy "brass" and knew it was not dug directly out of the ground, so why would they use the term "brass" 103 times instead of "copper" when they used "copper" the one time?
The first line in the ISBE states: "The use of the word brass has always been more or less indefinite in its application."
The Random House Dictionary of the English Language Second Edition, Unabridged:
brass "13. having the color brass"
From the KJV "Translators to the Readers" -
"Another thing we think good to admonish thee of, gentle reader: that we have not tied
ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure
would wish that we had done, because they observe that some learned men somewhere
have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense
of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places
(for there be some words that be not of the same sense everywhere [polushma]), we
were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But that we
should express the same notion in the same particular word, as for example, if we
translate the Hebrew or Greek word once by purpose, never to call it intent; if one where
journeying, never travelling; if one where think, never suppose; if one where pain, never
ache; if one where joy, never gladness, etc--thus, to mince the matter, we thought to
savor more of curiosity than wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the atheist
than bring profit to the godly reader. For is the kingdom of God become words or
syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them, if we may be free? use one precisely, when
we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?"
My guess is, the translators considered the context and used "brass" to represent any metals derived by digging in earth that was supportive of prosperity and showing the goodness from God. Any other ideas?
Brass, from the Encyclopedia Britannica
"Brass, as an alloy of copper and zinc without tin, did not appear in Egypt until about 30 BCE, but after this it was rapidly adopted throughout the Roman world, for example, for currency."
The KJV translators translated the Hebrew nchosheth 103 times as brass, 28 times brazen, fetters 5, chain(s) 3, copper 1, filthiness 1 and steel 1.
The KJV translators certainly knew about the alloy "brass" and knew it was not dug directly out of the ground, so why would they use the term "brass" 103 times instead of "copper" when they used "copper" the one time?
The first line in the ISBE states: "The use of the word brass has always been more or less indefinite in its application."
The Random House Dictionary of the English Language Second Edition, Unabridged:
brass "13. having the color brass"
From the KJV "Translators to the Readers" -
"Another thing we think good to admonish thee of, gentle reader: that we have not tied
ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure
would wish that we had done, because they observe that some learned men somewhere
have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense
of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places
(for there be some words that be not of the same sense everywhere [polushma]), we
were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But that we
should express the same notion in the same particular word, as for example, if we
translate the Hebrew or Greek word once by purpose, never to call it intent; if one where
journeying, never travelling; if one where think, never suppose; if one where pain, never
ache; if one where joy, never gladness, etc--thus, to mince the matter, we thought to
savor more of curiosity than wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the atheist
than bring profit to the godly reader. For is the kingdom of God become words or
syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them, if we may be free? use one precisely, when
we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?"
My guess is, the translators considered the context and used "brass" to represent any metals derived by digging in earth that was supportive of prosperity and showing the goodness from God. Any other ideas?
-
2
- Show all
