Religion:Real Bible Translation

Real Bible Translation (RBT) is a syntactical-literal and etymological-literal translation of the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. It is not based on any previous translation. It uses a reverse-translation methodology and computational linguistics as the basis for a digitized database-driven translation.

The RBT could be construed as a "tech version" in that it relies heavily on analyzing morphemes, lexemes, syntax, and semantic models using a database approach. Python, SQL, and the ETCBC-database of the Hebrew Bible are among the tools used.

History

Work on the Real Bible Translation began in early 2018 with completion of the book of Genesis in 2020. Much of the foundational influence for the work is rooted in the unknown Hebrew "accusative of time and space" and observations of Robert Young's attempt to handle and convey of the two unknown verb tenses traditionally referred to as complete and incomplete or perfect and imperfect, depending on the scholar. These two tenses are known to be untranslatable and research has shown that even the translator(s) of the LXX did not understand how the Hebrew tenses worked, yet Robert attempted to convey the distinction where other translations conjectured modern tenses. His arguments for this are found in the preface of his 1862 translation.

Reverse Formal Equivalence Approach

The translation methodology of the RBT is in reverse of normal translation methodology such that the ancient Hebrew is not interpreted into English word-tokens, but rather English word-tokens are interpreted into the ancient Hebrew. This means every Hebrew word-token is assigned only one unique English word rather than translated into dozens of different, subjective ways. In other words, the Hebrew word-tokens act as the "target" language, and the English as the "source". The idea is that the reader will be able to “learn” the ancient language without having to study the ancient language’s alphabet, syntax, lexis, etc.

One example is the waw-conjunctive which is normally translated as "and" but sometimes might be translated as "or", or "but" so that the modern mind can make sense of what they are reading. This direction posits ancient thought patterns into modern thought patterns. With reverse-translation methodology, the RBT tries to posit modern thought patterns into ancient ones. Hence, every waw-conjunctive is translated the same, "and".

Traditional Stories Challenged

One of the significant discoveries of a strictly syntactical-literal translation is the ambiguity of the traditional interpretation of the story of Cain and Abel. The traditional story posits Cain as a jealous murderer of his brother Abel, a righteous man. However, the syntax found in both the Genesis narrative and its remote references in the New Testament reveal a striking probability that it was Cain's offering that was accepted and not Abel's:

And HE IS BECOMING from the cut-off of the days, and Spearhead [Cain] is causing to come in from the fruit of the Red-one a gift to YAHWEH. And Vapor [Abel] has caused to come in, also himself, from the firstborn-ones of his sheep, from their fatty-ones. And YAHWEH is gazing toward Vapor and toward his gift. And toward Spearhead and toward his gift he has not gazed. And he is burning to Spearhead exceedingly, and his faces are falling. (Gen. 4:3-5 RBT)

The main verb in question is the Hebrew ַוִ֤יּ ַחר and he is burning and the preposition to, a term taken to be an idiom for anger. The verb construct is in the 3rd person masculine singular and has been traditionally rendered as a neuter "it is burning" to associate the verb with the previous sentence. The Hebrew verb charah meaning to burn, is always used in reference to anger and is not found used as a reference to a clause elsewhere. It is typically and uniquely expressed as he is burning to him or he is burning his nostril in. For example,

“And he is burning a nostril of YAHWEH in Moses...” (Ex. 4:14 RBT)

The word to gaze is shaah in Hebrew and is not found in a positive context in the Hebrew scriptures. This does not mean to respect, regard, or favor. In fact, it could mean a negative reaction in the same Qal form, i.e looking in dismay:

“Never are you fearing for with yourself is myself, never are you gazing [shaah], for myself is your elohe...” (Isa. 41:10 RBT)

An important New Testament reference is also syntactically ambiguous about the story:

"...we agape-love one-another, not according to Cain, from out of the evil was, and slew his brother, and why did he slay him? Because his works were evil, but those [works] of his brother, righteous." (1 John 3:12 RBT)

Surprisingly, "his works were evil" must be assumed to reference Cain's acts because John doesn't explicitly write who's works were evil. The semantics and flow would suggest John is actually comparing agape-love with Cain as it would make more sense to write "we must not hate, according as Cain" if that was his point. was Abel's works as John appears to be answering the question of why did Cain slay Abel with the emphasis on Abel. I.e he killed Abel because Abel's works were evil. And John explicitly writes that Cain was out from evil. The Greek ἐκ is an objective word that means exited... Thayer's Greek Lexicon states, "Also, it denotes exit or emission out of, as separation from, something with which there has been close connection; opposed to the prepositions εἰς into and ἐν in: from out of, out from, forth from, from"

This would imply that John could be saying Cain loved his brother but slew him because he had to. A narrative of Cain as the hero.Template:English Bible translations

Translation Sources Used

• Gesenius: Hebrew & Chaldee (i.e. Aramaic) Lexicon (1846)

• Gesenius Hebrew Grammar, 1813

• Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (1906). Based upon the work of Gesenius.

• A Hebrew & Chaldee lexicon to the Old Testament by Fürst, Julius (1867), student of Gesenius.

• James Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance (1890)

• Dictionary of Targumim, Talmud and Midrashic Literature by Marcus Jastrow (1926)

• Pulpit Commentary (1880)

• Cambridge Bible Commentary (1965)

• Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1864)

• Septuagint (LXX) Interlinear Greek OT (https://studybible.info/interlinear/)

• Perseus Greek Digital Library (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/)

• An Old Testament Commentary for English Readers (1897)

• Word Biblical Commentary, Gordon Wenham

• The Book of Genesis 1-17, 18-50, Victor P. Hamilton (1990, 1995)

• Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary, Victor P. Hamilton (2011)