I’m involved in a conversation with someone who is citing variations in translation of Hebrew “nachash” or “nahash” (נחש) as support for their claim. He refers to variations between their KJV bible and the NIV in Genesis 30:27, where Laban learned by either “experience” (KJV) or “divination” (NIV). Later on, in Genesis 44, it appears that the same word describes Joseph’s activities in verses 5 and 15. The word also appears in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, where it is forbidden. I have very little understanding of Hebrew but found that this word can be used in several senses.
What are some thoughts or commentary on the translation of “nachash”, especially as applied to Laban’s and Joseph’s activities?
Backstory (if interested): My conversation partner is a fundamentalist, KJV-only fellow who believes the KJV is, at a minimum, inspired. Of course, I don’t think that the KJV is superior or inspired. However, I don’t think my partner is ready to directly confront those arguments. I’m hoping that if we engage in a study of “nachash” together then my partner will open up to looking at the translation of ancient texts from a new perspective and, perhaps, lead to a conversation about textual criticism.
interesting. The NSRV goes with “learned by divination” here, while Alter doesn’t include any reference to divination or omens and simply says “I have prospered and the Lord has blessed me because of you,” focusing instead on the stylized nature of the conversation between Laban and Jacob.
Thanks for both of the helpful responses. So, if I understand correctly, נחשׁ may be used without any connotation of divination or omens (e.g., merely meaning ‘to prosper’). Or, in the case of merely meaning ‘to prosper,’ is there some connotation that the prosperity itself is an omen or sign? For example, an omen or sign of favor from God.
Either way, ‘experience’ doesn’t appear to capture the character of נחשׁ for the modern English reader and I wonder if it even did for a reader in seventeenth century. Thanks for pointing out that the translators were probably just following along with Jerome’s translation without putting much more thought into it.
Down in my neck of the woods, as they say, it is very common to attribute prosperity to God’s blessing without resorting to some “magical” type of inquiry into the matter. While it is very common for people in this forum to say that people used to think differently “back in the day,” it is entirely possible that people had the same kinds of thought processes then as they do now. Alter’s translation seems to work well in context, but who’s to say. Maybe Laban did an unrecorded reading of the “runes” before making his statement.
I don’t know that reading omens is quite the same as divination, as long as one is not actively creating the omens or doing something like haruspication. Joseph was supposedly given omens in the form of dreams. Perhaps the question centers on forbidding actively seeking omens as opposed to passively receiving them.
Now that is interesting. Perhaps there was some pious hesitation at equating wisdom received from Yahweh with magical practices? There is the same distinction not being made in the Merkabah tradition where there is a direct, explicit association between divine wisdom and magical practices. So much so that the rabbis and even some modern Jewish commentators are rather scandalized by it.
What are some thoughts or commentary on the translation of the word in Gen 44 (5 & 15)? In context there doesn’t seem to be much ambiguity about what Joseph is saying and I don’t see any indication that there’s any negative/forbidden sense about whatever Joseph is doing that he calls divination.
I ask because the guy I’m talking to claims that translations like the NIV, NRSV, etc. are evil because they somehow misuse the word divination. I’m trying to demonstrate to him that the word (or its root) is not always used in a negative sense. The Gen 44 verses look like a good example.
That sounds right. The Merkabah community did not make such a distinction. The literature assumes that one of the benefits of the Vision of the Chariot is the attainment of what we moderns would call magic powers. And there is even a hint in portion of the tradition that the seeker may attain a form of divinity. The early Rabbis and Medieval commentators were very uncomfortable with this.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)