![]() “freshly plucked”) and likely refers to “food” in general. The term טֶרֶף can refer to food derived from animals (i.e. The key term, בַּיִת, means “house, dwelling, building, family.” There isn’t a term for war that even remotely resembles בַּיִת. The term for war (מִלְחָמָה) does not appear anywhere in the entire chapter. Evan’s observation about a militaristic “victory” motif in this verse.Īdditionally, her rendering “she brings home spoils of war,” for verse 15 also seems fabricated. It seems that nearly all the English translations have missed Mrs. It means “behind, western, later, future, last.” When used with יוֹם (“day”), as it is here, it means “last or later days” or more dynamically, “the future.” The phrase pretty clearly means “she laughs at time/days to come” (ESV, HCSB, NIV, NRSV, etc.) or “she smiles at the future” (NASB), indicating a postive and optimistic outlook of the woman in Proverbs 31. No Hebrew dictionary or lexicon I consulted has “victory” or any synonym as a possible translation of אַחֲרוֹן. Her proposed translation of Proverbs 31:25, “she laughs in victory,” is simply false. The more fitting translation based on the language is, ‘a woman of valor who can find?’ And the phrase that’s used is ‘eshet chayil’…” So where we read, ‘she brings food to her family,’ the best translation is actually, ‘she brings home spoils of war.’ Where we read, ‘she can laugh at the days to come,’ the best translation is, ‘she laughs in victory.’ And the line that carries the poem is usually translated, ‘a virtuous wife who can find?’ And that’s a really bad translation. The poem is just really infused with this strong militaristic language that we miss in our English translation. “I did a little more research and I found out that we’ve kinda been mistranslating Proverbs 31. She claims that in her research she discovered some significant issues with our English Bible translations of Proverbs 31. This perspective aligns with a theme of her blog regarding the Bible, namely her oft-repeated caution: “loving the Bible for what it is and not what I want it to be.”Īlthough there is much more that could be said regarding her sermon, I do wish to focus on some issues related to her exposition of Scripture that formed the basis behind the assertions in her message. Her contention was that Ruth “broke all the rules” of biblical womanhood, especially those of the “Proverbs 31 woman,” a reference to the last chapter of the book of Proverbs. The main emphasis in her teaching corresponds to her forthcoming book, A Year of Biblical Womanhood, namely that there really isn’t a “biblical” anything, let alone biblical womanhood. Popular blogger and author, Rachel Held Evans, spoke at Mars Hill Bible Church this past Sunday for their Lenten series on the book of Ruth.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |