Information pertaining to Young’s Literal Translation

[MatthewG]

Robert young grew up reading the King James Bible. By the 1830s and 1840s some of the words in the King James Bible had changed in meaning. This apparently sparked an interest in young Robert, an interest in learning the Hebrew and Greek and an interest in translating the Bible. Robert Young decided on a strictly literal rendering of the Hebrew and Greek into English. No changing of words, no softening of words or passages, just translated strictly as it was written in the original languages.

In 1862, Robert Young finished translating the Bible. This was something that he has spent half of his life preparing for and doing. Twenty-five years later, he released the third and final edition, in 1887. After another twelve years of study, he released the third and final edition, the 1898 edition. In this edition was almost a complete lifetime of studying Hebrew and Greek. Almost sixty years of study and work had produced what is probably the most literal translation of the Bible ever produced. Now instead of reading it on the internet or sitting down with photocopied pages or endlessly searching for a reprint from years past, it is now available again in book form.

Robert Young did not intend for his literal translation to replace or compete with the King James Version. It uses the same Elizabethan English that the KJV used, so it does have some of the same flow that the KJV has. However, being a strictly literal translation, the word order is different from the KJV, so it does read different than the KJV and can be difficult at times to read. Being a strictly literal translation though, makes it the perfect study tool. You can not see exactly what God said and how he said it. Sit down with this Bible in personal Bible study and watch your understanding grow. Bring it to a group Bible study and what the excitement grow as familiar Bible verses take a slightly new turn under a new light.

 

[Enoch111]

Being a strictly literal translation though, makes it the perfect study tool.

Agreed. Young's Literal Translation can be quite helpful as a study tool. Young did not depart from the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts underlying the KJV.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Robert young grew up reading the King James Bible. By the 1830s and 1840s some of the words in the King James Bible had changed in meaning. This apparently sparked an interest in young Robert, an interest in learning the Hebrew and Greek and an interest in translating the Bible. Robert Young decided on a strictly literal rendering of the Hebrew and Greek into English. No changing of words, no softening of words or passages, just translated strictly as it was written in the original languages.

In 1862, Robert Young finished translating the Bible. This was something that he has spent half of his life preparing for and doing. Twenty-five years later, he released the third and final edition, in 1887. After another twelve years of study, he released the third and final edition, the 1898 edition. In this edition was almost a complete lifetime of studying Hebrew and Greek. Almost sixty years of study and work had produced what is probably the most literal translation of the Bible ever produced. Now instead of reading it on the internet or sitting down with photocopied pages or endlessly searching for a reprint from years past, it is now available again in book form.

Robert Young did not intend for his literal translation to replace or compete with the King James Version. It uses the same Elizabethan English that the KJV used, so it does have some of the same flow that the KJV has. However, being a strictly literal translation, the word order is different from the KJV, so it does read different than the KJV and can be difficult at times to read. Being a strictly literal translation though, makes it the perfect study tool. You can not see exactly what God said and how he said it. Sit down with this Bible in personal Bible study and watch your understanding grow. Bring it to a group Bible study and what the excitement grow as familiar Bible verses take a slightly new turn under a new light.

Hi Matt, there are many versions of the Bible, many were done for the benefit of language groups, some were done in a sincere effort to correct mistakes that they felt had crept in, and then some were done to support their own understanding of the Bible. We Christians can benefit from these multiple versions in coming to understand God better, some are easier to read, which if a person will read it, and gain a better understanding, then it is certainly beneficial. I do not personally recommend any version that does their best to remove God's name however, as this is a critical manipulation. After all who is it that does not want you to know God's name? he has been successful in hiding His name, but very unsuccessful in eradicating it. Jehovah's name is well known throughout the world today, so that anyone who has the desire to call upon His name for salvation is able to do so. Rom 10:13

 

[Pierac]

Here are a few interesting facts about the word Aion…

“Let us look at how the word aion is used in a number of passages. About 37 times in the New Testament it is rendered "world," twice as "worlds," twice as "ages," and once as "course." Every place where the word "eternal" appears, with but one exception, it is a translation of this word AION or its adjective form AIONIOS. Twice it is rendered "evermore." Every place where the word "everlasting" appears, but one, it is this same word or its adjective form. With but thirteen exceptions, every place where the word "ever" appears it is the same word or its adjective form. And aside from all this confusion, the word also appears in the plural, and in a number of confusing combinations, such as "the aion of the aion," "the aion of the aions," and "the aions of the aions," etc.

Some of the passages where AION is found will give us added information concerning it.

In Eph. 2:7 we find, "in the ages (aions) to come."

In Col. 1:26 we find, "the mystery which has been hid from ages (aions). "

In Eph. 2:2 we find "you walked, according to the course aion of this world."

In Heb. 1:2 we find, "by whom also He made the worlds (aions)."

In Heb. 11:3 we find, "the worlds (aions) were formed by the Word of God."

In about fifteen instances, such as Mat. 12:32,1 Cor. 1:20, etc., we find it rendered "this world (aion)". Twice we find "this present world (aion). "

In Gal. 1:4 we find, "deliver us from this present evil world (aion)."

In Eph. 6:12 we find, "the rulers of the darkness of this world (aion)."

In 11 Cor. 4:4 we find, "the god of this world (aion)."

In I Cor. 2:6 we find, "the wisdom of this world (aion)."

In Lk. 16:8 we find, "the children of this world (aion)."

In Mk. 4:19 we find, "the cares of this world (aion)."

How much more understandable it would be if the translators had used the word age instead of world like Young's literal Translation does!

In Mk. 10:30 we find that there is not only this present aion, which is evil, but also "the world (aion) to come."

In Lk. 20:35 we find, "but they that shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world (aion), and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage."

In Heb. 6:5 we find, "and have tasted the powers of the world (aion) to come."

And in Lk. 1:70, Jn. 9:32, etc., we find that the aion had a beginning: "since the world (aion) began."

And now in reviewing the Scriptures we have just quoted, we note that this aion is something which has a king; it has princes; it is in darkness; it had a beginning; it has an ending; it is evil; it has wisdom; it has children who marry; it has cares. We also find in Col. 1:26 that the mystery of Christ in us, the hope of glory, has been hidden from these aions.

Now, if aion means eternal, consider how ridiculous the Word of God would be! The Holy Spirit would be found saying, "the mystery which has been hid from eternities;" "the mystery of Christ which in other eternities was not made known;" "in the eternities to come;" "You walked according to the eternity of this world;" "by whom also He made the eternities;" "the rulers of the darkness of this eternity;" "now once in the end of the eternities has He appeared;" "the harvest is the end of the eternity;" "since eternity began;" "in the eternities to come," etc. etc. Let the scholars whose business it is delve into the many intricacies of expression, and worry over the many grammatical combinations. Suffice it to say here that there have been "aions" in the past, there is this present "aion," and there are "aions" to come. And these all combined make up TIME, encompassing the whole of the progressive plan and program of God for the development of His creation.

Our King James version renders it, together with the adjective aionios as: "age, course, eternal, forever, evermore, for ever and ever, everlasting, world, beginning of the world, world began, world without end." What a horrible mixture! “

The translators of the American Standard and the Revised Version, which are revisions of the King James Bible, realized there were problems in the King James Bible with these words. They therefore made a consistent rendering based not upon the Greek, but upon tradition! They translated that verse in Titus 1:2 "before times eternal." Now what in the world is that supposed to mean? How can there be times (plural) before eternity? This is not translation, this is nonsense. But you see, they had to stay true to the tradition of an eternal "hell" in which many people would be "forever" punished. Realizing how ridiculous a literal rendering of this phrase sounded based upon "tradition," the American Standard translators put in the margin, "or, long ages ago." YLT reads... Tit 1:2 upon hope of life age-during, which God, who doth not lie, did promise before times of ages,

Now here is a phrase that makes some sort of sense to the Greeks and to the English. Why not put it into the English text, since that is a rendering which is far more true to the Greek and English than "before times eternal?" Tradition!!! It is interesting to note that the Revised Standard Version (a revision of the Revision of the King James Bible) finally put into the text itself "ages ago," not quite correct, but certainly much closer than its predecessors. The New American Standard Version, (a revision of the American Standard of 1901,an [American version of the Revised Version which is a revison of the King James Bible) "long ages ago." It took almost 400 years to break this incorrect "tradition"!

So who is correct?
It's up to you to do the research and search the Scriptures to see if it is so...

 

[MatthewG]

Agreed. Young's Literal Translation can be quite helpful as a study tool. Young did not depart from the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts underlying the KJV.

Thank you for sharing your insights, Enoch.

In love,
Matthew Gallagher

Hi Matt, there are many versions of the Bible, many were done for the benefit of language groups, some were done in a sincere effort to correct mistakes that they felt had crept in, and then some were done to support their own understanding of the Bible. We Christians can benefit from these multiple versions in coming to understand God better, some are easier to read, which if a person will read it, and gain a better understanding, then it is certainly beneficial. I do not personally recommend any version that does their best to remove God's name however, as this is a critical manipulation. After all who is it that does not want you to know God's name? he has been successful in hiding His name, but very unsuccessful in eradicating it. Jehovah's name is well known throughout the world today, so that anyone who has the desire to call upon His name for salvation is able to do so. Rom 10:13

Thank you for your insights, Robert.

in love,
Matthew Gallagher

Here are a few interesting facts about the word Aion…

“Let us look at how the word aion is used in a number of passages. About 37 times in the New Testament it is rendered "world," twice as "worlds," twice as "ages," and once as "course." Every place where the word "eternal" appears, with but one exception, it is a translation of this word AION or its adjective form AIONIOS. Twice it is rendered "evermore." Every place where the word "everlasting" appears, but one, it is this same word or its adjective form. With but thirteen exceptions, every place where the word "ever" appears it is the same word or its adjective form. And aside from all this confusion, the word also appears in the plural, and in a number of confusing combinations, such as "the aion of the aion," "the aion of the aions," and "the aions of the aions," etc.

Some of the passages where AION is found will give us added information concerning it.

In Eph. 2:7 we find, "in the ages (aions) to come."

In Col. 1:26 we find, "the mystery which has been hid from ages (aions). "

In Eph. 2:2 we find "you walked, according to the course aion of this world."

In Heb. 1:2 we find, "by whom also He made the worlds (aions)."

In Heb. 11:3 we find, "the worlds (aions) were formed by the Word of God."

In about fifteen instances, such as Mat. 12:32,1 Cor. 1:20, etc., we find it rendered "this world (aion)". Twice we find "this present world (aion). "

In Gal. 1:4 we find, "deliver us from this present evil world (aion)."

In Eph. 6:12 we find, "the rulers of the darkness of this world (aion)."

In 11 Cor. 4:4 we find, "the god of this world (aion)."

In I Cor. 2:6 we find, "the wisdom of this world (aion)."

In Lk. 16:8 we find, "the children of this world (aion)."

In Mk. 4:19 we find, "the cares of this world (aion)."

How much more understandable it would be if the translators had used the word age instead of world like Young's literal Translation does!

In Mk. 10:30 we find that there is not only this present aion, which is evil, but also "the world (aion) to come."

In Lk. 20:35 we find, "but they that shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world (aion), and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage."

In Heb. 6:5 we find, "and have tasted the powers of the world (aion) to come."

And in Lk. 1:70, Jn. 9:32, etc., we find that the aion had a beginning: "since the world (aion) began."

And now in reviewing the Scriptures we have just quoted, we note that this aion is something which has a king; it has princes; it is in darkness; it had a beginning; it has an ending; it is evil; it has wisdom; it has children who marry; it has cares. We also find in Col. 1:26 that the mystery of Christ in us, the hope of glory, has been hidden from these aions.

Now, if aion means eternal, consider how ridiculous the Word of God would be! The Holy Spirit would be found saying, "the mystery which has been hid from eternities;" "the mystery of Christ which in other eternities was not made known;" "in the eternities to come;" "You walked according to the eternity of this world;" "by whom also He made the eternities;" "the rulers of the darkness of this eternity;" "now once in the end of the eternities has He appeared;" "the harvest is the end of the eternity;" "since eternity began;" "in the eternities to come," etc. etc. Let the scholars whose business it is delve into the many intricacies of expression, and worry over the many grammatical combinations. Suffice it to say here that there have been "aions" in the past, there is this present "aion," and there are "aions" to come. And these all combined make up TIME, encompassing the whole of the progressive plan and program of God for the development of His creation.

Our King James version renders it, together with the adjective aionios as: "age, course, eternal, forever, evermore, for ever and ever, everlasting, world, beginning of the world, world began, world without end." What a horrible mixture! “

The translators of the American Standard and the Revised Version, which are revisions of the King James Bible, realized there were problems in the King James Bible with these words. They therefore made a consistent rendering based not upon the Greek, but upon tradition! They translated that verse in Titus 1:2 "before times eternal." Now what in the world is that supposed to mean? How can there be times (plural) before eternity? This is not translation, this is nonsense. But you see, they had to stay true to the tradition of an eternal "hell" in which many people would be "forever" punished. Realizing how ridiculous a literal rendering of this phrase sounded based upon "tradition," the American Standard translators put in the margin, "or, long ages ago." YLT reads... Tit 1:2 upon hope of life age-during, which God, who doth not lie, did promise before times of ages,

Now here is a phrase that makes some sort of sense to the Greeks and to the English. Why not put it into the English text, since that is a rendering which is far more true to the Greek and English than "before times eternal?" Tradition!!! It is interesting to note that the Revised Standard Version (a revision of the Revision of the King James Bible) finally put into the text itself "ages ago," not quite correct, but certainly much closer than its predecessors. The New American Standard Version, (a revision of the American Standard of 1901,an [American version of the Revised Version which is a revison of the King James Bible) "long ages ago." It took almost 400 years to break this incorrect "tradition"!

So who is correct?
It's up to you to do the research and search the Scriptures to see if it is so...

Thank you for sharing your insights pierac,

in love,
Matthew Gallagher

 

[Robert Gwin]

[QUOTE="MatthewG, post: 1232200, member: 10311



Thank you for your insights, Robert.

in love,
Matthew Gallagher



You are very welcome Matt

 

[Abigail]

Very interesting read worthy of a bump I think. :)

 

[Pierac]

I would love to have a Hard Bound Copy... But could only find soft cover...

 

[Pierac]

Check out this Bible retail site...

GREATSITE.COM: antique Bibles, rare Bibles, ancient Bible leaves

They have seriously cool reproductions...

 

[MatthewG]

Hello Pierac,

That was the same YLT version, it’s got nice paper it holds a lot information in a such a very shortly noted paged book. The New Testament is so thin compared to the Old Testament. Looked at the website, those are very very expensive Bible books. I would like a hardcover Thompson chain Bible, my Nasb TCB tore a part in some sections.

In Christ, thank you,
Matthew Gallagher

 

[Dustykitten]

Hello Pierac,

That was the same YLT version, it’s got nice paper it holds a lot information in a such a very shortly noted paged book. The New Testament is so thin compared to the Old Testament. Looked at the website, those are very very expensive Bible books. I would like a hardcover Thompson chain Bible, my Nasb TCB tore a part in some sections.

In Christ, thank you,
Matthew Gallagher

I found this older thread by a blessing I think.

I enjoy YLT.

I searched Amazon for the Thompson CHAIN and note it appears as different versions of the Bible. KJV, NASB, NKJV.

Are other than the KJV inauthentic to the initial 1800's edition? Or did Mr. Thompson commit to add his work to any Bible version?

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Robert young grew up reading the King James Bible. By the 1830s and 1840s some of the words in the King James Bible had changed in meaning. This apparently sparked an interest in young Robert, an interest in learning the Hebrew and Greek and an interest in translating the Bible. Robert Young decided on a strictly literal rendering of the Hebrew and Greek into English. No changing of words, no softening of words or passages, just translated strictly as it was written in the original languages.

In 1862, Robert Young finished translating the Bible. This was something that he has spent half of his life preparing for and doing. Twenty-five years later, he released the third and final edition, in 1887. After another twelve years of study, he released the third and final edition, the 1898 edition. In this edition was almost a complete lifetime of studying Hebrew and Greek. Almost sixty years of study and work had produced what is probably the most literal translation of the Bible ever produced. Now instead of reading it on the internet or sitting down with photocopied pages or endlessly searching for a reprint from years past, it is now available again in book form.

Robert Young did not intend for his literal translation to replace or compete with the King James Version. It uses the same Elizabethan English that the KJV used, so it does have some of the same flow that the KJV has. However, being a strictly literal translation, the word order is different from the KJV, so it does read different than the KJV and can be difficult at times to read. Being a strictly literal translation though, makes it the perfect study tool. You can not see exactly what God said and how he said it. Sit down with this Bible in personal Bible study and watch your understanding grow. Bring it to a group Bible study and what the excitement grow as familiar Bible verses take a slightly new turn under a new light.

That was some task for one person - didn't know he did it alone. Most modern translations have many dozens of scholars working on them. I think I remember one having 70 scholars taking five years to complete. Anyways, I've been using YLT for a long time, just to double check certain words.

 

[JunChosen]

Do we really need a new translation from a translation of the Bible that has already been translated once?

I mean, if God is the Author of the Bible, He would have dictated to His prophets the correct words and letters that He desired to use to avoid confusion after all, God does things perfectly? [Ephesians 4:11-14].

There are denominations however, whose members are nor not really Christians I believe, who insists that God's name is JEHOVAH, yet Revelations 19:11-13 says otherwise:
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes [were] as a flame of fire, and on his head [were] many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. [sound familiar]?

Again, God said in Revelation 22:18-19:
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

To God Be The Glory

 

[Michiah-Imla]

I speak English and some Spanish.

Can you imagine me walking up to Spanish speaking people as they read a Spanish translation of an English text and telling them a literal rendering of the English might make them understand better?



Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water.
—King James Bible (The Translators)

Nope, not in this generation!

 

[Pierac]

Do we really need a new translation from ?

I mean, if God is the Author of the Bible, He would have dictated to His prophets the correct words and letters that He desired to use to avoid confusion after all, God does things perfectly? [Ephesians 4:11-14].

There are denominations however, whose members are nor not really Christians I believe, who insists that God's name is JEHOVAH, yet Revelations 19:11-13 says otherwise:
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes [were] as a flame of fire, and on his head [were] many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. [sound familiar]?

Again, God said in Revelation 22:18-19:
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

To God Be The Glory

Your statement is some what confusing.... What do you mean By (a translation of the Bible that has already been translated once)...

Lets look at the translations....

KJV Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

ASV Gal 2:16 yet knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we believed on Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

NIV Gal 2:16 know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

ESV Gal 2:16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

NASB+ Gal 2:16 nevertheless1161 knowing3609a that a man444 is not justified1344 by the works2041of the Law3551 but through1223 faith4102 in Christ5547 Jesus2424, even2532 we have believed4100 in Christ5547 Jesus2424, so2443 that we may be justified1344 by faith4102 in Christ5547 and not by the works2041 of the Law3551; since3754 by the works2041 of the Law3551 no3756, 3956 flesh4561 will be justified1344.

CLV Gal 2:16 having perceived that a man is not being justified by works of law, except alone through the faith of Christ Jesus, we also believe in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by the faith of Christ and not by works of law, seeing that by works of law shall no flesh at all be justified."

So... Is it... faith In Christ or Faith of... Christ.... Big difference in Translations... my friend... Really BIG!!!

Just trying to help you see...
Paul

 

[JunChosen]

So... Is it... faith In Christ or Faith of... Christ.... Big difference in Translations... my friend... Really BIG!!!

Just trying to help you see...
Paul

You haven't really given me any reasons to choose which is the correct translation. All what you are saying one translation is saying "faith IN Christ" as opposed to the other translation "faith OF Christ."

However, if I have to choose which is the correct translation when studying the Bible, we find that "faith IS a gift" [Ephesians 2:8] and NEVER "faith IN Christ" which is a works Gospel, lest any man should boast!!! [Verse 9].

Nothing really mysterious here.

Yes, it is King James Bible for me.

To God Be The Glory

 

[Pierac]

You haven't really given me any reasons to choose which is the correct translation. All what you are saying one translation is saying "faith IN Christ" as opposed to the other translation "faith OF Christ."

However, if I have to choose which is the correct translation when studying the Bible, we find that "faith IS a gift" [Ephesians 2:8] and NEVER "faith IN Christ" which is a works Gospel, lest any man should boast!!! [Verse 9].

Yes, it is King James Bible for me.

To God Be The Glory

You speak well...

Faith really is a GIFT - Eph 2:8-10 - "For it is by free grace (God's unmerited favor) that you are saved (delivered from judgment and made partakers of Christ's salvation) through [ the gift of] faith. And this [salvation] is not of yourselves, but it is the gift of God; Not because of works [not the fulfillment of the Law's demands], lest any man should boast. [It is not the result of what anyone can possibly do, so no one can pride himself in it or take glory to himself.] For we are God's [own] handiwork (His workmanship), recreated in Christ Jesus, [born anew] that we may do those good works which God predestined (planned beforehand) for us [taking paths which He prepared ahead of time], that we should walk in them [living the good life which He prearranged and made ready for us to live].

Belief is a GIFT - Phil 1:29 - "For you have been granted [the gift] to grant as a favor for Christ's sake not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer in His behalf."

BTW... there is no correct translation... I kinda prefer the net Bible for study... the NASB and KJV for reading... The language of the KJV is Unbelievably Beautiful one of my favorites

 

[Pierac]

You haven't really given me any reasons to choose which is the correct translation. All what you are saying one translation is saying "faith IN Christ" as opposed to the other translation "faith OF Christ."

However, if I have to choose which is the correct translation when studying the Bible, we find that "faith IS a gift" [Ephesians 2:8] and NEVER "faith IN Christ" which is a works Gospel, lest any man should boast!!! [Verse 9].

Nothing really mysterious here.

Yes, it is King James Bible for me.

To God Be The Glory

I think your looking for E-Sword....
It might be more helpful.... as it has multiple translations you can add.... So far I have about 58 translations dating back to 200-300Ad. Yep, I have a e-version of the Codex Sinaiticus.... even better I can compare 4 versons at once.... I even have Wycliffe 1385 translation from the Latin Vulgate...If you can read it...