How should we regard the HalleluYah Scriptures?

The HalleluYah Scriptures are saying they are the one true translation, is this so? Is it a good translation?

Clarify Share Report Asked April 18 2017 20140716 130034 Lance Oosthuizen

Community answers are sorted based on votes. The higher the vote, the further up an answer is.

Closeup Jennifer Rothnie Supporter Housewife, Artist, Perpetually Curious
When a human translation claims to be the 'one true translation,' Christians should be wary. Only scripture as originally written is infallible - translators are not. Errors and bias enter translation, and there also is the problem of things being 'lost in translation' between languages. No English translation can ever convey perfectly the meaning of the Hebrew or Greek.

In the case of the HalleluYAH scriptures, there are other red flags as well:

- It's producers dislike any analysis or criticism of their work - to the point where they have threatened some reviewers with legal action.

- There is no information contained in the HS versions about who the translators were, what manuscripts they based the translation on, or their translation philosophy or methods.

- The company is embroiled in copyright and plagiarism disputes.

- The translation base that is used was done, with only minor changes, by a single man.

- The HS version contains no footnotes and no textual variants, which means that in many places what one is reading is merely a chosen interpretation.

Moving on from the red-flags and diving into the translation itself [As I do not have a copy of the HalleluYAH scriptures, I am pulling mostly from the ISR translation which is almost identical]:

The HalleluYAH translation is nearly identical to the South African Institute for Scripture Research Version (ISR) and 'The Scriptures' translation, both minor revisions of the translation by Chris Koster. Koster, when making his translation, mostly used the KJV translation, the Textus Receptus (TR), the Greek Nestlé-Aland, and the Hebrew Shem Tob texts as his basis (The last two being from the 14th and 16th century). He seems to have willfully pulled bits and pieces from each as he liked.

The HalleluYAH scriptures use the Hebrew and Greek names and titles for God, which is a nice element for those wanting to see the underlying nuance often lost in English translation.

For example, Col 1:1-2 would be something similar to "Sha’ul, an emissary of יהושע Messiah by the desire of Elohim, and Timothy our brother, to the set-apart ones in Colosse, and true brothers in Messiah: Favour to you and peace from Elohim our Father and the Master יהושע Messiah."

I personally like that idea in theory: it's wonderful to bring out the names of God; it seems much more personal to call Jesus by His Hebrew name Yehoshua (Yahweh brings salvation), or to praise God with his many titles such as El-Roi (The God who sees me), Yahweh Saboath (the Lord of Hosts) or Kanna (jealous) than just falling into saying 'God' all the time. Much of that is lost in English.

Unfortunately, the HS usage of these underlying terms is not always correct. Sometimes terms are changed or omitted, which leads to a translation that is not 'more faithful' by using the true names/titles of God, but can actually obscure or distort the nature of God in some cases.

For example, consider the ISR version of Col 2:9:

"Because in Him dwells all the completeness of the Mightiness bodily,"

Almost every other translation will use 'diety' or Godhead' since the Greek word is theotētos: http://biblehub.com/colossians/2-9.htm

Why would a translation go out of its way to use the Greek term for God 'Theos' in many passages, but obscure it when it comes to the diety of Christ? In this case, it is probably because Chris Koster, the one whose translation was used for the HS revision, did not believe Jesus was deity.

Here is another change the translation makes, which is also concerning:

"“For this is My blood, that of the renewed covenant..." Matt 26:28
"...servants of a renewed covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit..." II Cor 3:6

Note the change from 'new' to 'renewed'? This seemingly 'minor' change dismisses the new covenant and is used to promote law-keeping rather than walking by the Spirit.

In short, it's probably best to avoid the HalleluYAH translation or only use it as a supplement with other translations alongside.

April 19 2017 1 response Vote Up Share Report

Add your Answer

All answers are REVIEWED and MODERATED.
Please ensure your answer MEETS all our guidelines.

What makes a good answer? ▼

A good answer provides new insight and perspective. Here are guidelines to help facilitate a meaningful learning experience for everyone.

  1. Adhere to the eBible Statement of Faith.
  2. Your answer should be complete and stand-alone.
  3. Include supporting arguments, and scripture references if possible. Seek to answer the "why".
  4. Adhere to a proper tone and spirit of love and understanding.
  5. For more info see The Complete Guide to eBible
  1. 4000 characters remaining