Skip to main content
Biblical Hermeneutics

Return to Question

misquotation from ESV
Source Link
WnGatRC456
WnGatRC456
  • 688
  • 1
  • 6
  • 20

I was comparing translations when I noticed this difference in Mark 11:20-21.

As they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. And Peter remembered and said to him, "Rabbi“Rabbi, look! ThatThe fig tree that you cursed has withered."” - ESV

As they were passing by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots up. Being reminded, Peter said to Him, “Rabbi, look, the fig tree which You cursed has withered.” - NASB

Now in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter, remembering, said to Him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.” - NKJV

My question is simple. From the last two translations, it is clear that the intended meaning of the passage is that the fig dried up starting at the roots and moving upwards. So why does the ESV choose to render the passage in a way that seems to reverse this, suggesting that the plant withered from the top down instead?

I was comparing translations when I noticed this difference in Mark 11:20-21.

As they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. And Peter remembered and said to him, "Rabbi, look! That you cursed has withered." - ESV

As they were passing by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots up. Being reminded, Peter said to Him, “Rabbi, look, the fig tree which You cursed has withered.” - NASB

Now in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter, remembering, said to Him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.” - NKJV

My question is simple. From the last two translations, it is clear that the intended meaning of the passage is that the fig dried up starting at the roots and moving upwards. So why does the ESV choose to render the passage in a way that seems to reverse this, suggesting that the plant withered from the top down instead?

I was comparing translations when I noticed this difference in Mark 11:20-21.

As they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. And Peter remembered and said to him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree that you cursed has withered.” - ESV

As they were passing by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots up. Being reminded, Peter said to Him, “Rabbi, look, the fig tree which You cursed has withered.” - NASB

Now in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter, remembering, said to Him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.” - NKJV

My question is simple. From the last two translations, it is clear that the intended meaning of the passage is that the fig dried up starting at the roots and moving upwards. So why does the ESV choose to render the passage in a way that seems to reverse this, suggesting that the plant withered from the top down instead?

Source Link
WnGatRC456
WnGatRC456
  • 688
  • 1
  • 6
  • 20

Why does the ESV say the tree withered from the top down, while other translations say the tree withered from the roots up?

I was comparing translations when I noticed this difference in Mark 11:20-21.

As they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away to its roots. And Peter remembered and said to him, "Rabbi, look! That you cursed has withered." - ESV

As they were passing by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots up. Being reminded, Peter said to Him, “Rabbi, look, the fig tree which You cursed has withered.” - NASB

Now in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter, remembering, said to Him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.” - NKJV

My question is simple. From the last two translations, it is clear that the intended meaning of the passage is that the fig dried up starting at the roots and moving upwards. So why does the ESV choose to render the passage in a way that seems to reverse this, suggesting that the plant withered from the top down instead?