ResponsetothequestionWhydonootherpopulartranslationsagreewiththeMCTsrenderingofGe. 16:12?,Chrislam,anassessmentoftheIMsprincipleparadigms,JaySmith,pg.286 MikeTisdell,4/16/2012 TheC5missiologistswhomaketheclaimthatGe.16:12shouldbetranslatedasIshmaeliswitheveryone demonstrateaseriousmisunderstandingregardingtheusageof-and.Whileitistruethatwithcanbea propertranslationofthepreposition-,itisnevervalidtotranslateitwiththesensethattheC5missiologists aresuggestingshouldbeconveyedinthispassage.Thisrelationalunderstandingofwithisnotconveyedby thepreposition-.Iftheauthorhadwantedtoconveythisrelationalaspectofwithhewouldhaveusedthe terminstead.NootherpopulartranslationsagreewiththeMCTsrenderingofthisversebecauseitrequires oneascribeameaningtothepreposition-thatisinvalid. Background: OneofthemostcommongrammaticalmistakesamongModernHebrewspeakersisconfusingtheprepositions and-whentryingtoexpresstheideaofwith.InbiblicalHebrew(andgrammaticallycorrect)Modern Hebrewthesetermsarenotinterchangeable.isusedtoexpresstherelationalaspectsofwithi.e.

.Iam walkingwithmywifeortheTheplateiswiththecuponthetablebuttheprefix-expressestheideaofin inphraseslikefruitwithitsseedinit,inahouseortown,orataplaceortheideaofwithwhenused withanunderstandingofbymeansofi.e.toshootanarrowwithabowortocutatreewithanax.In general,ifyoucannotsubstitutethephrasebymeansoffortheprepositionwithinatranslation,thenitis likelyanincorrecttranslationofthepreposition-. Asanexample,thecorrectwaytoexpressIwrotewithapencilis butacommongrammatical mistakewouldbetotryandexpressthisas. Correctlytranslatedthelatterexpressestheidea thatIwrote[something]andIparon*whowastherewithmewasalsowriting[something].InModern Hebrewthereisoftenconfusionoverhowtheseprepositionsaredistinguishedfromeachotherbecause HebrewisnotthefirstlanguageofmanyModernHebrewspeakers.ModernHebrewspeakersoftenbegan speakingafirstlanguageotherthanHebrewandotherlanguagesfrequentlyhaveasemanticunderstandingof withthatencompassesbothmeaningsusingasingleword.TheBiblicalHebrewwriters,whowerenot influencedbytheseforeignlanguages,didnotmakethismoderngrammaticalmistake.
*Note:Iparonisthetransliterationofandpencilisthetranslationof.Propernamesaretypicallytransliterated, asitwasinthetranslationIprovided,andnottranslated.

WhiletheNETbiblenotesandtheNIDOTTEdonotdirectlyaddressthegrammarofthepreposition,theirnotes doprovidesomeinsightsintothecontextualissuesthatlaybehindthetranslationofagainst. NETbiblenotes: 36 sn A wild donkey of a man. The prophecy is not an insult. The wild donkey lived a solitary existence in
the desert away from society. Ishmael would be free-roaming, strong, and like a bedouin; he would enjoy the freedom his mother sought. 37 tn Heb "His hand will be against everyone." The "hand" by metonymy represents strength. His freeroaming life style would put him in conflict with those who follow social conventions. There would not be open warfare, only friction because of his antagonism to their way of life. 38 tn Heb "And the hand of everyone will be against him."

NIDOTTE, vol 2, pg. 403: The metaphorical use of yad(hand) covers a wide range of the concept of power. In this respect there is no essential difference whether the word is related to God or humankind.

HereisthephrasefromGe.16:12 veryliterallytranslateditishishand[is]in/againstalland thehandofall[is]in/againsthim HereishowthisphraseistranslatedinseveraldifferentEnglishversions:

his hand against everyone and everyone's hand against him (Gen 16:12 ESV) He will be hostile to everyone, and everyone will be hostile to him (Gen 16:12 NET) his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him (Gen 16:12 NIV) His hand will be against everyone, And everyone's hand will be against him (Gen 16:12 NASB) with his hand against everyone, and everyone's hand against him (Gen 16:12 NRSV) His hand shall be against every man, And every man's hand against him (Gen 16:12 NKJV)