• No results found

Which translation of the Bible do you read?

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Which translation of the Bible do you read?"

Copied!
7
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

1 Which translation of the Bible do you read?

This will be a ‘working’ session, not devotional. There are so many translations coming on the market all the time, that I cannot keep up with them.

Some Bibles are meant to be read devotionally. Others attempt to stay close to the original language and culture. Others are designed more for study purposes. Some translations are designed for use by particular denominations, which sometimes become the only version authorized to be used in their churches. Some have doctrinal agendas behind them, causing the reader to lean towards certain points of view (Passion, Mirror). Some translations are the work of a single person (Amplified Bible).

Some translations are the product of many scholars from a wide range of denominations coming together to work in harmony (NIV).

So why don’t we go straight back to the original manuscripts? The reason is simple. There are no original manuscripts in existence in the world today. The clay or wax tablets that were etched are not to be found. We don’t have the goatskins some of them might have been written on. Creating papyrus from plants was a skilled profession. The printing press has only been in existence since around 1440.

You can’t find any of the original writings today. They are all gone. Perhaps the most significant find in recent history is the ‘accidental’ discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the 1940s and 1950s by shepherds looking for their sheep in caves.

Wouldn’t it be great to go to a museum and see the actual, original documents that Paul wrote to the various churches? But whatever happened to them, they don’t exist anymore!

So, we must realize that in the absence of original manuscripts, we have to work with hand copies. In the world today, there are thousands of ancient copies, all produced by hand, copied repeatedly for over 1400 years. In the world today, there are about 5000 Greek copies, about 1000 Latin copies, but errors in copying by hand have resulted in the fact that no two of them are exactly alike. I don’t know where they are kept. There are national libraries in London. I believe the largest collection can be found in the national archives in St. Petersburg, Russia, though I am not positive.

A few copies in existence today date back as far as the 2nd century, but the greater majority are from the years 1000 – 1540. The challenge to scholars (who devote their lives to this kind of work), is to determine which ones were done first, and which is a copy of which. Would you like to go to university and learn the skill of ‘textual criticism’?

- determine which was original, and which is a copy of which - dating a manuscript by its quality

- be aware of the kinds of mistakes copyists make from time to time - what is the biblical author’s style and vocabulary

- how the individual writers used certain words - what was changed by an editor as he was copying - what was a spelling mistake made by a copier

- when a copier deliberately tried to clarify or harmonize - when a change was made due to a theological bias

I could give you so many examples that we would have no time to discuss anything else. I will only give you a few. If you want to know more, go do some research!

(2)

2 My personal journey is that I absorbed and memorized the KJV, and it was the only major Bible translation I read and studied for years. I became very accustomed to it. There is no doubt that it is beautiful and very poetic (but not always understandable to modern ears).

But just for a little fun, here are some examples. You will quickly see that there can easily be some heated passion over these things!

Jn 7:39 – the original says, and the Spirit was not yet. In order to clarify what could be misunderstood, (Is this saying that the Spirit was not in existence?), the word ‘holy’ and ‘given’ were added.

References to ‘fasting’ were added to Matt. 17:21 and 1 Cor. 7:5. Did a translator take away the concept of fasting, or did he add it? Which is correct?

Mk. 1:2 says that Isaiah is being quoted, but the quote actually is a conglomeration from Isaiah, Exodus and Malachi, so in some translations it was clarified by simply saying ‘the prophets’.

Mark 2:17 ESV I came not to call the righteous, but sinners - or - KJV I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance

Sometimes some words were not translated at all, but due to theological concerns, were transliterated (create a new word by keeping the Greek word intact). For example, take the word ‘baptize’ In every sese of the word, it means to dip or submerge. But at the time of the KJV, the church practiced other forms such as sprinkling. So, what were they to do? If they translated the word as ‘dip’ or ‘submerge’, they would have to change their practice, so they simply did not translate the word into English, but kept the Greek word ‘baptizo’.

Consider the word ‘bishop’. All it means is ‘overseer’, used interchangeably with pastor, elder, shepherd or presbyter. In the new testament, there was no hierarchy of church officials that led to a supreme leader. But in the time of the translators, there was, so they kept the word ‘bishop’ to justify such an office.

When King James authorized his famous version, there was some political reasons for it. There were warring factions between the Church of England and the Puritans. King James did not like the version of the Geneva Bible that was in use, which the Puritans used. He thought some of the notes in the margins were seditious and did not show enough respect for kings. He also favoured a hierarchical structure for the church, so he wanted the new translation to support the bishop-led system. He insisted that the Greek word ‘ecclesia’ not be translated as congregation or gathering, but kept to the word ‘church’.

Missing verses? Did you know that there are 16 verses that are omitted in the NIV? We have already noticed Matt. 17:21. Try looking up Mk. 15:28 in the NIV! Somehow, your Bible goes from 15:27 straight to 15:29!

Copying errors? 1 Sam 8:16 – Which is right? Is the king going to take your young men (KJV) or your cattle (NIV)? In the Hebrew language, there is one letter different I the spellings of these two words.

Which one got it right, and which one made a mistake in copying?

In Num. 11:25, did the seventy upon whom the Spirit came upon, did they not cease prophesying (KJV) or did they not do it again (NIV).

Why are there these differences? To help illustrate the issues, let us compare the KJV and the NIV.

(3)

3 The KJV was translated from what is now called ‘The Received Text’, which was compiled using a small number of late manuscripts available in the early 1600s. In contrast, the more modern versions and translations use what is called ‘The Critical Text’, which scholars have identified and eliminated copyist errors.

The NIV is based on the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament in Egypt around 250AD).

Bibles translated into other languages (such as the French or Russian Bible) use the same manuscript as the NIV. Sometimes the chapters division are different (Psalms, Job, Isaiah), so if you preach or teach in a culture that is French or Russian, work with your interpreter before the fact, or you will soon lose him when using references.

Having said all that, let’s move on to the theory of how translation works. I am sensitive to this, because for more than thirteen years, I have worked with interpreters in several languages (Russian, French, Albanian, Spanish, Chinese Mandarin, Vietnamese, Romanian, Hindi, numerous African dialects).

Translation is never just a word-for-word issue. There are huge gaps between the two languages in matters of words, how the grammar works, idioms, euphemisms, culture, worldviews, history and so forth.

Go to Spain, eat at a restaurant, and then ask for a ‘doggie bag’ to take home what you did not finish.

Tell me what happens! Since it is socially unacceptable to take food out of a restaurant, the waiter will not know what you are asking for. What is a doggie bag? A bag full of dog pieces? A bag made out of a dog’s skin? A bag full of food for your dog?

Have you ever tried a holiday to the US and spend your GBP there? Before you can spend, you have to exchange it, and then you are always asking the question as to how much you are really spending.

What does it mean to steer clear of something? If you said you travelled for 1000 miles, would someone who grew up with the metric system know how far you have travelled? In Australia, when you ‘knock up’ someone, you simply are knocking on their door. If you ‘knock up’ someone in Canada, you got them pregnant. Over the years, I have had more than my share of ‘goofs’ when I didn’t know I was making a goof. Inadvertently, I have admitted to being drunk, once told my female interpret how much I loved her in front of the whole church, and I have even called for prostitutes with my hands!

Can you believe it?

I’ve even discovered the English and Irish don’t really understand each other at times, and they both speak English! A jar to an Englishman is not a jar to an Irishman!

In everyday language, we use far more idioms than we realize. We speak of things familiar to us but not known in other cultures. Coming from Canada, how would I talk about being as white as snow to people who have never seen it? Or how would you translate the word ‘anchor’ in parts of landlocked Africa where the population has never seen the ocean or boats, and the word doesn’t even exist in their language? How would you preach about sheep to cultures that never have seen one, but only goats? In the west, to refer to a person as like an owl – that is a compliment, speaking of his wisdom.

Don’t’ do that in India, for there an owl is the symbol of foolishness. In the UK, calling you ‘homely’ is a compliment. But don’t use that phrase in North America. There it means ugly. If you invite a Canadian over for supper, don’t be surprised when he shows up for your tea! We put different definitions on the same words we use, and we live in the same era! Imagine trying to sort out what words meant at different times throughout history!

(4)

4 If something is a piece of cake, what on earth does that mean to strange ears? I could easily write a list of a hundred such sayings that would not make any sense if I simply gave word for word translation.

Just for the fun of it, let’s suppose you have to translate this for me into a different culture and language. This will help you get the difficulty in the work of translations:

My career had seen better days. I was skating on thin ice, scraping the bottom of the barrel, and ready to say ‘uncle’. The boss and I did not see eye to eye. He told me to shape up or ship out. There was no silver bullet. It was a safe bet to say I was going to sink or swim. Nobody could save my bacon. My smart-aleck colleague was a stick-in-the-mud and a snake in the grass who would sell me down the river as soon as shake a stick at me. I could smell a rat, so I steered clear of him. I had one slim chance, It was a shot in the dark, but if I could keep a stiff upper lip, stick to my guns, and sail close to the wind, I would get a second chance. The saving grace was that at the last minute I caught a second wind and was saved by the bell.

You would say that it was impossible to translate. You would have to expand and explain every phrase in order to get across any understanding at all! You would have to be completely familiar with my culture and find how to get the same concepts to be reflected with the same emotion and intensity to accurately get the point across to people in a completely different culture and worldview!

You have the same challenges when you try to translate poetry, rhetorical questions, hyperbole, irony (constantly used in Mark), sarcasm (irony that bites), metonymy (where word stands for an object or concept – the pen is mightier than the sword), synecdoche (where a part is used to describe the whole – nice set of wheels), euphemisms (ways of referring to embarrassing things or things hard to talk about, such as death, toilet and sex)… Some of us might even say, ‘I don’t know those terms even mean!’ But a skilled interpreter would have to know when he encounters such language and must know what he is to do with it. He may translate the literal words, but they would be completely meaningless to the hearers.

The goal for an interpreter, or translator, is to transfer both the words and ideas from language and culture into another language and culture. Our Bibles originally were written in Hebrew, different levels of Greek (koine – streel level, and some very technical), and parts in Aramaic.

One of the challenges every Bible translator has to work with is to decide what the style and reading level should be set at. Who is the intended audience? Scholars? Adults, Children? Immigrants where English is a second language?

Over time, words change meaning. When I was young, the word ‘gay’ did not men then what it means now. A long time ago, the word ‘silly’ used to mean ‘pious’ but now means ‘feeble in mind and lacking in reason’. Before ‘fudge’ became a sugary treat or candy, it was to tell a lie. Sometimes, it is still used that way today. Before a ‘leech’ was a blood sucking parasitic worm, it was a doctor. Centuries ago, the word ‘nice’ didn’t mean ‘pleasant’ or ‘appealing’, but meant ‘ignorant’ and ‘unknowing’. It still carries that meaning when we say it irony.

Now for some well-known old English Bible words…What does the word ‘prevent’ (KJV) in 1 Thess.

4:15 mean? To modern ears, it means to hinder, but that is not at all what it meant in 1611. It means to ‘not go before’. Why do modern people think the word ‘prosper’ in 3 Jn 2 (KJV) means financial success? It means no such thing. In 1611, it meant ‘have a good journey’. To wish someone to prosper was a general, polite way of saying that you wished them well. The abuse of this verse is well documented. A middle class society in the modern, capitalist, western hemisphere (which was as

(5)

5 foreign to the original reader as gong to Mars) reads this verse through the lens of its own culture with absolutely no concern for context or word definitions. And it has wrongfully been twisted to become the foundation of a ‘prosperity gospel’ that guarantees material wealth for ever believer.

Now let’s bring this specifically to the question of Bible translation. Now that I have outlined some of the problems that translators have to face, every translator must adopt a theory of translation. Then I can tell which versions chose which theory they have followed.

There are three theories.

1) Literal translation – This keeps as close as possible to the exact words and phrasing of the original language, and yet try to make sense in the receiving language. There is no attempt to bridge the culture or historic gap. Thus, the translation still speaks of a denarius, but you have no idea of what it is worth. Is it equal to a month’s wages? More? Less? There is no explanation. You read about candles and lamps, not flashlights or ‘torches’.

These translations keep the form of Greek and Hebrew while producing basically understandable English. It tries to produce the grammar and syntax (how words are put together) of the original language (power of his might instead of mighty power).

2) Paraphrase - On the other end, there are the ‘free translations’. The main goal is to get the ideas across the gap with less concern about exact words. What sounded natural in the original language is not natural today. It is not word for word but more thought for thought.

Today, we wouldn’t say, ‘There is tidings in his mouth’. (2 Sam. 18:25). We would just say, ‘He is bringing us news’.

Every translation lies somewhere within this spectrum. But there is a third option.

3) Dynamic Equivalent – This is a mediating position, the middle ground and gets between these two extremes. This is the attempt to translate the words, expressions, idioms, and grammatical constructions of the original language into precise equivalents. This keeps the historical distance but updates language, grammar, and style. It tries to find the balance, and therefore is sometimes more literal and other times more idiomatic.

Where does the Bible you read fit in?

Literal Translations: KJV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, Amplified, ESV

Paraphrase: Living Bible, Good News Bible, New Century version, Contemporary English version, God’s Word, New Living Translation, New International Reader’s Version, Phillips, Message

Dynamic Equivalent: Jerusalem Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible, Revised new English Bible, New American Bible, Ne International Version, Today’s New International Version, Tanakh, Holman Christian Standard Bible, New English Translation

Each approach to translation has its goals, strengths, and its weaknesses. No single version can accomplish excellence in every area. To be excellent in one area demands sacrifice in another.

Let’s build a chart:

(6)

6

Literal Mediating Free

Goal Comprehension Clarity Naturalness

Strengths Captures metaphors, verbal allusions, ambiguities

Accuracy and clarity Greatest comprehension, Communicates message Clearly and naturally Weaknesses Awkward English

Obscurity, inaccuracy,

Comprehension test often fails

Interpretive, Greater margin for error,

Sometimes unnatural English

Even more interpretation so even greater margin for error – sometimes loses nuances of meaning in pursuit of simplicity and clarity

Evaluating Literal Bibles:

In literal translations, the distance between the original and receiving language are kept too distant, creating an unnatural way of speaking. Have you ever heard a foreigner speaking ‘broken English’? He tries to find the right words, but uses them in his native grammar. Instead of saying, “I will come to your house”, he might say, “Me, your house, come.”

Hebrew grammar doesn’t use adjectives. The ‘word of his power’ is not natural in English. It is more natural to say, ‘his powerful word’. ‘Coals of fire’ (Rom. 12:20 KJV) are better understood as burning coals.

Literal translations can tend to make the English ambiguous. What does ‘to know after the flesh’ mean (2 Cor. 5:16)? It is an accurate and literal translation of the words, but what does it communicate to the modern English reader? Does it mean that a person is being known by their outward appearance (implied in the KJV and NASB)? Or does it mean that the person who is doing the knowing is doing it from a worldly point of view (as in the NIV)?

The NRSV is gender neutral and tries to be politically correct (man – anyone Jn. 3:4; Ps. 1:1,4). We do this as well. Do we speak of a chairman or a chairperson?

If the goal of the reader is to see the structure and cadence of the original, then a literal Bible is what you want. If you want to read large units and follow the sweep of a story, the free translations are good, especially for young people and new Bible readers. For study purposes, a mediating translation is the best.

Many scholars consider the NRSV is the most reliable. The NSAB is consistently literal and provides the most direct access to the form and structure of the Hebrew and Greek. The ESV is considered an improvement over the RSV because it uses more gender accurate language.

Evaluating Free paraphrases:

These are good for easily reading an entire book of the Bible in one sitting, for catching the big sweep of a narrative. It is helpful to read these as a complement to and in conjunction with other Bibles.

In free translations, the translation is updated so much that it becomes more of a commentary than a translation. The Living Bible talks about flashlights (lamp Ps. 119:105), handshakes (kiss 1 Pet. 5:14), pancakes (cakes Gen. 18:6), special abilities (gifts 1 Cor. 12-14), Rome (Babylon 1 Pet. 5:13).

(7)

7 What about the question of head coverings for women? For 1 Cor. 11:10, the Living Bible puts it this way “So a woman should wear a covering on her head as a sign that she is under man’s authority.” In stark contrast, the NIV says, “A woman ought to have authority over her own head” meaning it is her power of choice.

Evaluating Dynamic Equivalent Bibles:

The NIV is a very good choice for general purposes. The TNIV is an update of the NIV concerning gender accuracy. It is exegetically precise. The NET and NAB are reliable and excellent reads.

For study purposes, for developing accurate biblical thinking, for forming a biblical worldview, you want to use translations from the mediating, dynamic equivalent position the most. They attempt at keeping the precision necessary for constructing correct theology, and yet attempts to bring into our grammar, language and style so we can connect with it.

Choosing which Bibles you will habitually use:

If your purpose is reading for devotion or inspiration, feel free to use the paraphrases, but do not build your theology or doctrine on them.

If your purpose is study, use primarily Bibles from the mediating position. Then supplement that with a Bible from the literal category. Use a paraphrase to open your mind to other ways of thinking.

For those who are serious in their study, who do not know Greek or Hebrew, who have responsibility in teaching or preaching, whose goal is sound exegesis, and developing good and sound doctrine… use a Bible from the mediating, (Dynamic Equivalent) as your main Bible. The choose a Bible from the Literal category as a secondary supplement. Then read for a third time from another dynamic equivalent. Finally, read from yet another dynamic equivalent.

To mature spiritually, we must engage the Lord with our whole soul. We must engage our wills, our emotions, heart, soul, strength… and our minds. We must grow up in our thinking. We must read devotionally, but not limit ourselves to that. We must not let our theology be formed by the latest popular worship song (some which really need to be reworded. (Roaring of Lion of Judah? Amos 3:8;

Hos. 11:10… Reckless love of God?). The church is full of people who have grown up in church all their lives but remain biblically illiterate. In the west, this problem has reached pandemic proportions! We must learn to think! We must develop how to think biblically about everything. Otherwise, we will not mature as we ought.

We can chat about this for weeks, but this is only meant to give you an overview of this huge topic, to help you make choices and guide you in your reading habits.

Bible Study by:

Eugene Smith wordworship.org

References

Related documents

Our new favourite thing will be to listen to music together We will be so happy when Covid is

Comparative study of various bomber aircrafts The first step in the design of aircraft is to collect data of existing aircraft of similar purpose i.e., bomber.. This step

Using a Public Goods Game, we are interested in assessing how cooperation rates change when agents can play one of two different reactive strategies, i.e., they can pay a cost in

Open Society Georgia (Soros) 27 Course Baccalaureate Nursing Curriculum 40 Continuing Tbilisi State University Iashvili Children’s Hospital National Medical Center. Model

Even if we were able to correctly classify each Twitter user, we would not be able to make a reliable estimate of the voting results as (i) several Twitter users may not vote,

She has created mechanisms to feedback customer service and mystery shopping data into real time, revenue producing activities by the front line and outside sales forces.

observation gets to the ation gets to the heart of Appreciativ heart of Appreciative Inquiry, e Inquiry, an engagement an engagement technique with the potential to change the

While it is good to see possible altered chord extensions as a simple substitution, as shown in previous chapters, there is a very easy way to add tension and color to your