Translations are not the problem. The problem is new translations. “The word of God” is the translation we grew-up hearing, we are fine with that one. Other translations are wrong, aren’t as majestic, they leave stuff out, they put stuff in, they just sound wrong. We like to believe that we are logical and rational people, but when it comes to the “word of God” it is hard not to have an emotional response. This essay is not intending to change your opinion on what translation to use, or whether one should translate “word for word” or use dynamic equivalence. I want to learn what Jesus felt about translations of the word of God. Perhaps knowing how Jesus felt will influence how we feel about them.
Every Old Testament quotation in the New Testament was translated into Greek. That is obvious, but it is also obvious that we do not think about it. How often have you compared the quotation to the reference? Here are three passages that Jesus quoted in the book of Matthew, from the King James translation. They are similar to the passages from the Old Testament, but the differences are very interesting. We do not know why the translators chose to translate the passages the way they did, but we can still learn from them. Jesus had many enemies, and they would have been delighted to point out that the translation he used was wrong. They never did.
Isa. 42:1-4
Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. 2He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. 3A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth. 4He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
Mat. 12:18-21
Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles. 19He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets. 20A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory. 21And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.
There are so many differences between the two passages: “whom I have chosen” instead of “whom I uphold”, “my beloved” instead of “mine elect”, “well pleased” instead of “delighteth” and others. But I want to discuss the final statement where Jesus quoted “the Gentiles” instead of “the isles”. When Isaiah wrote “Isles” he seems to have been making a poetic reference to the gentile nations. The translation that Jesus used made clear that Isaiah was referring to the gentiles. Our modern translations do similar things when they choose to translate the idea instead of the word, and they are criticized for doing it.
Isa. 6:9-10
And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. 10Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.
Mat. 13:14-15
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
There are several changes made in the translation. These changes are mostly the result of the change in perspective: in Isaiah the prophet is commanded to speak to the people, in the Greek translation the responses of the people are being described. A striking difference is how much shorter Isa. 6:9-10 is than Mat, 13.14-15. It is hardly a word for word, literal translation, but it is the one Jesus used.
Deu. 6:5
And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
Mat. 22:37
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind
Such a simple passage, and it is almost a word for word translation but for one word: “might” is not the same as “mind”. Why did Jesus choose to use a translation that used “mind” instead of “might”? I assume that he used that translation because that was the one people were using.
Translations of the scriptures are necessary, but they have always aroused dislike. Augustine complained that “In the early days of the faith, every man who happened to gain possession of a Greek manuscript and who imagined that he had any faculty in both languages - however slight that may be - dared to make a translation” (De doctrina christiana ii.11).
Should we use a word for word translation, or a dynamic equivalent translation? Or some mix of the two? When you look at the translations that were used in the New Testament you see that the inspired writers used the translation that was in common use among the people they were teaching. Sometimes they used word for word translations and sometimes they used a dynamic equivalent. If Jesus and the apostles were willing to use dynamic equivalent translations why are we objecting to them?
We are blessed with many translations of the word of God. While we will never agree on what is the best translation or even how the translation should be made, perhaps we can read the translations that Jesus and the inspired writers of the New Testament used and be a bit more humble with our comments about how a passage must be translated. And, perhaps, we can agree that we are allowed to use the one we want to use.
If I had my druthers we would all read the bible in the original languages, but I know that will not happen. People prefer that translation that they grew-up using. And we would still have complaints: the original language sounds wrong, and it is too much work to learn to read the word of God in the languages he inspired them to be written in.
Translating is hard, and no matter how well you do it, you look at your results and are dissatisfied. Something is always lost: the meaning of the words, and the beauty of the writing. Translating is a humbling experience, and it makes you compassionate to those who translate the word of God and publish it so that people can read the word of God in their native language. Such people should be honored, not condemned. There are no perfect translations, but there are many that are worth using. Choose one that you enjoy reading and know that the power of God’s word will overcome the limitations of our human language and the limitations of our ability to translate them.
RAJ
No comments:
Post a Comment