An Illogical Objection to a Version of the Bible

     Most of our English versions of the sacred scriptures were translated
from the Hebrew and Greek texts by people who are highly trained experts
in their respective disciplines. They not only know the intricate details of the
source  languages, but  they  know  the  target  languages  well, otherwise
the translation process would be impossible.

     Translators are not miraculously guided by the Holy Spirit in their work.
Therefore,  their  work  sometimes  reflects  the  imperfections  of  human
tradition,  thinking,  and  training.  This  is  why  translations  often  need
revision. There is not a perfect translation of the scriptures in existence.
But, this does not mean that a person cannot learn what God wants them
to do in order to be saved from sin. God's plan of salvation can be learned
by studying most English translations.

     There are a number of reasons why people choose particular translations
as their primary Bibles.  Some choose modified-literal translations because
they are close to the original texts in form. Most modified-literal Bibles are
not idiomatic in their approach to the translation process. Modified-literal
Bibles are good for study purposes, but they  are  not  good  for extended
periods of  reading. Most of them tend to be awkward in style, archaic in
phraseology, and cumbersome in sentence structure. The American 
Standard Version is a perfect example of each of the foregoing elements.
It is very faithful to the Hebrew and Greek form, but it is not good, idiomatic,
readable English in many places. Notice the ASV's rendering of Luke 9:17,
"And they ate, and were all filled: and there was taken up that which remained
over to them of broken pieces, twelve baskets." The ASV is nearly word for
word and true to the form (word order of the Greek text). But, it is not good
readable English. It is called biblish, that is, artificial translation English in a
form never spoken as a common dialect. The NIV 2011 translates the same
passage in this way, "They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked
up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over." Faithful to the text,
precise, and expressed in clear modern English.

     A fellow preacher objected to the NIV on the following basis, "It's
too easily understood. It doesn't sound like the Bible ought to sound.
Furthermore, a Bible like that will make my work as an expositor
unnecessary." His objection to the NIV is an illogical objection. It
makes no sense. God wants his word translated in a way that people
can understand it! According to the preacher, God's word should be
extremely difficult, archaic, and unnatural. (Eph. 3:3-4) He also fails to
understand that there will always be a place for the expositor of the word.
His role is to explain the text in harmony with the immediate and remote
contexts; to define key words; and to make application to his life and to
the lives of others.

     If one objects to the NIV and other translations, let it be on the basis
that they do not accurately convey the meaning of the original texts of
scripture. The Hebrew and Greek texts are the standard, not someone's
personal likes and dislikes.No matter whose they are, illogical objections
will remain illogical objections!
                                                                                                RD

Copyright 2011 

    


    

NIV-2011

     Zondervan Bible Publishers of Grand Rapids, Michigan, in conjunction with
Biblica US, Inc., Colorado Springs, Co. has released an update of the New
International Version, Copyright 1973,1978, 1984, 2011. Their intent is to bring
the NIV in line with current scholarship, and to update the text so that gender
accuracy is reflected  in both the Old and New Testaments. The new revision is
generally referred to as the NIV-2011. Most people who purchase it will think
of it as a revised NIV.

     Today's New International Version (TNIV), Copyright 2001,2005, was a
"failed" attempt to accomplish the same goal. It was rejected by many who style
themselves as evangelicals. Some evangelicals judged the TNIV as being loose
primarily because it made an an attempt to be "gender accurate." There are many
places in the Old and New Testaments where the biblical writers include both
males and females, but such is often obscured when gender specific words such
as "he," "man," "men," and  "brother/brothers" are used in English translation.
When both males and females are included in the words used by the writers of
scripture, the meaning is "person," "people," "human being," "mankind," and
"brothers and sisters." Inasmuch as the TNIV didn't read like their NIV, many
people rejected it even though it has many virtues that commend it as a good
reading Bible and it is good for comparison with other translations. 

     The NIV-2011 is an improvement over both the NIV and TNIV. It has
the strengths of both the NIV and TNIV, and it corrects many of the exegetical
weaknesses of both. It is not perfect but it is imminently useful! It is not among
the modified-literal texts such as the ASV, RSV, NASB, NRSV, and ESV.
The NIV-2011, like the NIV and TNIV stands among the idiomatic translations
that strive to translate using terminology that is current. Their translators looked
in the ancient Hebrew and Greek texts and said, "We know what the Hebrew
and Greek say; how do we say the same thing in English?" They are meaning
based versions. Many people criticize meaning based translations, but the fact
is, every single English version is meaning based to a large extent! Every
informed translator determines the meaning of the words or phrases he is
translating, then he transfers the meaning by selecting the word or phrase in
the receptor language that means the same as the original word or phrase.

     We will now mention a few notable instances in which the NIV-2011 excels
over the "original" NIV. In Acts 2:27, the NIV reads, "...you will not abandon
me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay." The revision says,
"...you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, you will not let your holy
one see decay."  In John 1:18, the NIV says the Son is "at the Father's side."
The revision says the Son "is in closest relationship with the Father." This
beautifully and accurately conveys the meaning of the idiom "in the bosom of" in
the Greek text. The NIV received a lot of criticism for translating the Greek
word sarx as "sinful nature" in the letters of Paul. Most of the places have been
"corrected" and the revision generally reads "flesh." When Paul used sarx he
was not literally referring to the material composition of the body, but to a sinful
state or condition. (cf. Rom. 8:3; Eph. 2:3, etc.) In 1 Cor. 7:1 the NIV says, "It
is good for a man not to marry." The revision says "It is good for a man not to 
have sexual relations with a woman." The revision has corrected the alleged
contradiction that many have seen between Mat. 5:17 and Eph. 2:15 in the NIV.
The NIV uses "abolish" in both texts. The revision keeps "abolish" in Mat. 5:17,
but says, "setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands" in Eph. 2:15.

     The NIV 2011 is not perfect, but it is a very useful version. It, like all other
versions should be used with discretion, and may we never forget that accuracy
is not determined by comparing one translation to another translation, but the
standard by which accuracy is measured is the original text.
                                                                                                          RD

Copyright 2011
 

Daly's N.T. Translation: The Second Letter of Peter

    

     Second Peter

   1:1 Simeon Peter, a slave and apostle of 
Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained 
an equally precious faith as ours through 
the righteousness of our God and Savior 
Jesus Christ: 2 Grace and peace be yours 
in abundance in the knowledge of God and 
of Jesus our Lord.
   3 His divine power has given us everything 

needed for life and godliness, through the 

knowledge of him who called us by his own 
glory and goodness; 4 through which he has 
given to us his precious and very great 
promises; so that through these you may 
become sharers of the divine nature, having  
escaped from the corruption that is in the 
world because of lust. 5 Also for this very 
reason you must put forth every effort to 

supplement the faith you have with 
excellence, and the excellence with  
knowledge, 6 and the knowledge with 
self-control, and the self-control with 
endurance, and the endurance with 
godliness, 7 and the godliness with  
brotherly affection and the brotherly 
affection with love. 8 For if these things 
are in you and increasing, they keep you 

from being unproductive or unfruitful in 
the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
9 For the person who lacks these things is 
nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten  
the cleansing of his past sins. 10 Therefore, 
instead of being like that, brothers and 
sisters, you must make every effort to 
confirm your calling and election: for if you 
do these things, you will never stumble. 
11 For in this way, the entrance into the 
eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior 
Jesus Christ will be richly provided for you.
   12 Therefore, I intend to always remind 
you about these things, though you know 
them, and have been established in the 
present truth. 13 And I think it right, as 
long as I am in this body, to stir up your 
memory, 14 knowing that the putting off 
of my body will soon come, even as our 
Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. 15 So, 
I will make every effort so that after my 
departure you may be able to recall these 
things.
   16 For we did not follow cleverly devised
myths when we made known to you the 
power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 
17 For he received honor and glory from 
God the Father, when a voice conveyed to 
him by the Majestic Glory, said, "This is my 
Son, my Beloved, with whom I am  
well-pleased:" 18 and we ourselves heard 

this voice from heaven, while we were with 
him on the holy mountain. 19 And we have 
the prophetic word more fully confirmed; to 
which you do well to pay attention, as to a 
lamp shining in a dark place, until the day 
dawns and the morning star rises in your 
hearts: 20 knowing this first, that no  
prophecy of scripture was produced by 
one's own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy 

ever came by the human will, but men spoke 

from God, being carried along by the Holy 
Spirit.

   2:1 But there were also false prophets 
among the people, as among you also there 
will be false teachers, who will secretly bring 
in destructive opinions, even denying the 
Master who has bought them, bringing swift 
destruction on themselves. 2 And many will 
follow their morally corrupt ways; because of 
whom the way of truth will be maligned.
3 And by covetousness they will exploit you 
with fabricated words, but for them the 
sentence pronounced long ago is waiting; it 
is not idle and their destruction is not asleep.
   4 For if God did not spare angels when 
they sinned, but sent them to tartaros, and 
committed them to chains of deepest gloom, 
to be kept for judgment; 5 and he did not 
spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah 
the eighth one, a preacher of righteousness, 
when he brought a flood on the world of the 
ungodly; 6 and having reduced the cities of 
Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes, judged them 
by complete devastation, making them an 
example of what awaits the ungodly; 7 and 
delivered righteous Lot, being distressed by 
the morally corrupt conduct of the lawless  
8 (for that righteous man dwelling among 
them, by seeing and hearing, his righteous 
soul was being tormented from day to day 
concerning their lawless deeds): 9 the Lord 
knows how to rescue the godly from trial, 

and to keep the unrighteous under 
punishment until the day of judgment; 
10 and especially those who indulge the 
flesh in desires that defile, and despising  
authority. Daring, self-willed, not afraid to 
 blaspheme glorious ones: 11 whereas 
angels, though greater in might and 

power, do not bring a slanderous judgment 

against them before the Lord. 12 But these 

people, as irrational creatures, were born 
animals of mere instinct, to be taken and 
destroyed, blaspheming in matters which  
they are ignorant of. Indeed, in their 
destruction they will be destroyed, 
13 suffering wrong as payment for 
wrong-doing; considering indulging in the 
day time a pleasure. They are spots and  
blemishes, indulging in their deceits while 
they are feasting with you; 14 their eyes 
are always looking for an adulterous 

woman, and who are never satisfied 
without sin; enticing unstable souls; having 
a heart that has been trained in greed.  
Accursed children! 15 forsaking a straight 
way, they went astray, having followed the 
way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved 

the wages of unrighteousness; 16 but he 
was rebuked for his own transgression: a 
speechless donkey spoke with a human voice 
and restrained the madness of the prophet.
   17 These are waterless springs, and mists 
being driven by a storm; for whom the most 
gloomy darkness has been reserved. 18 For, 
speaking pompous dictums, they entice by 
the lusts of the flesh, and by moral corruption 
they are enticing those who are just escaping 
from those who live in error; 19 promising 
them freedom, while they themselves are 
slaves to corruption; for by whom anyone has  
been overcome, to this one he has been 
enslaved. 20 For if, having escaped the 
defilements of the world through the 
knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus 
Christ, they are again entangled by them 
and overcome, the last state has become  
worse with them than the first. 21 For it
was better for them not to have known the 
way of righteousness, than having known 
it, to turn from the holy commandment 
delivered to them. 22 It has happened to 
them according to the true proverb, "A dog 
returns to its own vomit, and a sow that 
has been washed to wallowing in mud."

   3:1 This is now, beloved, the second letter 
that I am writing to you; I am trying to stir 
up your sincere mind by way of reminder; 
2 that you may remember the words that 
have been previously spoken by the holy 
prophets, and the commandment of the Lord 
and Savior through your apostles: 3 knowing 
this first, that in the last days mockers will 
come mocking, living according to their own  
lusts, 4 and saying, "Where is the promise of 
his coming? For, from the time the ancestors  
fell asleep, all things are continuing as they 
were from the beginning of creation. 5 For 
they deliberately forget, that by the word of 
God, heavens existed long ago, and an earth 
having been formed out of water and through 
water, 6 through which the world existing 

at that time, perished being deluged with 
water: 7 but the present heavens and the 
earth, by the same word have been stored up,  
being kept for fire, for a day of judgment and  
destruction of the ungodly people.
   8 But do not forget this one thing, beloved,
that one day with the Lord is as a thousand 
years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The 
Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as 
some think of slowness; but is patient toward 
you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come 
to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will 
come like a thief; in which the heavens will 
pass away with a sudden roar, and the 
elements burning up will be dissolved, and 
the earth and the deeds that are done on it 
will be laid bare. 11 Since all these things 
will be dissolved in this manner, what sort 
of persons ought you to be in holy conduct 
and godliness, 12 waiting for and earnestly 
desiring the coming day of God, because of 
which the heavens being set on fire will be 
dissolved, and the elements burning up  will 
melt? 13 But, according to his promise, we 

are looking for new heavens and new earth 
in which righteousness dwells.
   14 Therefore, beloved, waiting for these 
things, make every effort to be found by 
him in peace, spotless and unblemished. 
15 And regard the patience of our Lord as 
salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul 
also wrote to you according to the wisdom 
given to him, 16 as also in all his letters, 
speaking in them concerning these things;
in which are some things hard to be 
understood, which the ignorant and unstable 
distort as they do also the other scriptures, 
to their own destruction. 17 Therefore, you 
beloved, knowing these things in advance, 
must continue guarding yourselves, lest 
being carried away with the error of the 
lawless, you fall from your own stability. 
18 But continue growing in the grace and 
knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus  
Christ. To him be the glory both now and to 
the day of eternity. Let it be so. 
 
Copyright 2007, Ron Daly, All Rights Reserved

Bible Translations and Young Preachers

     I am frequently asked by young preachers, "Which translation do you
recommend that I use in my preaching?"  This  is a  great question and  it
comes  from  young  men  who  are  conscientious  about  their  work as
servants  of  the most  high God. It indicates that they want to use the best
texts available in their study, teaching, and life application. First, we must
lay some groundwork.

     No translation of the sacred scriptures is without flaws. All of them were
translated by human beings, and they reflect the background, training, and
deficiencies of the hands that made them. Therefore, do not go on the hunt
for the perfect translation. It's not out there.

     I strongly  believe  preachers  should  use more  than one translation for
study. The "backbone" translation should be one of the modified-literal texts.
Why?  The  modified-literal  translations  will  stay  close  to  the  Hebrew,
Aramaic, and Greek texts. They will give you some idea of what is going on
in the original text. Simply put, if you do not have any background in Hebrew
and Greek, modified-literal versions will get you as close as possible to those
languages short of studying the original languages of scripture. Another reason
for using versions of this kind is the fact that those of us who believe in the
verbal inspiration of scripture, put emphasis on the very words of the text.
(1 Cor. 2:13) Most modified-literal versions try to bring as much from the
original languages into English as possible.

     The reigning "king" of the modified-literal versions is the ASV-1901. In
my judgment, it edges out the NASB most of the time. The NASB is based
on a slightly better text, and uses a more modern vocabulary, but many times
the best translation in the NASB is found in the footnotes! I have found this
to be true quite often. The NASB's strength is in the fact that it attempts to
show  "verbal action,"  but  that  is not all there is to accuracy in translation.
Many  times  this  becomes  artificial  and  is  often inconsistently executed.
Nevertheless, if a person cannot find a usable copy of the ASV, the NASB
is probably a good alternative.

     There  are  translations  that  stand between the very literal ASV and the
so-called dynamic equivalent versions. This middle ground is occupied by the
RSV, ESV, NRSV, and the HCSB. On the whole the ESV is probably the
best though the NRSV is not too far behind. The main flaw of the NRSV is
its   attempt   to   be  "gender  inclusive"  which   sometimes   causes  it    to
butcher English and change the text. The  RSV  is  not  as  bad  as  is  often
alleged.

     There are also versions that are "dynamic equivalent" or more idiomatic
in  their  approach  to  translating  God's  word. There  is a place for such
translations. They often  complement  the  more  literal  versions. They are
usually  easy  to  read  and  can  open  the  door  to good  exegesis  and
understanding.  The   New   International   Version   (NIV),  New  Living
Translation (NLT), and Today's  New  International Version  (TNIV) fall
into this category.

     Young  preachers  would  do  well  to have copies of the ASV, RSV,
NASB,  NIV,  ESV,  NRSV, and TNIV  in  their  library.  They  should
diligently  study  and  compare  them.  By  doing  so, they  will  have the
benefits of broad based scholarship. Learn  to  note the differences among
them and ask "Why do they differ?" Do your research in order to determine
the  reasons for the disparity  in  their  renderings. If  you  will  use  several
translations in your study, they will serve to "balance and counter balance"
each other. The best all-around version is probably the ESV. It is basically
the RSV updated and sometimes corrected by conservative scholars.
                                                                                                         RD

Copyright 2011

Modified Literal Translations

     If you have extensively read the scholarly literature that discusses
the theory  of  Bible translation,  you  have  likely  seen  the  phrase
"modified-literal."  What  is  a  modified-literal  translation  of   the
scriptures?

     A strictly literal translation is one that follows the form of the source
language even though doing so does "violence" to the receptor language.
A strictly literal translation attempts to follow the form of the original in
every way; word order, grammar, number of words used, etc. The
closest  literary  production  that  we  have of such  literalism is called
an  interlinear. A  strictly  literal  translation  of the original languages of
scripture  would be  difficult  to  read  and more difficult to  understand. 
Note  this example:  The Greek text of Heb. 3:1 says, "hothen   adelphoi   
hagioi  kleseos  epouraniou metochoi katanoesate ton apostolon kai 
archierea tes homologias hemon Iesoun."  A  strictly  literal   English
translation of the Greek text is, "For which reason brothers holy calling
heavenly partners consider carefully the ambassador and high priest of the
confession of us Jesus." At least two things are apparent, (1) a strictly
literal translation is difficult to read and understand, (2) it can also be
misleading, especially for the person not conversant in Greek, and who
is not aware that Greek and English word order are not always the same.

     Now we ask, what must be done in order to achieve understandability
and maintain accuracy? Some degree of modification has to be made in
the receptor language. We try to make as few modifications as possible,
but we make any that are necessary in order to produce an understandable
and  accurate  translation.  This  is  the  idea  underlying   modified-literal
translations. The modified-literal versions remain as close to the original as
possible, and they sometimes sacrifice English style in doing so. They are
not always easy to read, but they make the best study Bibles for close,
indepth  research. Even  the  slightest  deviation  from  the original  is  a
modification, whether it is a change in word order, word count, or other
linguistic alterations.

     When  we  make  the  necessary  modifications  to the strictly literal
translation  of   Heb. 3:1  noted  earlier,  the  resultant  modified-literal
rendering could be something like this, "Therefore, holy brothers and
sisters, partners  in  a  heavenly  calling,  carefully  consider  Jesus,  the
ambassador and high priest of our confession."

     The English speaking world is blessed with several good modified-
literal versions of the scriptures. The ASV-1901 is a very close rendering
of the Hebrew and Greek. In fact it is generally so close that it is quite
difficult to read, but its deviation value from the biblical languages is quite
low. It is an excellent translation for comparative study if a person can
navigate through the archaic Elizabethan English. The RSV, ESV, NASB,
and the NRSV are all modified-literal versions that have a good degree
of accuracy, and each is useful to the careful student of God's word.
This does not mean that all translations of the scriptures are equal, but
most are useful, and their usefulness varies from passage to passage.
                                                                                             RD

Copyright 2011 

A Brief Nontechnical Evaluation of Some English Versions (Part 5)

     The New Revised Standard Version was officially issued
September 30th 1990. The NRSV translating committee consisted
of 30 men and women, each of whom held advanced degrees in
their respective fields. The copyright is held by the National Council
of the Churches of Christ. The translation philosophy underlying
the NRSV is "literal as possible; as free as necessary." In my
judgment this reflects the ideal goal in all Bible translation, albeit
often inconsistently executed. There are times when a modified-
literal rendering of the ancient texts is understandable, and there
are  occasions  when  literal  is  unintelligible. In  such  cases the
translators  should use  current  English  idiom, and some degree
of paraphrase if necessary in order to insure the resulting translation
is intelligible as well as accurate.                                                                 

     The NRSV is a thorough revision of the RSV which was initially
published in 1952. A second edition of the RSV, which was a slight
revision of the N.T. portion was published in 1971. Several factors
provided the impetus that led to the production of the NRSV. (1) The
need to remove the archaic language including the removal of the "thee's"
and "thou's" from the RSV. (2) The need to correct and update some
of the exegetical choices in the text of the RSV based on further use
of the papyri, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and modern scholarly study of
comparative Semitic languages such as Akkadian and Ugaritic. (3)
The need to remove unnecessarily male oriented language when the
text speaks to or about males and females. For generations the words
"man" and the so-called generic "he" were understood to include males
and females in certain contexts, but changes within the English language
to some extent altered this perception.

     The O.T. committee made use of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
(1977 edition; emandate, 1983) . They did not slavishly follow the
Masoretic Text. When the translators believed the Hebrew text was
"corrupt," they did not hesitate to compare the ancient versions (Greek,
Aramaic, and Latin) and the Dead Sea Scrolls. They also made
"corrections" to the text by following the most probable reconstructions
of the original and relying on the judgment of competent Hebrew scholars.
The N.T. committee based its work on the 3rd edition  of  the United
Bibles Societies Greek Text. The translators had access to the changes
that were introduced into the critical apparatus of the 4th edition of the
Greek N.T., published in 1993.

     There are many textual improvements found in the NRSV. Instead
of a "mist" going up from the earth as in the RSV, the NRSV says "a
stream would rise from the earth." (Gen. 2:6) In Proverbs "sluggard"
is replaced by "lazybones" (Prov. 6:6,9 ) and  "lazy person" (Prov. 19:24;
20:4; 26:14). In Acts 2:38 the NRSV takes the bold step of accurately
translating eis aphesin ton hamartion humon as "so that your sins may
be forgiven," instead of using the generic phrase "for the forgiveness of
your sins."  In Acts 19:9 we read of the "lecture hall" of  Tyrannus instead
of  "school" as in the KJV and ASV.  In 1 Cor. 10:9, the NRSV
follows the reading of  p46, a papyrus fragment dated 200 A.D. Instead
of the traditional "Lord," it says the Israelites in the wilderness put "Christ"
to the test.  In 2 Tim. 4:1 the translators understood the contextual use
of diamarturomai and rendered it "I solemnly urge you" instead of  "I
charge you" as in the RSV. In Gal. 3:24 paidagogos is interpreted as
"disciplinarian" instead of  "schoolmaster" or  "tutor." The NRSV's
brilliance for idiomatic translation is observed in Jno. 1:18. The literal
rendering of  eis ton kolpon tou patros is "in the bosom of the Father."
(KJV, ASV, RSV) The NRSV abandons a literal translation of the
phrase and gives us the beautifully elegant "close to the Father's heart."

     There are places where the NRSV has made textual choices that
are questionable to say the least. In Gen. 1:1 it says, "In the beginnning
when God created." They translate the Hebrew as a dependent clause,
when it appears that it is a general summary statement of the creation.
In Gen. 1:2 it says, "a wind from God swept over the face of the waters"
instead of saying "the Spirit of God was hovering..." Ruach elohim is
used in other places in the O.T. to indicate the "Spirit of God" so why
not in this occurrence? Mat. 5:32 gives "unchastity" as a ground for
divorce. The rendering is too vague. The Greek porneia denotes
sexual immorality. The NRSV correctly translates porneia in
(1 Cor. 5:1 and 2 Cor. 12:21). In Mat. 18:15 it says what to do "if
another member of the church sins against you." The Greek simply
means "if your brother or sister, or a fellow believer sins against you."
(Cf. the TNIV) In 1 Cor. 16:2 the NRSV says believers should
contribute "whatever extra you earn" toward the collection for God's
holy people. The Greek says, "give whatever you prosper in", meaning,
"as you prosper." The NRSV's rendering of the Greek phrase is sure
to lighten many a collection basket on Sunday morning.

     The NRSV is not a perfect translation. Nevertheless, it has many
good qualities and is a very useful text. Perhaps its niche is when
used as a comparative tool for study. Occasionally it goes too far in
order to attain "gender inclusiveness" and in doing so it sometimes
sacrifices accuracy.  There is much to commend the NRSV if a person
uses it with discretion.  How do I rate the NRSV on a scale of 1 to 10?
I give it a rating of 8 for readability and a rating of 7.5 for accuracy.
The accuracy rating  of  7.5 reflects the way the NRSV handles "gender
inclusive"  language. Gender   accuracy   and  gender inclusiveness
are not necessarily the same. If the NRSV were more restrained, and
if it were more felicitous in handling the English language, it would easily
have a 9 for accuracy! It is an excellent translation most of the time.
                                                                                        RD

Copyright 2011
     

    

Tradition and Translation (No.2)

     Correctly translating the original languages of scripture into English
(or any other language), is a very serious work. The language from
which a translation is made is called the source or parent language.
The language into which a  translation is  made  is  called the target
or receptor language in scholarly circles.  Translators are not guided
by the  Holy  Spirit  in  their  endeavor. They  translate  based on their
their understanding of what they see in the original text and their ability
to determine the meaning of the words, idioms, and grammar of the
source or parent text. Their training and theology have some degree
of influence on their work.

     Many translators are also influenced by tradition in their work, as
many readers of translations are affected by tradition in their reading
of the text. Tradition is not necessarily evil unless it forms the basis
for changing what God has revealed, and becomes the purveyor of
religious error. Human tradition is like a wild bull; it is a difficult beast
to break. One reason tradition often plays an integral role in the Bible
translation process is due to the commercial side of the venture. If
changing the wording of the translation is needed for the sake of
accuracy, it is often rejected by publishers because the product is
designed to be sold to the public. The primary goal of the translation
process should be faithfulness to the  source  language  in  so  far  as
such can be accommodated by the target language. Let us briefly
illustrate this point by noting some examples.

     The word baptize that we see in most English translations of the
N.T. is a notable example. Baptize is not a translation of the original
word. It is transferred from the Greek text and brought over into the
English language. The Greek word is baptizo and the last letter "o"
(Omega) is dropped and an "e" is placed at the end. Contrary to
some incomplete Greek lexicons baptizo does not mean to "baptize."
Baptize is a gloss, not a definition. Baptizo is used in ancient Greek
as far back as Hippocrates in the 5th-4th century BC, and Plato in
the 5th-4th century BC, etc. in the sense of put or go under water,
submerge,  immerse,  or  sink.  There  is   also  the   figurative  or
metaphorical  sense  of  soak  or  overwhelm. 

     Why does baptize live on in English translations? First, King
James of England issued the edict that "ecclesiastical words" were
to be retained when he gave instructions to the men who translated
the KJV. The language of the KJV continues to influence English
speaking people even when accuracy demands change. Second,
baptize is defined in English dictionaries as "to dip (a person) into
or sprinkle with, water as a symbol of admission into Christianity
or   a   specific  Christian   church."  (Webster's  New  World 
Dictionary, Second  College  Edition, page  111)  This  is  an
inaccurate  ecumenical  definition  that  allows  enough  room for
those  who  practice  the  errors  of  sprinkling  and pouring to
claim  that  their  practice  has  biblical  precedent.  The  word  
baptizo never has those meanings in the N.T. 

     The  phrase "the Holy Ghost" in the KJV is another symbol
of  tradition's ability to hang on like an eagle with a fish in its talons.
In Greek, the  phrase  is  tou hagiou pneumatos  as  in  Mat. 28:19
and  2 Cor. 13:14. The  correct  reading  is  "the Holy Spirit." Yet,
many people, including preachers, continue to speak of the Holy
Spirit as the Holy Ghost. Why? It is sometimes because of  tradition
or the mystical "feeling" in charismatic circles that accompanies the
mention of  "the Holy Ghost." The Holy Spirit is not a "ghost," he
is a person in the Godhead.

     Church is another word that needs to be discussed. It is another
one of the ecclesiastical words that King James said is to be retained
in the translation he authorized. Most people think of a "church" as
either a physical building where people meet, or they believe it means
a denomination.The fact is, the Greek word from which "church" is
translated is ekklesia, and in the N.T, it means a congregation, group,
or assembly. In the spiritual sense it refers to the Lord's people whether
assembled (1 Cor. 11:18), living in a region (Acts 9:31), or the entire
body of Christ (Mat. 16:18). It never refers to a denomination in the
N.T.

     In the O.T. we often see the words "LORD" or "GOD" spelled
with all capital letters. This is the way that translators of the Hebrew
scriptures alert the readers to the fact that the tetragrammaton
(the four consonants YHWH) are used in those places. YHWH
represents the personal name of God. (Ex. 3:14; Isa. 42:8; Jer. 33:2)
YHWH is found in more than 6000 places. The ASV uses the word
"Jehovah." First, the use of "LORD" and  "GOD" is confusing to many
people as they are not aware those words are used to represent the
name  of  God.  Second,  neither  "LORD,"  "GOD," or "Jehovah"
accurately reflects what the Hebrew text says. I am aware that due
to ancient Jewish superstition, many believe the exact pronunciation
was lost. There are better ways to represent what is in the Hebrew
text instead of using artificial expedients. Some  English  versions
have  made steps forward in breaking with tradition as to how the
tetragrammaton is translated. The Jerusalem Bible and the Holman
Christian Standard Bible choose to represent the tetragrammaton
with Yahweh in many places.

     When  necessary, why  can  we  not  break  away  from human
tradition and accurately convey God's word in current understandable
English? It can be done.
                                                                                            RD

Copyright 2011