My Bible is falling apart - even the masking tape that is holding it together now needs repairing. (reminds me of the slogan I once saw - 'Bibles that are falling apart are generally read by people who aren't' - I should have listed slogans like that as one of my pet peeves.). Anyway, what to buy? Our Seniors kindly gave me a Waterstone's voucher for speaking at their Birthday Rally, so now I have the opportunity...
There's such an array isn't there? As well as the basic versions, there are a million variations on them (really, I counted...). The Bloke's Bible, The Women's Bible, The Christian Growth Bible, The I Have No Clue Which Bible to Buy Bible. Some have so many notes and additional material, it's almost impossible a) to carry it and b) to actually find scripture in it. Why rely on the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth - they seem to ask - when you can have an army of preachers ready to assault you from the pages with their wisdom. Don't for goodness sake make your own mind up, here's some pre-digested food specially tailored to your unique circumstances o reader of the 'Life Application provided it's on a Thursday and you like the colour pink and by the way did you know God was a vegeterian' Bible - now available with it's own trailer.... How many versions do we need? It's like the Bread aisle at the supermarket - so much choice when so many have no bread to eat. So many versions when so many people don't have anything in their own language.
But I digress. What I'm really concerned with today is the built in bias of most of our translations.
All translation is interpretation. No-one comes to the task as a completely detached objective person with no preconceived ideas. When a translator (or team) face a word that has multiple meanings or possible nuances, they will inevtiably be influenced by their existing understanding of what the original intended to communicate.
Let me give you an example: The NIV has the following for Romans 8:6-9
6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace;
7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so.
8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you.
You will see that on three occassions the word 'control' is used, yet a literal translation gives:
6. For to be flesh minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7. Because the flesh mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8.So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
The word 'control' has been added changing the meaning from two states of mind to the implication of some external force exerting 'control' - if I am driving the car, I am in control of the journey, the passengers may object, but whilst I am in control, their choices are null and void. So the NIV has a sinful nature controlling those in whom the Spirit does not dwell. Conversely, if the Spirit does dwell in you, you are controlled by the Spirit. In either case it makes the person seem like the passive victim of external, irresistable influence. This strikes at the heart of our view of what God is like and how he works in the world.
Yet the original text makes no such inference: the insertion of the word ‘control’ reinforces a view of how God exercises His sovereignty: Because God could impose His will at all time and in all places, it is easy to presume that He must act in this way. Yet without the addition of this word, the passage is in line with what I believe the weight of the Bible points to: A God who has invested great significance in us and who genuinely gives us free moral choice, for which we are held accountable. He accomplishes His plans and keeps His promises through the freely made choices of those who follow Him. He is infinitely creative in His use of unGodly choices and infinitely capable of redeeming those choices when we repent. He shapes, He weaves, He brings things to ends He has determined - but He dosesn’t micro-manage, He doesn’t control.
To be clear, this isn’t an indictment of the NIV (although I don't personally use it) - I think it is the nature of translation that the pre-existing worldview of the translators will seep through. My concern is that the readers and those who use the translation for teaching should be made more aware of the inherent bias. A ‘health warning’ on the cover perhaps… ‘This translation can seriously damage your view of God’
So what did I get? An NRSV (for old times sake) and a New Living Translation (recommended by friends in our housegroup). Whatever, the more and wider you read it, the more God's Spirit has with which to lead you into all truth.
See you soon - I've got a good book to read...
There's such an array isn't there? As well as the basic versions, there are a million variations on them (really, I counted...). The Bloke's Bible, The Women's Bible, The Christian Growth Bible, The I Have No Clue Which Bible to Buy Bible. Some have so many notes and additional material, it's almost impossible a) to carry it and b) to actually find scripture in it. Why rely on the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth - they seem to ask - when you can have an army of preachers ready to assault you from the pages with their wisdom. Don't for goodness sake make your own mind up, here's some pre-digested food specially tailored to your unique circumstances o reader of the 'Life Application provided it's on a Thursday and you like the colour pink and by the way did you know God was a vegeterian' Bible - now available with it's own trailer.... How many versions do we need? It's like the Bread aisle at the supermarket - so much choice when so many have no bread to eat. So many versions when so many people don't have anything in their own language.
But I digress. What I'm really concerned with today is the built in bias of most of our translations.
All translation is interpretation. No-one comes to the task as a completely detached objective person with no preconceived ideas. When a translator (or team) face a word that has multiple meanings or possible nuances, they will inevtiably be influenced by their existing understanding of what the original intended to communicate.
Let me give you an example: The NIV has the following for Romans 8:6-9
6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace;
7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so.
8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you.
You will see that on three occassions the word 'control' is used, yet a literal translation gives:
6. For to be flesh minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7. Because the flesh mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8.So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
The word 'control' has been added changing the meaning from two states of mind to the implication of some external force exerting 'control' - if I am driving the car, I am in control of the journey, the passengers may object, but whilst I am in control, their choices are null and void. So the NIV has a sinful nature controlling those in whom the Spirit does not dwell. Conversely, if the Spirit does dwell in you, you are controlled by the Spirit. In either case it makes the person seem like the passive victim of external, irresistable influence. This strikes at the heart of our view of what God is like and how he works in the world.
Yet the original text makes no such inference: the insertion of the word ‘control’ reinforces a view of how God exercises His sovereignty: Because God could impose His will at all time and in all places, it is easy to presume that He must act in this way. Yet without the addition of this word, the passage is in line with what I believe the weight of the Bible points to: A God who has invested great significance in us and who genuinely gives us free moral choice, for which we are held accountable. He accomplishes His plans and keeps His promises through the freely made choices of those who follow Him. He is infinitely creative in His use of unGodly choices and infinitely capable of redeeming those choices when we repent. He shapes, He weaves, He brings things to ends He has determined - but He dosesn’t micro-manage, He doesn’t control.
To be clear, this isn’t an indictment of the NIV (although I don't personally use it) - I think it is the nature of translation that the pre-existing worldview of the translators will seep through. My concern is that the readers and those who use the translation for teaching should be made more aware of the inherent bias. A ‘health warning’ on the cover perhaps… ‘This translation can seriously damage your view of God’
So what did I get? An NRSV (for old times sake) and a New Living Translation (recommended by friends in our housegroup). Whatever, the more and wider you read it, the more God's Spirit has with which to lead you into all truth.
See you soon - I've got a good book to read...
thought provoking - thanks
ReplyDelete