English Translations and Gender Inclusiveness. ἄνθρωπος / Matthew 4.4 NET: “Man does not...
Preview:
Citation preview
- Slide 1
- English Translations and Gender Inclusiveness
- Slide 2
- / Matthew 4.4 NET: Man does not live by bread alone NRSV: One
does not live by bread alone NLT: People do not live by bread alone
can mean man, person, one This quotes Hebrew Deuteronomy 8.3. The
Hebrew word can mean a man but more often it means mankind! And in
the context, it probably meant all people, since Moses was
reminding all the people of what they had learned.
- Slide 3
- / 2 Peter 1.10 NASB: Therefore, brethren, be all the more
diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you NET:
Therefore, brothers and sisters means brother, but the plural can
mean brothers, brothers and sisters, or even associates or fellow
members. Context has to dictate whether the original meant to
include women. Peter appears to be writing to all believers,
including women.
- Slide 4
- + adjectival participle / 1 Peter 3.10 NKJV: For he who would
love life and see good days NET: For the one who NIV: For whoever
Any of these is correct for this type of Greek construction, so if
the context is not exclusive of women, then it is appropriate to
change the masculine he who to a neutral the one who or
whoever.
- Slide 5
- / 1 John 4.20 KJV: If a man say, I love God, and hateth his
brother, he is a liar NET: If anyone says NIV: Whoever claims NLT:
If someone says means someone, so any of these are appropriate
translations, but in the context there is no reason to exclude
women.
- Slide 6
- / Psalm 1.1 ESV: Blessed is the man who walks not in the
counsel of the wicked NIV: Blessed is the one means person or
man.
- Slide 7
- / Psalm 1.1 ESV: Blessed is the man who walks not in the
counsel of the wicked NIV: Blessed is the one means person or man.
NRSV: Happy are those This turns a singular into plural, losing
some of the intimacy implied between God and the individual.
- Slide 8
- 2 John 1.10 NKJV: If anyone comes to you and does not bring
this doctrine, do not receive him... NIV: If anyone comes to you
and does not bring this teaching, do not take them The pronouns
definitely are masculine: him. But in the context, anyone could
include women, so NIV accommodates by switching to the neutral
them, because we do not have a gender neutral single pronoun other
than it, which would not be appropriate. But now the single becomes
plural.
- Slide 9
- Luke 14.27 NET: Whoever does not carry his own cross and follow
me cannot be my disciple. NIV: And whoever does not carry their
cross NLT: And if you do not carry your own cross NIV tries to be
gender neutral with plural their, while NLT switches to second
person you.
- Slide 10
- 1 Corinthians 15.21 NET: For since death came through a man,
the resurrection of the dead also came through a man. NRSV: For
since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the
dead has also come through a human being. There is theological
significance that Adam and Jesus were men, not just people.
- Slide 11
- Proverbs 1.8 is a father talking to his son NASB: Hear, my son,
your father's instruction Several translations [NET; NLT; NRSV]
change this to my child.
- Slide 12
- 1 Timothy 3.2 NET: The overseer then must be above reproach,
the husband of one wife NRSV: be above reproach, married only once
NRSV loses the requirement of being male.
- Slide 13
- History of English Translations
- Slide 14
- When was the first English translation attempted?
- Slide 15
- There were some efforts to translate at least parts of the
bible into Old English in the 10 th Century or earlier.
- Slide 16
- When was the first English translation attempted? There were
some efforts to translate at least parts of the bible into Old
English in the 10 th Century or earlier. When was the first
preserved English translation?
- Slide 17
- When was the first English translation attempted? There were
some efforts to translate at least parts of the bible into Old
English in the 10 th Century or earlier. When was the first
preserved English translation? Wycliffes, in the 1380s, was a hand
written translation of the Latin Vulgate [which hurt its
accuracy].
- Slide 18
- Were there other major English translations of the Bible
between Wycliffe and the KJV?
- Slide 19
- Tyndale [1526] translated from Greek and Hebrew texts, all of
NT, parts of OT. To some degree, Tyndale followed Luthers
philosophy of a thought for thought translation instead of word for
word!
- Slide 20
- Were there other major English translations of the Bible
between Wycliffe and the KJV? Tyndale [1526] translated from Greek
and Hebrew texts, all of NT, parts of OT. To some degree, Tyndale
followed Luthers philosophy of a thought for thought translation
instead of word for word! Coverdale [1535] was the first full
printed version, based largely on Tyndale for NT. Matthew/Rogers
[1537] based largely on Tyndale Great [1539] revised Matthew. It
was the first authorized Anglican Bible.
- Slide 21
- Tyndale [1526] Coverdale [1535]. Matthew/Rogers [1537] Great
[1539] the first authorized Anglican Bible Geneva [1560] based on
Great but with mms. Calvinistic/Presby. Bishops [1568] based on
Great 2 nd authorized Anglican Rheims-Douay [~1600] based on Latin
Vulgate Roman Catholic
- Slide 22
- How does the KJV relate to the other early English
translations?
- Slide 23
- Tyndale [1526] Matthew/Rogers [1537] Great [1539] 1st
authorized Anglican Bible Bishops [1568] 2 nd authorized Anglican
Bible KJV [1611] 3 rd authorized Anglican Bible Preface said it was
not a new translation, but a revision, based largely on Bishops.
90% of NT was based on Tyndale.
- Slide 24
- Interesting Facts About KJV Followed Bishops as closely as
possible, but consulted other English translations and the Greek
text of Erasmus/Beza for the NT and the Masoretic text of the day
for the OT. In its original preface, there were several quotations
from the Bible, and they were from the Geneva Bible, not KJV.
People resisted KJV, preferring the language in the Geneva
Bible.
- Slide 25
- Interesting Facts About KJV Originally included the apocryphal
books. The 1611 editions had 200 English variations. The text
underwent several revisions in subsequent years, incorporating over
100,000 changes. NKJV [1982] modernized the English.
- Slide 26
- KJV Influence English Revised Version [1885] American Standard
Version [1901] RSV [1952/1971]NASB [1971/1995] NRSV [1990]ESV
[2001/2011]
- Slide 27
- Independent New Translations Phillips [1958/1972]: paraphrase
Good News / TEV [1976]: thought for thought NIV [1978/1984/2011]
CEV [1995]: aimed at elementary children NIrV [1996]: NIV for
elementary children NLT [1996/2007]: original mms, despite name
HCSB [1999/2009]: Southern Baptist driven Petersons Message [2000]:
paraphrase NET [2006]: thought for thought, DTS
- Slide 28
- Word for Word? or Thought for Thought?
- Slide 29
- What is more important, the specific words and grammar patterns
or the meanings they express?
- Slide 30
- What is more important, the specific words and grammar patterns
or the meanings they express? If both, how do we strike a
balance?
- Slide 31
- Paraphrase Try to convey the idea of a passage without worrying
about individual words or phrases. Example: The Message; Phillips
What are the pros and cons of such an approach?
- Slide 32
- Paraphrase Positive: Easy to understand. Example: Philippians
1.9-11 NASB: And this I pray, that your love may abound still more
and more in real knowledge and all discernment, so that you may
approve the things that are excellent, in order to be sincere and
blameless until the day of Christ; having been filled with the
fruit of righteousness which comes through Jesus Christ, to the
glory and praise of God.
- Slide 33
- Paraphrase Positive: Easy to understand. Example: Philippians
1.9-11 Message: So this is my prayer: that your love will flourish
and that you will not only love much but well. Learn to love
appropriately. You need to use your head and test your feelings so
that your love is sincere and intelligent, not sentimental gush.
Live a lovers life, circumspect and exemplary, a life Jesus will be
proud of: bountiful in fruits from the soul, making Jesus Christ
attractive to all, getting everyone involved in the glory and
praise of God.
- Slide 34
- Paraphrase Negatives Not trying to convey the very words of
God. Very interpretive, and often the view of a few scholars. Weak
for study purposes; maybe even inaccurate. Example: John 1.1 NET:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was fully God. Message: The Word was first, the Word present
to God, God present to the Word. The Word was God, in readiness for
God from day one.
- Slide 35
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Translate each word
carefully; stick as closely as possible to word order and grammar
of original. Examples: NASB, NKJV, NRSV, most of ESV Note: Its
impossible to stick completely to the original word order and
grammar, because it would make no sense in English. We have
standardized Subject-Verb-Direct Object-Indirect Object format, but
they moved words for emphasis, not to signal who was the subject
and who was the object.
- Slide 36
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Its also impossible to
translate each original language word with only one English word
every time. They used words differently than we do, so there always
is some interpretive work in a translation, even in formal
equivalence. For example, can mean many different things - from,
near, with, beside, in the presence of, alongside of, in comparison
to, beyond, in the judgment of - all depending on the context. KJV
uses more than 20 English words for one original language word; and
one English word for dozens of distinct original language
words.
- Slide 37
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Translate each word
carefully; stick as closely as possible to word order and grammar
of original. Examples: NASB, NKJV, NRSV, most of ESV What are the
pros and cons of such an approach?
- Slide 38
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Positive: Sometimes they
convey emphasis lost in other translations. Example: Ephesians 2.8
NASB: For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not
of yourselves, it is the gift of God. NLT: God saved you by his
grace when you believed. And you can't take credit for this; it is
a gift from God. Which best shows the Greek emphasis on grace?
- Slide 39
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Positive: They are more
likely to retain biblical terminology which is rich in meaning.
Example: Romans 3.23-25 NASB: for all have sinned and fall short of
the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through
the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed
publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. NLT: Yet
God, with undeserved kindness, declares that we are righteous. He
did this through Christ Jesus when he freed us from the penalty for
our sins. For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin.
- Slide 40
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Positive: Minimal
interpretation, allowing the reader to be illuminated and figure it
out. Ex.: 1 Peter 2.9 ESV: But you are a chosen race, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that
you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of
darkness into his marvelous light. NLT: But you are not like that,
for you are a chosen people. You are royal priests, a holy nation,
God's very own possession. As a result, you can show others the
goodness of God, for he called you out of the darkness into his
wonderful light.
- Slide 41
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Negative: Often stilted
English or hard to comprehend. Example: 1 Peter 5.6-7 NASB follows
Greek word order: Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand
of God, that He may exalt you at the proper time, casting all your
anxiety on Him, because He cares for you. Is casting your anxiety
on God related to God exalting you? NET clears this up, putting
casting your cares on God together with being humble: And God will
exalt you in due time, if you humble yourselves under his mighty
hand by casting all your cares on him because he cares for
you.
- Slide 42
- Formal Equivalence: Word for Word Negative: use of unexplained
biblical terminology can leave new or young believers confused.
Negative: some Greek and Hebrew words need more than one English
word in translation, and some Greek and Hebrew grammar
constructions require interpretation in translation. Example: we
translate strictly as I worship, but it means much more than
that.
- Slide 43
- Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought Translate the meaning
of each phrase or sentence. Examples: NET, NIV, NLT, HCSB Within
this group, there are a variety of styles, with some being closer
to formal equivalence and others being closer to paraphrase.
Formal-----------------------------------------------Paraphrase
NASB ESV HCSBNET NLT Message NKJV NIV ESV is 90% copy of RSV which
is formal, but loosens up elsewhere. NIV, HCSB, NET try to be
formal when it works, but dynamic if necessary.
- Slide 44
- Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought Translate the meaning
of each phrase or sentence. Examples: NET, NIV, NLT, HCSB What are
the pros and cons of such an approach?
- Slide 45
- Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought Positive: Sometimes
they can convey the biblical idea more clearly. Example: 1 Peter
5.9 ESV: Resist him, firm in your faith... NET: Resist him,
standing firm in the faith NET interprets the adjective to help
convey the idea that would have come to the Greek contemporary
reader.
- Slide 46
- Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought Positive: Translators
can interpret hints in the original language. Example: 1 Peter 5.9
ESV: Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of
suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the
world. NET: Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you
know The Greek participle [-ing verbs in English] does not have
helper words like in English, so it often makes sense to add them
to the translation, especially if they help interpret the meaning
of the verse.
- Slide 47
- Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought Positive: They tend to
explain biblical terms and be more meaning driven. Example: Romans
3.21 NASB: But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has
been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets. NLT:
But now God has shown us a way to be made right with him without
keeping the requirements of the law, as was promised in the
writings of Moses and the prophets long ago.
- Slide 48
- Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought Negative: Allowing the
translators to interpret takes it out of the readers hands.
Example: John 6.27 ESV: For on him God the Father has set his seal.
REB: the seal of his authority. NLT: the seal of his approval. CEV:
God the Father has given him the right to do so. Which is a correct
interpretation? What is the effect on the readers of the other
translations?
- Slide 49
- Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought Negative: The loss of
biblical vocabulary hurts the church over time as theological
meaning is lost and the rich verbal heritage is lost. Example:
Romans 5.1 NASB: Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have
peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; NLT: Therefore, since
we have been made right in God's sight by faith, we have peace with
God because of what Jesus Christ our Lord has done for us. Fullness
of justification includes legal declaration by God, imputed
righteousness of Christ.
- Slide 50
- Other Issues All translations fail to perfectly render the full
meaning of the original text. For example, some words in Greek
signal things which have no equivalent in English. We sometimes
translate Greek as but, and, now, then but what it really does for
a Greek speaker is signal that there is a new thought starting
which is related to the previous one. In John 3.1, tells us that
Nicodemus is an example of the people discussed at the end of John
2.
- Slide 51
- Other Issues All translations fail to perfectly render the full
meaning of the original text. For example, Hebrew sentence
structure in narrative will change to signify what is narrative
plot and what is explanatory background or to focus the reader on a
particularly important detail, as if guiding the cameraman to the
right shot. This significance is missed in any English
translation.
- Slide 52
- Other Issues in Translation Approach Some translations are
inconsistent in approach or quality. NET in OT is sometimes very
formal and sometimes very dynamic or anywhere in between. ESV
copies RSV 90% of the time, making it very formal, but freely edits
the other 10%. KJV is considered weak in Job and several prophetic
books; in Romans and 1-2 Corinthians, it has several minor
inaccuracies. Hebrews 4.8 has Jesus when it should have
Joshua.
- Slide 53
- Manuscript Basis We do not have any original copies of the
Hebrew [and Aramaic] Old Testament or the Greek New Testament, but
we have a great deal of manuscript evidence for what they
said.
- Slide 54
- Hebrew / Aramaic Manuscripts All the popular modern English
translations are based on the same Hebrew/Aramaic manuscript,
called the Leningrad Codex. This copy of the Old Testament dates to
the year AD1008. There are over three thousand hand-written Hebrew
copies of the Old Testament, but almost all of them were copied
after the Leningrad Codex.
- Slide 55
- Hebrew / Aramaic Manuscripts Most importantly, Old Testament
copies among the Dead Sea Scrolls, which date to around the time of
Jesus, largely agree with the Leningrad Codex. Old Testament
translators start with the Leningrad Codex, and then consider any
variations in the other [especially earlier] manuscripts as they
translate. KJV was based on a version of the Masoretic Text, which
might have differed slightly from this codex.
- Slide 56
- NT Manuscripts We have almost six thousand ancient Greek New
Testament manuscripts, dating back to the first century. We also
have thousands of early translations into other languages and
thousands of quotations of Scripture in the writings of the early
church.
- Slide 57
- NT Manuscripts Most translators believe in analyzing this
manuscript evidence and tracing any variations as they occurred
through time, to determine what the earliest and most original
wording must have been. This process results in a critical or
eclectic Greek text, which gets translated into English. Most
modern translations rely on the critical text known as the
Nestle-Aland. This text gets updated from time to time, as new
manuscripts are discovered. NA28 is the current version.
- Slide 58
- NT Manuscripts Some scholars prefer to rely on what is known as
the majority text which uses a different method of determining the
Greek text when there are differences in the manuscripts, relying
on which variant occurs the most often. The problem with this is
that it is biased toward a group of writings that were mass
produced and produced later in time in the Byzantine Empire and so
are better preserved, but are thought by most scholars to contain
the most errors.
- Slide 59
- NT Manuscripts The KJV was based on a Greek text put together
by Roman Catholic priest Erasmus and edited by Beza. It is called
the received text or textus receptus by KJV advocates.
- Slide 60
- NT Manuscripts Erasmus text of the NT was highly inaccurate,
relying on only a handful of manuscripts [6-14], most of them now
known to be relatively inaccurate copies; earliest was 6 th century
and most were from 10 th or later. It also had numerous
typographical errors of its own. Erasmus had no Greek text
containing the last six verses of Revelation, so he translated the
Latin Vulgate back into Greek, and created seventeen new and unique
variants!
- Slide 61
- NT Manuscripts Example: 1 John 5.7-8: Erasmus originally had
this correct to show the Spirit and the water and the blood [as in
all modern translations, even NKJV!], which is not only the best
reading but also the majority text reading. Erasmus knew of no
Greek text which contained the reading preferred by the Latin, The
Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, but when someone contrived a
new Greek manuscript with that reading, Erasmus switched his text,
and this is what made its way into the KJV. The earliest manuscript
to have this reading, dates from the sixteenth century.
- Slide 62
- NT Manuscripts The KJV and NKJV have some verses or parts of
verses that other translations lack. When we trace the manuscript
evidence through time, we see that scribes tended to add to the
text; sometimes this was to purposefully clarify something, other
times it was inadvertent copying of a margin note into the text,
and other times they would include information from two or more
variants rather than choose between them. Because the KJV and NKJV
are based on later manuscripts, they contain many of these
additions which do not appear in earlier manuscripts.
- Slide 63
- NT Manuscripts For example, Matthew 6.13: NET: And do not lead
us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. NKJV: And do
not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one. For
Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. The
best manuscripts do not include this extra material.
- Slide 64
- NT Manuscripts We have advanced in our analysis of textual
evidence, resulting in serious questions about the KJV textual
quality. Despite centuries of improvements in our manuscript
evidence and understanding of that evidence, NKJV mostly is based
on the same manuscripts as KJV.
- Slide 65
- Readability
- Slide 66
- Each translation is written to a target reading level. Some are
at an elementary school level: CEV; NCV; NIrV Some are at a middle
school level: NIV; NLT Some are at a high school level: NASB; NRSV;
ESV NKJV usually gets ranked at a middle school level, but it uses
big theological terms, which many middle school students would not
know.
- Slide 67
- Readability Each translation makes decisions about the style of
English it will use. The KJV, even though it has experienced
thousands of changes over the years, still largely relies on a
style and word usage that are not common today. Over 300 words in
the KJV no longer have the same meaning today as they did in the
seventeenth century.
- Slide 68
- Readability If you did not grow up with the KJV, you could not
understand it well [and many who did grow up with it and think they
do understand it make mistakes as they interpret the ancient
English words]. For example, when we see pitiful we think it means
deplorable or pathetic, but the KJV uses it to mean one who takes
pity on others: James 5.11 the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender
mercy. Compare theNKJV: the Lord is very compassionate and
merciful.
- Slide 69
- Readability Philippians 4.6 KJV: Be careful for nothing. NKJV:
Be anxious for nothing.
- Slide 70
- Readability 2 Timothy 2.15 KJV: Study to shew thyself approved
unto God NKJV: Be diligent to present yourself approved to God The
correct meaning of the Greek word in todays English is not study,
but be zealous, or make every effort.
- Slide 71
- Readability Most modern translations are up to date with word
usage and sentence style. But there still is a great variety: the
more dynamic the translation, the closer they can get to how people
talk today, but perhaps the more they move away from considering
the best translation of each Greek or Hebrew word.
- Slide 72
- Readability Another factor is how a translation handles idioms.
Example: 1 Samuel 24.3 KJV literally translates the Hebrew: Saul
went in to cover his feet NASB translates with an equivalent modern
idiom: Saul went in to relieve himself An alternative would be to
explain the idiom with something like Saul went in to urinate
- Slide 73
- Readability Example 1 Peter 1.13 NKJV is very literal in its
translation: Therefore gird up the loins of your mind NET
interprets the idiom: Therefore, get your minds ready for action
Without study of customary usage in the first century, how are you
to know what it means to gird up your loins, let alone to gird up
the loins of your mind?
- Slide 74
- Readability Even the KJV sometimes simplified the idiom:
Example: John 10.24 Greek: This literally says How long will you
take up our souls? KJV translates the idiom and the words: How long
dost thou make us to doubt? NET has an even better understanding
for today: How long will you keep us in suspense?
- Slide 75
- Readability Numbers 22.22: The literal Hebrew reading is Gods
nose [or nostrils] became hot, KJV interprets this to say, Gods
anger was kindled.
- Slide 76
- Readability The same situation exists for interpreting actions.
In Genesis 37.29, most English translations are literal in saying
that Reuben tore his clothes [NET, NASB, NIV, ESV, HSCB, NKJV, KJV]
NLT explains it by saying, he tore his clothes in grief.
- Slide 77
- Readability The original NT was written in the common Greek of
its day, so that everyone could easily understand it. The KJV was
written in a way that could be understood by the common people of
its day. Should we not seek to offer the same advantage to English
speakers today? Should we not have one translation easy enough for
children [NIrV] and one for teens and newer believers still getting
used to the Bible [NLT] and one more for everyday use [NIV]?