Working through the Gospel of
John with a weekly small group has once again reminded me of the debilitating
effect of study Bibles, which I’ll address in a future post; of the piecemeal
fashion in which we read and study the Bible, which I’ll also address in a
future post; and of the poor job the NIV does in being faithful to the original
text. It has also got me thinking about how little, if any, folks know about
translations.
Around the table we have mainly
NIVs; there is one NASB and one ESV; we used to have one KJV but that person
was recently given an NIV so she is now bringing that – I wish she’d continue
to bring her KJV along with it.
I don’t understand why some
commentary writers write for NIV commentaries for I can’t see how one can do
that without seriously criticizing the NIV; but then those writers typically
subscribe to the “Dynamic Equivalent” theory of translation so I guess that
explains it. If one wants to witness the slippery slope of this theory one only
has to look at the more recent permeations of the NIV, permeations which I
don’t keep up with but which, the last time I looked, was neutering the
Biblical text in more ways than one.
One of the problems with the NIV
and other pseudo-translations is that they think for the reader, thus dumbing
down the text; these translations argue that they are translating the thoughts
of the author, but that indicates that the translators are mind readers and I
doubt that is the case. They also argue that they are making the text more
understandable for the reader – well now, what ever happened to good solid
engagement with the text…not to mention the Holy Spirit? Then there is the
argument that most people read at a ninth or tenth grade level (a level which
is likely degrading so that what is now a tenth-grade level may soon become
what is now a sixth-grade level) – the thinking is that rather than bringing
people “up” we bring the text “down”. That’s pretty sound thinking isn’t it? It
must be sound thinking because that seems to be how society operates in many
arenas.
By the way, what does this say
about the ancient readers of the Greek and Hebrew texts? Among other things it
says that they were able to hold complex and prolonged paragraphs and passages
in tension without losing the tension and intricacies of the passages. We can’t
do that as a society – we insist on treating a text piecemeal because we can’t
hang with a Pauline paragraph that encompasses a few verses – it’s too much and
we shut down – I’ve seen it in small group after small group – it’s like
feeding a baby pureed food.
I like using Romans Chapter Six
when I illustrate one of the problems with the NIV; it uses the term “sinful
nature” for “flesh” (sarx in Greek). The NIV has no warrant for substituting a
“term” a “designation” for a word that is clear Greek, sarx is sarx is sarx and
it means “flesh”. Now as to why Paul uses the word “flesh” in Romans Six, well
now that is another question – but that
is not a question for translators, that is a question for the reader and the
teacher. The NIV does the reader’s work for her, it does the teacher’s work
for him, and we need not interact with Paul the human vessel or God the Author
– the NIV has taken care of that.
Time and again when teaching and
observing I’ve seen the NIV dumb down the text – but those who don’t know the
text beyond the NIV don’t know it, nor do they know the theories behind the
translations. (When does one take a time out in a small group or Bible study
and say, “Do we understand the different theories behind the translations we
are using?”)
Here’s the thing that has
disgusted me in our study of John; when Jesus prefaces key statements with
“Amen, amen, I say to you…” the NIV substitutes, “I tell you the truth”. Here
again, as in Romans Chapter Six, the Greek is clear, in fact the Greek word is
“amen”. So Jesus is saying, “Amen, amen, I say to you…” At least the KJV, NKJV,
ESV and NASB use “Verily, verily” or “Truly, truly” or an equivalent – they are keeping a word for word
correspondence to the Greek text and in so doing are retaining both the cadence
and emphasis that Jesus places on His statements. (Just to clarify, I don’t
think that all translation need be word for word, considering that Greek is a
synthetic language, like German, it often takes more than one English word to
correspond to a Greek word, plus a Hebrew or Greek word may have a thought
behind it that is better expressed by more than one English word - I appreciate
the KJVs use of italics when adding a
word for better understanding.)
Read John Chapters Five and Six
in the ESV, NASB or KJV and look for the Amen, amen or Truly, truly, or Verily,
verily; read them again and again with an eye on these statements, savor their
rhythm and emphasis, note the statements of Jesus that follow them – you don’t
see this in the NIV. Reading these chapters in the NIV is like listening to a symphony in which all point-counterpoint has been removed. (About a year
ago I did a blog series on John Chapter Five in which I held that Jesus’ use of
“Amen, amen” is the equivalent of Yahweh proclaiming, “Thus says the LORD”,
thus Jesus is proclaiming His Divinity. Whether one agrees with this or not at
least if we have faithful translations we have something to wrestle with!)
I’ve seen this weekly small group
go through the first six chapters of John and no one has caught the “Amen,
amen” statements – in part because they’re reading the NIV – what a shame. A
symphony without a motif – that’s the NIV and its companions in the land of the
slippery slope.
No comments:
Post a Comment