The Discipline of Hermeneutics
Regarding Bible
Translations
Define the terms “formally equivalent”
and “functionally equivalent” with regard to translation theories.
Formal equivalent refers to a literary translation of the
Greek and Hebrew text into English syntax.
This process “prioritizes preserving the form and structure of the text
over what is the most intelligible English.”[1]
By seeking to remain as close as possible to the original form of the Greek and
Hebrew language, the form equivalent “may appear awkward, less sensitive to a
contemporary audience, and may sacrifice meaning for form.”[2]
In contrast, the functionally equivalent renders more of a dynamic
interpretation of the Greek and Hebrew language into English. This rendering
seeks to “reflect better English,” placing the “priority on clarity over
grammar and syntax.” Another way to define the functional is that it brings the
text closer to the language of the contemporary reader (an attempt to reproduce
the same effects as experienced by the original audience).[3]
Which one is
considered more “word-for-word” and which is more “thought-for-thought”?
The formal equivalent is the more “word-for-word” while the
functional equivalent is the “thought-for-thought.”
What criteria should
a person use to choose a Bible translation?
Purpose or occasion determines choice.[4]
What does the reader/user wish to
accomplish? Is the Bible a gift? How old or mature is the user? A study Bible
or devotional Bible? The audience may also determine the need (traditional or
contemporary?). A starting point would be to choose a translation that is your
language (or the preferred language), preferably one under fifty years as there
have been additional manuscript discoveries since the 1600’s and the advent of
textual criticism. Silva et al suggests two additional criterion[5]: (1)
choose a translation based upon the Greek and Hebrew text; and (2) select a
translation that is the result of committee contribution versus a single
interpreter, as there is a lesser chance of biases and preunderstandings read
into the text.
Respond to this
quote: “If they can’t read Hebrew and Greek, then Christians should use at
least 2 Bibles: one formal and one functional equivalent. That way they can see
some of the nuances in the languages as understood by the translators.” Do you
agree or disagree? Be sure to give reasons.
I agree with this quote. If the aim is to get as close as
possible to the original author’s intended message, then a formal (keep the
Greek/Hebrew form – word-for-word), plus a functional (thought-for-thought)
will definitely bring you closer. What one translation misses, the other can
shed light or amplify. Because no translation is perfect, nor the translator, a
range of options will take us closer to the source language while bringing us
even closer to the receptor language. The end result is better revelation of
God’s Word.
What translation
would you recommend for a new believer and why?
I am a believer in the New American Standard Bible, as it
comes really close to the Greek and Hebrew text. Not to mention the fact that
it is an easier read than the King James version, and it provides footnotes on
manuscript variations within the text.
Because the early years (formative) of the new believer is so crucial, I
find it extremely necessary to provide a text that is true to form, yet
contemporary enough for them to grasp without feeling overwhelmed. It also
helps that the NASB comes in the Life Application Study Bible formats, which
provides ample historical-cultural background information which makes for an
exciting read.
The Importance of Historical-cultural Background
The historical-cultural background is a literary tool that
informs the interpreter of “cross-cultural and epoch-spanning” factors related
to the original author and audience that can provide additional insight beyond the objective text. With a bit of
reconstruction, when employed correctly, interpreters gain access into the
perspective, and mindset of the writer and recipients, leading to the authors’ intended message. These elements
will include (but not limited to) the political climate, religious practices,
economic and societal structures,
worldview, physical/geographical features and local customs.[6] Through contextualization, the interpreter
aims to “bridge the gap between the biblical culture and modern culture” to
provide “a clear, accurate, and relevant explanation of the text’s intended
meaning in language that is meaningful to one’s contemporaries.”[7]
What is the
significance of this material in interpreting the Bible properly?
Klein et al rightly suggests “resisting the temptation to
sanitize the Bible so it conforms to our values and mindset.”[8] A
proper understanding of the historical-cultural background will land us
squarely into the world of the author and his audience, helping the interpreter
to understand their perspective, their worldview, their situations. Even though
“their town” is worlds apart, the hard work of deciphering this information
lessens the chances of pretext, and gives greater probability of determining a
timeless principle.
Describe the process
of “contextualization.” How would you explain contextualization to a new believer
that wanted to learn more about the historical-critical background of the
Bible?
Contextualization is entering the world of the author and
his audience and uncovering a truth or principle that applies to the present
context. It is entering King David’s world as he pondered moving on after being
told his son born from his affair with Bathsheba would die (2 Sam. 12:15-23),
and finding a principle for your current shared experience. His story was
written for our edification. Why did the author mention in the surrounding
context “Then it happened in the spring, at the time when Kings go out to
battle…” (2 Sam. 11:1a) regarding David? How is this text tied to his affair
with Bathsheba? To really know what’s happening, the interpreter has to dig a
bit deeper for the answer. If he or she does the digging, they will find the
Bible speaking truth to life. The new believer would find that digging deeper
in this text will reveal that King David abandoned his purpose by staying
home. Could David be intoxicated by his
earlier victories (use of the conjunction “then;” c.f. 2 Sam.5, 8-10)? What
happens to us when things are going well? How does God fit into our lives
during times of ease? Taking the time to look at the surrounding texts
(preceding and subsequent verses, maybe the entire chapter) related to the text
in question will provide the proper context with which to understand the
thoughts of the author and his purpose for writing to that audience, and by
extension, God’s message to the current reader.
Why is the
“historical-cultural background” important?
Obviously, the Bible was not communicated in a vacuum. Its
writers were influenced by both culture and language. And since culture and
language (regardless of time in history) drives “systems of values and a way of
looking at the world,” as well as “the emotional-affective dimension of
discourse,” interpreters have an obligation to consider the effects of history
and culture within the context of communication. [9]
For example, before the mid-twentieth century, the word “gay” in a sentence was
understood to mean carefree or bright or lighthearted, especially in the
English culture. In the twenty-first century, the word “gay” has only one
meaning. A millennial reading a prose with the use of such a word might be
misinformed if not for correct interpretation (which involves knowledge of the
context). Returning to the earlier example of King David – Anyone reading 2
Samuel 13-20, in which we see David’s house turned up-side down, would think
“David’s luck ran out.” It would have been better to read the chapters before
to understand that judgment came to his house (2 Sam. 12:10-11) because “he
stayed home.” The reader can understand the mindset of all the people touched
by David’s actions and inaction when the historical-cultural background is
uncovered.
What are some steps
useful in retrieving the “historical-cultural background” of Scripture?
This background information should include: (1)deciphering
facts on the author, date and purpose – using dictionaries, commentaries,
extra-biblical material; (2) scrutinizing the specific passages to determine
cultural specifics (mentioned earlier) – anything that can help the reader
understand the authors’ intent by entering the world of the original audience.
Undoubtedly, the aim is to connect the relationship of the author and the
audience here and the motivation behind the communication.
[1] William W. Klein, Craig L.
Blomberg and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr., Introduction
to Biblical Interpretation, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 191.
[2] J. Scott Duval and J. Daniel Hays,
Grasping God’s Word, (Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 2012), 35.
[3] Ibid.
[6] Klein et al, Interpretation, 323-4.
[7] Ibid., 319.
[8] Ibid., 314.
No comments:
Post a Comment