CORRECTION OF ARCHAISMS, AMBIGUITIES, AND THE RENDERING OF PROPER NAMES AND TECHNICAL EXPRESSIONS.
It is manifest that an archaism ceases to be innocent wlien it has become altogether obsolete, or has wholly or to a considerable degree changed its meaning. And not a few such words or phrases are to be found in the Authorized Version. They are now either quite unintelligible or seriously misleading; and to substitute other expressions for them was clearly one of the plainest duties to be kept in view in preparing the Revised Version.
The following words may be given as examples of those that have, of necessity, been replaced by others. "Let" now means to permit, but is used with exactly the opposite meaning of hinder at Rom. 1:13; 2 Thess. 2:7. "Worship" is now used only with reference to the service of God, but occurs in the sense of respect shown to man at Luke 14:10; while "room," now meaning apartment, is used in the same verse to denote a seat. "Wealth" reads strangely indeed at 1 Cor. 10:24, "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth," where the word means welfare. "Prevent" now means to hinder, but at Matt. 17:25 and 1 Thess. 4:15 it is used in the sense of anticipate or precede. "Quick" is used for living, as at Heb. 4:12, and is barely intelligible to the ordinary reader of that passage. "Ensue" is quite obsolete in the sense of pursue, which it has at 1 Peter 3:11. The word "conversation," as used in the Authorized Version, is a most fruitful cause of mistake. It always means conduct, except at Philipp. 3:20, where it is translated "citizenship" in the Revised Version, and might perhaps mean "city" or "home." The dreadful word "damnation," which stands at 1 Cor. 11:29, has had the very worst consequences in many cases, and means no more than judgment. "Honest," at Philipp. 4:8, is a Latinism, meaning honorable; and the same is true of Rom. 12:17, though the Greek is there different. "Affect," at Gal. 4:17, is used for court, and "allow," at Luke 11:48, means approve—senses of the words which would never occur to a modern English reader. The words "offend " and "offence" are very misleading, but it is not easy to substitute for them others that shall be in every respect preferable. The Revised Version has adopted cause to stumble and stumbling-block for "offend" and "offence" in some passages, as Matt. 5:29, 16:23, but in others has not been able to get rid of the obnoxious words. "Virtue," at Mark 5:30 and Luke 6:19, 7:46, simply means power. In the word "usury," at Matt. 25:27, there is no objectionable meaning, and it has been replaced by interest, as our language now requires. "Nephews," at 1 Tim. 5:4, really means grandchildren; and when Moses is called "a proper child," at Heb. 11:23, the meaning is what we now express by such a word as goodly. The singular expression "occupy," found at Luke 19:13, means traffic, and "by and by," which occurs at Matt. 13:21 and several other passages in the Gospels, means immediately. "Writing-table," at Luke 1:63, denotes writing tablet, while "devotions," at Acts 17:23, means "objects of worship." To mention only one other example of the many misleading archaisms which exist in the Authorized Version, the word "debate" is used at Rom. 1:29 in the sense of strife; and so liable is this to be misunderstood that we are told "a worthy member of a Scottish Church court once warned its members not to call their deliberations a 'debate," for debate was one of the rank sins condemned by the inspired apostle!"
As specimens of archaic phrases or modes of expression which are very apt at the present day to be mistaken, the following will suffice. At Matt. 6:34 the injunction, "Take no thought for the morrow," occurs, and has proved very hurtful in modern times. It was a faithful enough representation of the original two and a half centuries ago, for "thought" was then used in the sense of anxiety. But the word has now no such meaning, and the consequence is that the precept of our Lord as it stands has perplexed many a humble believer, while it has been used by unbelievers as a charge against Christ's teaching, which, they affirm, encourages improvidence. But the Greek really means, "Be not anxious for the morrow," and is so rendered in the Revised Version. Again, to take an instance of a different kind, what a ludicrous notion are these words at Acts 21:15 fitted to suggest: "And after those days we took up our-carriages, and went up to Jerusalem." Persons of education will doubtless run little risk of mistaking the meaning of the passage. But it should ever be remembered that the Bible is, above all other volumes, the people's book, and that, if possible, not a single expression should be left in any translation of it which is at all likely to stumble or perplex the plainest reader. In the case before us, a very slight change, "we took up our baggage," makes the meaning clear. Some strange stories have been told in connection with the words "we fetched a compass," which occur at Acts 28:13, and whether these be true or not, much is gained by the rendering, "we made a circuit," adopted in the Revised Version.
Some ambiguities which occur in the Authorized Version also deserve to be noticed. One of the most puzzling of these, if regard be had only to the apparently grammatical import of the words, occurs at 2 Cor. 5:21, "He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin," where it might seem that the sinlessness of mankind was proclaimed. This possible misconception is very simply but effectually obviated in the Revised Version, by rendering, in exact accordance with the order of the Greek, "Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf." At Luke 4:20 the statement "He closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister" might suggest the idea of a president or preacher in the synagogue, instead of the attendant or officer who had charge of the sacred books. At Eph. 6:12 the rendering, "spiritual wickedness in high places," is clearly ambiguous, as it might seem to refer (and has, indeed, been so taken) to the wickedness of persons high in rank or authority, whereas the true meaning is "in the heavenly places," as in other passages of the Epistle. There is an obvious misplacement of the word "also" at Heb. 12:1, to the obscuring of the sense: 'Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses let us lay aside," etc., as if the believers named in the previous chapter were, like us, "compassed about," while they, in fact, are themselves "the cloud of witnesses;" and the verse should run, "Let us also;" etc. Finally, James 2:1, "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ," is rendered clearer by translating "hold not," etc.; and so at chap. 3:1, "My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation," has, with advantage, been exchanged for, "Be not many teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive a greater judgment," in the Revised Version.
We now proceed to consider the rendering of proper names.
The common-sense principle to be observed in regard to these is that one form should be preserved throughout Scripture for the same person, so that there may be no doubt as to identity. But, as need hardly be said, this rule is grossly violated in the Authorized Version. We find such varieties as Noah and Noe, Korah and Core, Hosea and Osee, Sinai and Sina, Midian and Madian, Miletus and Miletum, etc., made use of in referring to the same persons or places. This is most confusing to the reader, and may sometimes entail serious disadvantage. "Let us just seek," it has been well said, "to realize to ourselves the difference in the amount of awakened attention among a country congregation which Matt. 17:10 would create if it were read thus: 'And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elijah must first come?' as compared with what it now is likely to create." The procedure of our translators in regard to this matter of proper names is truly incomprehensible. Not only do they vary the forms in the Old and New Testament, but they do so in the New Testament itself, even in the same books, yea, in the same chapters. Thus we find "Mark" at Acts 12:12, 25 and 2 Tim. 4:11, but "Marcus" at Col. 4:10, Philem. ver. 24, 1 Peter 5:13; "Cretes" at Acts 2:11, but "Cretians" at Tit. 1:12 ; "Simon, son of Jona," at John 1:42, but "Simon, son of Jonas," at John 21:15, 16, 17; "Luke" at Col. 4:14, 2 Tim. 4:n, but "Lucas" at Philem. ver. 24; "Jeremy" at Matt. 2:17, but "Jeremias" at Matt. 16:14, and "Jeremy" again at Matt. 27:9; "Timotheus" at Acts 16:1, but "Timothy" at Heb. 13:21, and, most strange of all, "Timothy" at 2 Cor. 1:1, but "Timotheus," at ver. 19 of the same chapter. It is no slight gain that these and similar inconsistencies have been corrected in the Revised Version.
But there is another name which here calls for special notice—even the "name that is above every name." The Greek form of Joshua is Jesus, and for that very insufficient reason Jesus stands in two passages of the Authorized Version where Joshua, the leader of Israel, is intended. These are Acts 7:45 and Heb. 4:8, and in both passages the introduction of the name of Jesus must have proved very puzzling to plain English readers. When they find it stated that "if Jesus had given them rest, then would he (David) not afterward have spoken of another day," their minds are certain to form some confused notion of the Saviour, who is the author of rest to His people. And thus is a passage of Scripture obscured and perverted by the use of the name Jesus, instead of Joshua, to designate the illustrious captain of the children of Israel.
The extraordinary inconsistency of the Authorized Version in regard to proper names admits of still further illustration. At Acts 17:19 we find the term "Areopagus," but only three verses after the same spot is referred to as "Mars' hill;" the form "Judea" occurs at Matt. 2:1, and most other places, but for some inconceivable reason the name appears as "Jewry" at Luke 23:5 and John 7:1; so, again, "Judas" is the usual form in the New Testament for the "Judah" of the Old, but the name appears as "Juda" at Mark 6:3, etc., and as "Jude" in the first verse of the Epistle written by that Apostle. It is hardly possible to say a word in defence of such capricious variations, and, as a matter of course, they are not to be found in the Revised Version.
With regard to all such names, the really important points are that the form which has through circumstances become most familiar should be adopted, and that then this form should be adhered to with strict, unvarying consistency.
On now turning to the consideration of technical expressions, we find much to object to in the Authorized Version. Several, indeed, of the renderings it has given of them involve more or less of positive error. Thus is it with the term "deputy," which occurs at Acts 13:7, 8,12, and 19 : 38; it should always be translated " proconsul." Again, the rendering " certain of the chief of Asia," at Acts 19:31, suggests quite a false impression. It is an official title, and should have either been transferred from the Greek, like "tetrarch," so as to read "Asiarchs," or translated "presidents," as in the Revised Version. At Mark 6:27 the word rendered "executioner" really signifies "a soldier of the guard;" and at Rom. 16:23 "treasurer of the city" is a preferable rendering to "chamberlain."
It is very difficult to decide what course should be followed in translating the names of coins, weights, and measures. As need hardly be said, there are, as regards these, no words in our language exactly corresponding to the original; and it would never do to present them in a strictly equivalent version, so as to read "a measure of wheat for eightpence-halfpenny," or "six pounds five shillings would not purchase bread sufficient." On the other hand, every one feels that the "penny" and "pence" which occur so often in the Authorized Version are awkward and misleading. Still, nothing better could be found. The word in the original, "denarion," might indeed have been transferred from the Greek into English, and so with all the other terms in question. But this would have been felt almost intolerable, and such words could have conveyed no meaning to the English reader. For the most part, therefore, they have been left unaltered in the Revised Version. But in some passages greater definiteness has been given to the translation. Thus at Matt. 17:24, instead of the general word "tribute," there is read, "Doth not your master pay the half-shekel?' And at ver. 27 of the same chapter, for the un-meaning "piece of money," we read "the shekel," which, being exactly double the amount mentioned before, throws light on the immediately following words of our Lord to St. Peter, "that take, and give unto them for me and thee."
It may here simply be noted that the expression "Easter," which occurs once in the Authorized Version, is quite indefensible. Our translators struck it out from many other places in which it stood in the earlier English versions, and it was probably retained at Acts 12:4 by mere oversight. The word ought to be rendered there, as everywhere else, "passover."
There is one word not occurring at all in the Authorized Version, that has simply been transplanted from Greek into English in the Revised Translation. This is the term "Hades," denoting the invisible world. Immense gain has been secured in several passages by the adoption of this word. Thus is it very markedly at Acts 2:27, where these words are quoted from Ps. 16 in reference to Christ: "Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, neither wilt thou give thy Holy One to see corruption." The common rendering "hell" is here wholly unsuitable. That word has in the Revised Version been reserved for a totally different term {Gehenna) in the original.
Before concluding this chapter, I may notice the correction of an error in the Authorized Version which seems to have been due at first simply to a misprint. It occurs at Matt. 23:24: "Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel." The correct rendering is "strain out," and so, doubtless, the translators intended their text to be, but in some way or other, at instead of out found a place in the verse. We are told by scholars who have carefully examined the first edition of the Authorized Version, issued in 1611, that it is by no means correctly printed. The errors which it contained have been gradually removed in subsequent editions, so that the text is now very accurate; but strangely enough, while other mistakes have been perceived and corrected, this "strain at" for "strain out" has maintained its place down to the present day.
For a list of all of my books on disks, and other ebooks click here
No comments:
Post a Comment