The Bible Translator

The New Testament contains over 3,000 non-Greek words. Many of these are simply cases of loanwords, seen especially in the case of proper nouns and toponyms. However, others retain their foreign value in the text, illustrated especially by the addition of an in-text translation or explanation. These examples of flagged code switching point to further examples of unflagged code switching. After dealing with the function of code switching in the New Testament, this article analyzes the treatment of nine examples of unflagged code switching in forty-four passages. The results point to a clear distinction in the translational practice between traditional and modern Bible versions.

In Isa 23, the ships of Tarshish, on their voyage home, howl to see the destruction of their home ports of Tyre and Sidon: “The sea says: ‘I am like one who has never borne children.’” Bible scholars struggle over the interpretation of this verse, wondering why a masculine voice speaks about writhing in labor and bearing children. To the mythic mind, however, this verse makes perfect sense, for the sea god, known in the Greek world as Poseidon, sired as many as 140 children, including two sons that are connected to places mentioned in this passage, Belus, an early king of Egypt, and Agenor, king of Tyre (with his son Phoenix = Phoenicia). Now that some of those places are destroyed, it is as if the Sea never fathered them. In contrast to the biblical God, the prophet states, the sea god has limited power and can only mourn the fate of his progeny. The use of the term מָעוֹז‎ “stronghold” in Isa 23 may refer to the protecting gods/avatars who lament over the destruction of the Phoenician nation-states, as the text gloats over their destruction.

In 2005 missiologist Rick Brown argued on the basis of Synoptic parallels that, in a few cases, Luke translates Son of God language with non-filial language, especially the term “Christ.” The argument supported the practice of using non-filial renderings of Son of God language in Bible translations made for Muslims, the stated intent being to convey the meaning of the text more clearly and to avoid offense and misunderstanding. This article tests Brown’s claim, mainly by considering the literary relationships between the Synoptic Gospels and by examining every Lukan parallel of Markan and/or Matthean Son of God language used with reference to Jesus. The results of the investigation contradict Brown’s thesis, showing that the relevant Lukan texts do not provide direct support for the rendering of Son of God language with non-filial language.

Most commentaries interpret Acts 13.48 as a strongly predestinarian verse. Key to this reading is the perfect passive participle τεταγµένοι. Modern translations frequently translate the word with the equivalent of “to appoint,” “to ordain,” or “to choose.” Typically, God is understood as the unstated active agent of this participle form of τάσσω, which results in a translation of “as many as were appointed to eternal life believed” (ESV). Often the biblical concept of enrollment in the Book of Life is woven into explanations. In this article, the evidence for this interpretation and translation is critically evaluated and demonstrated to be problematic to support the typical understanding. Instead, by examining the semantic range of τάσσω and the discourse context, the following translation has better lexical and contextual merit. The thesis is that Acts 13.48b should be understood as, “they believed, as many as were arranged by Paul for eternal life, specifically the Gospel.”

Understanding ζηλοῦτε in the indicative mood, this paper proposes the following translation of 1 Cor 12.31a: “Yet, are you continuously striving for the ‘greater’ spiritual gifts?” Considering the flow of Paul’s arguments, the indicative reading of ζηλοῦτε should be preferred to the imperative reading that is predominantly found in Bible translations and scholarly discussions. Furthermore, translating this indicative ζηλοῦτε interrogatively (i.e., as Paul asking a rhetorical question)—rather than as a simple statement—can help Bible readers better recognize the rhetorical force of the passage. This paper defends this indicative-interrogative translation by challenging four common objections to the indicative reading of 1 Cor 12.31a.

The editors of Proverbs structured the book to counter traditional negative sentiments about women. Proverbs such as 19.13, “a stupid child is a ruin to a father, and a wife’s quarreling is a continual dripping of rain” (NRSVue), are misogynistic, presenting problems for the contemporary reader and arguably for the ancient editor as well. Their strategy to combat these old sayings included beginning and ending the book with positive feminine figures, Wisdom in the prologue (Prov 1–9) and the Strong Woman in Prov 31.10-31, and using negative masculine stereotypes as a foil for the negative feminine ones. Recent translations that use gender-neutral language mask these tropes about men’s behavior.

There are cases in which Bible translation has involved the demonization of local terminology. This is the case with the translation of the Bible into the Kachin language of Myanmar (Burma). The pre-Christian religion of Kachins was Nat worship, which provided religious vocabulary items for the Kachin Bible translation. The local term Nat (meaning “spirit”) was used for several demonological terms in the Kachin Bible. This study argues that the local term Nat was demonized in the process of Bible translation, resulting in a lasting and damaging impact on the biblical and theological understanding of Kachin Christians.