adventures in the cev

Loving the Lord with all my mind...

Monday, March 05, 2007

Like a Son

Timothy, because of our faith, you are like a son to me. 1 Tim 1:1
.
From the CEV at least, it strikes me afresh that Paul's relationship with Timothy was like a father to a son. It's funny that the NIV's 'my true son in the faith' didn't evoke the same response in me although it is perhaps semantically stronger. However, neither version actually sticks to a word-for-word translation, which would be something like,
.
'To Timothy, true child in faith'.
.
Now the question is, where should the emphasis be put in that phrase? Should it be on 'true' - the genuineness of Timothy's birth into faith? Or should it be on 'child' - Timothy as a child or son or offspring? Or should it be on 'faith' - the faith into which Timothy has been born? Because wherever you think the emphasis should be will effect the translation you make.
.
If it's on 'true' then you ramp up the volume on it by describing Timothy's birth into faith as being authentic, genuine, valid, true. Perhaps, 'To Timothy, a truly genuine child in the faith.'
.
If it's on Timothy as a child, then child of whom? Child of faith or child of Paul's? If you opt for the latter and I guess the argument goes that this is a letter addressed to Timothy from Paul and is therefore setting out the basis of their relationship, then you ramp up this volume. There is no 'my', as has often been put in, to make effectively, 'true child of mine'. But if you are wanting to use this phrase in connection to Paul & Timothy then you might introduce a 'my' because it must surely have been on the tip of Paul's tongue, right? Thus, 'To Timothy, truly a son of mine in the faith.' Or 'Timothy, because of our faith, you are like a son to me.'
.
If it's on faith then you might perhaps translate the 'in' as 'of '. Or you might understand the phrase to mean that Timothy is truly childlike in faith or that he is someone perhaps still young in faith but genuine in his pursuit of it. So something like, 'To Timothy, truly childlike when it comes to simple, sincere believing.'
.
But what if you did come away from the CEV thinking that Paul had actually written the words to Timothy as they have translated it? It may well have been Paul's intention to say exactly that. At the very least, the CEV is shining a light on the phrase in just the right way to produce shadows of meaning in all those places. But significantly, Paul doesn't use the word 'son' here, which would have given a stronger sense of Timothy being an offspring of Paul's and he didn't use the word 'my' either.
.
There are some who would be aghast that so much time is spent thinking through this one small phrase. But it actually would have real implications
.
  • in terms of comparing & contrasting Timothy's ministry with Paul's apostolic calling
  • to see if there are significant similarities of commission
  • for an impartation of spiritual DNA in Timothy that comes from Paul.
.
It also sends a powerful statement about the nature of the relationship between Paul and this young disciple. It sounds like a warm, rich & formative relationship. It also has implications in terms of how those in ministry might possibly be called to seek to mentor other leaders.
.
Looking at the bigger picture, it is again an example of the extent to which the translating process is strongly interpretative. Even the order of the original words can sometimes provide the missing emphasis we are looking for here. It's a subtle thing.
.
I have found in even the most enquiring of quarters a tendency in the translating process for people to want to come down strongly for one particular answer and in effect to shut down debate. I guess we're all paid in whatever field to give answers after all. But I think it would actually be more Jewish in style to leave the question open sometimes. To retain a little bit of the mystery in the text. To make you do the work. In this instance, to leave the reader with the job of having to decide for themselves how Paul is trying to address Timothy. And that's harder to do in a dynamic equivalence because the work is done for you and the original translation effectively masked from sight, and I guess, maybe it should be for the purposes of aiding the reader in interpretation. But the question begs itself. Can the CEV really lay claim to be a translation or is it just a very easy-to-read interpretation?
In a more formal translation the words should be left plain. Then coming to a translation would become a bit like going to look at a masterpiece in the National Gallery. The picture sits framed in simplicity against the wall with a light shining on it to illuminate the whole. First you sit on the bench provided and take it all in. Then you look at different bits of it. Then having soaked in it and studied it, you come to your own conclusions of what the painter is trying to achieve and you preserve an imprint of the whole in your memory.
.
For what it's worth, I think the affirming warmth and tender affection of Paul towards Timothy seems most evident in the greeting to me. In that Paul doesn't use 'my son' but rather 'true child', I think he is wanting to affirm the genuine nature of Timothy's heritage of faith wherever it has originated. And I do think he probably meant 'son of mine' because it is a relational greeting though for all the reasons above I wouldn't presume to translate it that way myself because it's too prescriptive.
.
Finally, it is always going to be very difficult to find Paul's meaning because he wraps up so many deep concepts in phrases such as 'in faith'. So we will always have to wrestle with Paul's words and pray that in the process the Holy Spirit will grant us revelation of the truths Paul is pointing to. And that's something that will always be worth spending time doing.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

Initial Impression of Galatians

My initial impression of Galatians is that it is indeed well written and easy to read. There are some undoubted losses in translation but one thing I did find pleasing is that the text did feel really fresh to me, as if Paul's letter was speaking to me in a new way.
.
I'm now going to move on into Paul's letter to Timothy, a letter written to a young apostle as opposed to a church and see what gems of thought I might uncover there in this fresh translation. I am really enjoying it though because the scriptures feel new all over again.

Friday, March 02, 2007

The Importance Of a Spirit Filled Life

In Gal 5:16-26 Paul concludes with the importance of a Spirit-lived life. Although he doesn't here mention being filled with or baptised in the Spirit, it is clear in the passage, and also from his alluding to Jesus' teaching on fruitfulness as a recognition of inner righteousness, that the Spirit-empowered life is absolutely essential to working out righteousness by faith.
.
This is a challenge for preachers. Charismatics preach an experiential infilling of the Spirit; their expectation levels will be high and they tend to focus more on Spirit baptism with signs following but not so much on the ethical dimension. Non-charismatics tend to downplay the experiential often even discounting teaching on the Spirit. If there is talk of the role of the Spirit, it can be reduced to teaching on the effort of the believer to live right.
.
Not so for Paul. He focuses squarely on the battle between the indwelling Spirit and sinful flesh. I find him very real here. Yes we have put to death the sinful nature on the cross; the back of sin has been broken. But yes there is also an ongoing battle between the flesh trying to resurrect itself until we are ultimately renewed. Pursuing the radical, indwelling & empowering life of the Spirit will bring incremental breakthroughs in the here and now.
.
I am challenged to put the diamond back in the crown of Christian living and display it as it should be. The Spirit filled & empowered life is absolutely central to life lived as a Christian. It is essential for us to live in the reality of the justification by faith Christ has won for us at the cross. The Spirit filled life is not an optional extra for the happy-clappys. It doesn't mean extra effort to live right. It does mean a dynamic pursuit of Spirit-fellowship so that Christ and Christlikeness is formed in us.

Monday, February 26, 2007

Ringing Through The Ages

I wonder what a good Jew would have thought as Paul began his discourse on the status of the Jews in Gal 4:21? I could just imagine them nodding away sagely as they happily affirm the first part of Paul's argument - all the way to the first part of 4:24 - and then going apoplectic when Paul so fundamentally reinterprets the Jewish nation's ancestry from Abraham. Am I right to think that they would be tearing their hair out at Paul's reinterpretation of the Jews as being descendants of Ishmael? Or at the very least that Paul has at this point seismically departed from Judaism and made an enormous clanger? Wouldn't a good Jew have been absolutely furious with the perceived heresy they would hear in Paul at this point?
.
And for that matter, now that Paul has tied law-keeping covenants to the descendants of Ishmael, does that have any significane whatsoever in understanding the position of any other religion, most notably Islam as a law-based religion today? Is it possible that in this part of his letter, Paul has sounded a warning bell that is ringing ever louder down through the ages? Or have I got it completely wrong? Answers on a postcard, please.
.
If you have now read this, I want you to know that not commenting is not playing according to the rules I made up in my head. Come on, you must have something to say?

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Pre-Script: On the other hand

In the same introduction, the CEV looks at how it translates a psalm, effectively a poetic song of praise, moving away from a literal translation and from some of the poetic devices of the time to using more modern techniques. And it works brilliantly.
.
Now why would I advocate this as good practice? For the exact same reasons as below. In the original Hebrew, the writer may be rhyming and using poetic devices, including rhythm to make the poem much more powerful as a result. All this is lost with a wooden literalistic rendering of the text. Now listen to how they take a literal translation, add the spice and in my view, slam-dunk the translation.
.
NIV of Ps 29:3-4:
.
The voice of the LORD is over the waters;
the God of glory thunders,
the LORD thunders over the mighty waters.
The voice of the LORD is powerful;
the voice of the LORD is majestic.
.
And try to read these lines from the CEV without getting goosebumps
.
The voice of the LORD echoes over the oceans.
The glorious LORD God thunders above the roar of the raging sea,
and his voice is mighty and marvelous.
.
Awesome. Devastating. Evocative. You can almost hear the thunder in your head as you read. Praise-inspiring. They have captured the sense of the text perfectly.
.
So between the two prescript posts here, the jury is out on the CEV.

Pre-Script

Finding meaning in translation is a tricky thing. I tend towards wanting to preserve the words people use because words in and of themselves contain nuances of meaning. For example, try explaining what a word means and you will find yourself composing a recipe. 'Oh, it means such-&-such and so-&-so with a hint of this-or-that.' This recipe is part of capturing an overall sense of the meaning of a word. In my view, anyway. I know that this is a debated point. I would also maintain that rhetorical devices also communicate meanings.
.
Take one of the examples the CEV gives as a guide to its rationale in the translating process. The NIV of Jer 23:23 says
.
"Am I only a God nearby," declares the LORD, "and not a God far away? Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him?" declares the LORD. "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" declares the LORD.
.
The new, 'improved' CEV says (note the subtle use of quotes that, as a grammatical device, adds a spice of irony to the adjective before CEV)
.
"I am everywhere-- both near and far, in heaven and on earth. There are no secret places where you can hide from me."
.
Now the translators proudly maintain this is a reliable rendering. In one sense they have given a reliable rendering but in my personal opinion here at this point (which remember is an example they are giving of their approach to the text) they have stripped it of some of its potency. It is my opinion that a rhetorical question posed by the Lord should elicit the correct answers with an accompanying sense of awe. Here no such opportunity remains; and some of the spice in the text is lost asa result.
.
Plain English? Yes. Plain meaning? Perhaps (and debatable). Plain insight? Coming up short as a result. Spice? Totally missing.
.

Saturday, February 24, 2007

Palpable Disappointment

In Ch 3, it seems as if Paul breaks off from the disappointment of his experiences with the apostles to launch into the Galatians who are in the process of being led astray. But it almost seems as if Paul alone is fighting for truth, battling with Peter and even Jesus' own flesh and blood to defend the centrality of the cross. I wonder whether Paul has worked himself up into a stew with his reminiscences and now is laying into the Galatians or whether he is genuinely trying to reform their faulty thinking with generous rhetoric. Either way, he is taking no prisoners.

The important leaders

I was a little confused by the passage in Gal 2:3-8. The leaders in 2:6 sound like the infiltrators in 2:4.
.
The CEV communicates something of an antipathy and a sense of mutual mistrust between these giants of the early church, almost as if there is a dividing of constituencies. The apostles can have the Jews; Paul can have the rest. And all can live in peace. It seems quite sad really.

Preaching as Revelation

1:11 My friends I want you to know that no one made up the message I preach. It wasn't given or taught to me by some mere human. My message came directly from Jesus Christ when he appeared to me.
I know this is not the point of the text but I was reminded that having a message to preach is not just an exercise of the mind but should at some level involve an aspect of revelation or inspiration, even imparted understanding, if you like.

Grace as Kindness

I love that the CEV is trying to get contemporary with their translation of grace as kindness (1:3) but is the sense of God's unmerited favouring being lost in translation? And for that matter is grace as kindness and mercy as undeserved kindness (6:16) being truncated into one concept rather than two? And how come grace is translated as kindness in one verse and wonderful kindness in the next (1:6)?
I'm not complaining. It feels more real to me already.

thoughts on galatians

The first thought that strikes me is the extent to which Paul is defending his own ministry. This is quite personal stuff from him. I think when I come to preach a text I am looking for the eternal perspective, what will translate well and be applicable to people reading the text and trying to be a Christian in a 20/21 century context, but Paul quite loudly proclaims his credentials. So much for humility? Not really: he is vigorously defending the authority of his call. But the letter doesn't automatically translate into preaching material. Even exegetically, the requirement to produce a sermon can impose itself on the process of discovering what the text is really saying.

What I'm trying to do

What I'm trying to do here is take a new version of the Bible and look at scipture afresh. Let the letters or books themselves and the words really hit me. I am too comfortable and familiar with the NIV. I know it off by heart and back to front so it has lost its capacity to shock me with something I haven't seen before because it's like I can see around the corner. I know what's coming.
.
So I have chosen the CEV. It's clear & fresh and people are praising it to the rafters; churches are even choosing it for their pew Bible. So I am going to have a look. And first impressions, at 5.30am, is that it does read rather well and that the text is really making me think again.
.
But the question is, is the new stuff revelatory just because they have translated the words out of their meaning or have I been truly shocked out of my stupor?
.
Take Gal 4:19 for example. In the Greek, Paul talks about being in labour pains until Christ is formed in them. A powerful metaphor connected with strong images of bringing new birth and a mysterious insight into one aspect of the apostolic role. Totally missing in the CEV: "My children, I am in terrible pain until Christ may be seen living in you." If they miss as powerful a metaphor as that because it doesn't translate well, what else might be missing? That said, in the same verse the CEV really captures a sense of Paul's bafflement with the Galatians, almost as if he really is at a loss to know how to deal with them: "You really have me puzzled." Delicious.
.
I wonder whether that very verse will end up being my overall impression or whether the loss in exactness will be more than offset by the gains in understanding by the freshness of the text.
.
Let the games begin.
.