Error.
Firstly, the fact that I was going to "see how a bible fit" may be one of the most ludicrous things Ive ever done. That's pretty much me making God who I want Him to be, not letting Him be who He is. As if the bible is a shoe... I try one on that I like, if it's uncomfortable, I try another one, etc, until I find one that "fits".?. The Word of God is what it is, the WORD OF GOD. Comfortable or not, I can't change that. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think that other translations of the bible are evil and that it's necessarily wrong to read them. I just mean, for me, I was looking for something a little, well.... easier than the KJV. To be perfectly honest, I've been reading the NKJV for quite some time, but I am a creature of UN-habit. I like change. I like new things. I like the look and smell of a shiny new bible and the feel of the new crinkly pages and the fact that there is room in the margins for note taking, and ................
....And, me me me me me me me me me.
I SHOULD love the bible for the contents inside. Now, I do.
Back to the search for better scripture...
I grabbed hold of my father's old bible. I say old, it's not really old. It's barely worn. Apparently some years ago he lost his and my aunt bought him a new one. And, apparently, my father wasn't anymore keen on it than I am now. I have been holding onto it and reading from it because I love the thought of anything that ties me to him, my earthly father. But now that he is on the other side of eternity, I am trying to cling to whatever ties me to my heavenly Father, and I am thinking it is NOT this bible. Here's why.
Steven reads from the NKJV, and there have been a couple of times that we've read the same scripture, only it was different. The difference isn't huge, but it's different. I've also noticed in my dad's bible, that in the references (on the large side margins that I love) the words "literally means" would appear with the literal translation to a word in that particular verse. Odd, I thought, but continued to hold this bible tight, looking past the oddities. Then, today, I decided to read the "Preface to the New American Standard Bible", located in the front. It begins by saying how great the old King James Version is, and how thankful the writers/translators are for the history and word-for-word transliteration. Then it goes on to describe the "Principles of Translation". The first one reads...
Modern English Usage: The attempt has been made to render the grammar and terminology in contemporary English. When it was felt that the word-for-word literalness was unacceptable to the modern reader, a change was made in the direction of a more current English idiom.
Insert sound of tires coming to a screeching hault here.
I was so offended by that entire entry that I don't even know where to begin. Let's start with the definition of the word literal.
lit·er·al
1.
in accordance with, involving, or being the primary or strict meaning of the word or words; not figurative or metaphorical: the literal meaning of a word.
2.
following the words of the original very closely and exactly:
3.
true to fact; not exaggerated; actual or factual: a literal description of conditions.
4.
being actually such, without exaggeration or inaccuracy:
So the translators of the NASV are saying that the true definition of each and every God breathed word in scripture is unacceptable?
Unacceptable to me? No, unacceptable to the modern reader.
Let's define modern.
mod·ern–adjective
1.
2.
characteristic of present and recent time; contemporary; not antiquated or obsolete: modern viewpoints.
Ancient. Antiquated. Obsolete.
Did I say earlier that I was offended? Yyyyyyeeeauh. Just a tad.
Last but certainly not least, let's define idiom.
id·i·om–noun
1.
an expression whose meaning is not predictable from the usual meanings of its constituent elements, as kick the bucket or hang one's head, or from the general grammatical rules of a language, as the table round for the round table, and that is not a constituent of a larger expression of like characteristics.
3.
a construction or expression of one language whose parts correspond to elements in another language but whose total structure or meaning is not matched in the same way in the second language.
It's number three that really gets me. Honestly, I had to read that sentence a few times. I still don't know that I really understand it. But as for what I've gotten so far (five times reading it), I think its saying that you basically take something written in one language, word it so that it makes sense in another language, and completely forsake the fact that it means something completely different in its original language because you want it to be relate-able. Doesn't the bible say something like "the truth shall set you free".
Hogwash according to the NASV.
Ok, I'm done for now. Back to my NKJV.
No comments:
Post a Comment