Comments on: Should Archaic Language Be Used In Modern Translations?

By: Wendyl Leslie

Wendyl Leslie — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 12:51:20 +0000

This argument is just a classic example of what happens when folks start trying to change the text from what was originally written. When I hear folks complaining about not understanding what the original ancient language meant and thinking it’s wrong as a result, my thinking is that they’re too lazy to find out what it means.

Brent is absolutely correct regarding the usage of the word “betrothed.” It’s the only way to accurately convey what was meant by the author of the text. And oftentimes, this is the case whenever archaic terms are used. There are just no modern counterparts that can adequately express the original writer’s intent. And when we think we know better than what the original author meant then we’re really messing around with the “God-breathed” words of God.

And, that my friends, is not a very good idea!

By: Brent Kercheville

Brent Kercheville — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:46:35 +0000

Mike:
I did not mean to imply that Strauss wrote about casting lots. I was just using the casting of lots as another example of archaic language that I think we must keep until we can come up with something clearer.

By: Ray McCalla

Ray McCalla — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:09:38 +0000

I agree with you. I read Mark’s paper, and his criticisms were generally accurate; the ESV could be improved in a number of places. He assumes, however, that his translation philosophy (to bring the ancient text into the contemporary world) is the only right one. But this is just a difference in perspective; the ESV attempts to do just the opposite: to take the reader back into the ancient world.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:01:31 +0000

Excellent point about “betrothed.” I hadn’t thought about it that way.

I don’t remember Strauss saying we should remove casting lots though, I thought he had said the ESV shouldn’t use, “the lot fell on Mathaias” or something like that…

In minority language translations, where there are places where cultural issues that are difficult to translate like these, translators often insert footnotes explaining the problem. That might be helpful for translations such as “casting lots,” or “betrothed.” Typically, unless its a study Bible in English, we don’t see much of that.