Skip to main content

A Plea Regarding Footnotes in Bible Translation

Recently I was giving input to a team who had worked on Psalms. I noticed that in several places they had included footnotes referring to the New Testament use of those Psalms. One example was a footnote in Ps 34:20 'not one of [his bones] will be broken' that referred to John 19:32, 33, 36 where this prophecy is fulfilled.

Now, obviously this is a useful link for readers, but it is better to put it in John's gospel referring back to Psalms. Why? Because the New Testament is (to some extent) a commentary on the Hebrew Bible, whereas the reverse is not true (the Hebrew Bible never refers to the New Testament). There are often two possible ways of reading a Psalm:

  1. In its original context, and 
  2. As interpreted by the New Testament writers.
This is quite important, as the Hebrew Bible belongs to two faith communities, the Jews and the Christians. (Muslims too, to some extent, though they refer to the Torah and the Psalms only). If we translate the Bible in such a way that it only helps Christians, we are showing disrespect towards the Jews. 

It also shows that we understand that the Bible was written by many human authors over a long time period, and that, far from being revealed from heaven in one set of revelations (as the Qur'an is thought to be by Muslims), it took millennia for the Bible to come into its present form.

A very good model for a study Bible is the one produced by NIV. If you look through the book of Psalms it frequently refers to other parts of the Hebrew Bible in its footnotes, but rarely to the NT. (There are some cross references that do, in the centre column, but that is different). Actually, here in Ps 34:20 it says, 'Perhaps John's Gospel applies this word to Jesus (see NIV text note on Jn 19:36) - as the one above all others who could be a called a "righteous man" (v. 19).' Why does it preface the statement with the word 'perhaps'? Because this is a point of view. Most translations do not have study Bible footnotes, however, so this kind of footnote would not normally be included. Study Bibles are often produced later, with the idea of helping one particular faith community.

The other thing we try to avoid in footnotes is preaching. Often translators get inspired as they translate, and suddenly see something that they believe really applies to the people group they belong to. Great! That thought can be used in Scripture engagement, but should not be included in the Bible translation itself. The preaching and application of the Bible to the community is something that happens when believers gather together, and is a further step. It is very important that it happens, but trying to achieve everything all at once in a translation of the Holy Scriptures is not advisable, even if there are few believers amongst the community.

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

10 Reasons to Make Scripture Impact a Priority

This is a response to some recent posts about the importance of Bible translation in fulfilling the Great Commission. Yes, there is much truth in that, but more is needed. It really helps to have Scripture impact (or 'engagement') the top priority, the 'car' as it were, with translation the engine that sits beneath the bonnet. Not all drivers need to know all the details of the engine, but they need to be able to control the vehicle. The most important thing is to be able to get from A to B (see point 2), rather than knowing how the engine works. These are the ten reasons to make Scripture impact a priority: To help people flourish in their communities. There are all kinds of needs that need to be met for people to flourish. One is clean water. Another is good sanitation. Peace (lack of war), and freedom of religion. Access to education etc. etc. For a community to truly flourish they also need access to the Scriptures in a language (or languages) that they understand a...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Flow Chart for Bible Translation (a Relevance Theory Approach)

One of the current theories behind modern translation work is Relevance Theory. [1] Here is a flow chart that explains the process often used to produce a draft when using such an approach: *Make sure your translation committee makes the decision as to what kind of translation they want. A domesticated translation is one that submits to dominant values in the target language [2] whereas a foreignized translation is one that is happy to import foreign terms and ideas from Hebrew, Greek, or the language of wider communication such as the Greek term baptizo . The chart looks something like this: Text                                   Communicated Ideas                  Context A sower went out to sow  A farmer went out to sow grain   People scattered/threw seed etc. The text has very little information, but behind i...
Post a Comment
Read more

Asking the Right Questions in Bible Translation and Scripture Engagement Planning

If you want to get useful answers you have to ask the right questions. Do you agree? Yes, of course you do. In the Bible translation world we often ask a very narrow question when planning for the next stage of work: 'What would you like to see translated next?' Now, if you simply want to translate, and that's it, that question is fine, but what if you want to see some kind of result from your translation work? What if, for instance, you want to see transformation occur? Then a more powerful question to ask the community and positive stakeholders in the project would be: 'What kingdom goals would you like to see reached?' These kingdom goals should meet felt needs of the community - they should solve problems that are apparent to most or all in the community. See below on how those can be met. If that's too abstract, then try, 'What kinds of things, in your extended family, do you tend to worry about?' This will help establish some felt needs, from which...
7 comments
Read more