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:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Scripture Engagement for Translation Advisors

What do translation advisors need to know about Scripture engagement (SE), and why? Let's look at the 'why' first: Translation advisors (TAs) are often involved in day-to-day exegesis. They help mother-tongue translators (MTTs) prepare drafts. The MTTs they work with might not know Hebrew or Greek. The TAs then take part in the team check of that draft, which involves other MTTs in the project as well as the TA. Sometimes they are also involved in the coordination of the translation programme. They are very busy people. So why do they need to know about SE? Because: The translation is ultimately for an audience that has felt needs that are not being addressed by the translation programme. Analysing and meeting (or helping to meet) the felt needs of the audience should be the first priority of any mission worker, including TAs. Only about 30% of completed translations are well used. The initial set up of the programme needs to take SE into consideration (it's no good wai...
Post a Comment
Read more

One Person's Contextualisation is Another Person's Syncretism

I was in an interesting discussion full of anthropologists the other day. They were discussing syncretism. Most of them were of the view that outsiders cannot decide which practices are syncretistic and which are not. It has to be a decision made by local believers. This is because only local people can create indigenous theologies, that is, interpret Scripture according to the local worldview(s).  Not only that, some practices need to be tolerated in the short term, as we trust that new believers will gradually mature, and realise that those practices need to be weaned out of their lives. This can take time, perhaps years. Outsiders can, however, help local believers through the process of deciding for themselves which practices need to be rejected, which can be accepted, and which need to be modified according to (local formed) principles from Scripture. For example, ancestor practices, which my PhD thesis was on, are often continued by people after they have come to faith. They...
Post a Comment
Read more

Asset Based Bible Translation (ABBT)

Many of you will have heard of asset-based community development (ABCD). How can Bible translation programmes be asset based, rather than deficit based? The best way to look at this is a comparison table: Deficit based Asset based Driven by outsiders Driven by the community Outside funding Community funded Done to meet a need Done to help the community grow Quality control done by a consultant Community checked and approved Control from outside-in Lead by stepping back Products not accepted? Products are accepted Little engagement Engagement with products Scientific Organic Not sustainable Sustainable Of course many translation programmes these days are neither one nor t'other, they are somewhere between these two extremes. Nevertheless, this illustrates a point, and shows that the current ...
Post a Comment
Read more