Skip to main content

A History of Bible Translation: Chapter 2 - Early Translations of the Bible

Some of you may be surprised to learn that the King James Version of the Bible wasn’t the first Bible translation. Apart from the translation of the Old Testament into Greek, mentioned above, there are many other versions of the Bible:

The Samaritan Pentateuch – this contains the first five books of the Old Testament. The Samaritans only took these books as part of their canon. They also had Damascus as their capital and worship-centres in Dan and Bethel for many years, and were considered a sect by Jews. The Samaritan Pentateuch is not a translation, as such, but an important text, in that it duplicates the ‘Torah’ – the teaching part of the Hebrew Bible.

The Dead Sea Scrolls – also not a translation, but an important collection of Hebrew texts, dating back to the 1st century BC. The scrolls were found in a cave in Qumran, so are sometimes known by that epithet. They were remarkably well preserved, given the fact they had been lying there for about twenty centuries before they were discovered. Thankfully the extreme dryness of the climate led to their preservation. Nevertheless, they ended up in fragments, and scholars have been pasting them back together ever since. Still, one or two books, such as Isaiah, are in a very good state.

The Peshitta – this is the Syriac translation of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). It was probably translated into Syriac in the 2nd century AD.

The Vulgate – this is the translation of the Bible into Latin, and was carried out by Jerome in the 4th-5th centuries AD.[1] By then a Latin version of the Bible was very much needed, as Greek was no longer as influential as it had once been. The crazy thing is that this became the standard translation of the Bible for the next ten centuries! Latin became the language of the Western church, and remained so until relatively recently. It was only in the 1960s that the Roman Catholic church decided to allow mass to take place in local languages rather than in Latin.[2] The Eastern church continued to use Greek until the advent of the Russian Orthodox Church, and some other Slavic churches, which use Church Slavonic[3] for their liturgy. Of course, most of these churches have readings and sermons, and these were sometimes in local languages, at least in the last couple of centuries. The Russian Orthodox Church today continues to use Church Slavonic for its liturgy, but the sermon is normally in modern Russian, as are the readings.

As for English translations of the Bible – the first was probably by John Wycliffe and his colleagues in the 14th century. He was an Oxford scholar, but also trained up lay preachers and evangelists, and they were encouraged to use a translation of the New Testament from Latin into English made by Wycliffe and others, so that ordinary people could understand them. It was a translation of a translation, since the Bible is written mainly in Hebrew and Greek.[4] He himself was not persecuted, but he was posthumously labelled as a heretic. After his death his bones were dug up, burnt, and thrown in the river Swift. His writings were also burnt. Wycliffe was around at the very beginning of the Reformation, which we will get to in the next chapter.

There were also translations into French, German, Czech and Arabic around this time. Arabic was earlier, in fact. Still, in Europe, at least, the Latin Bible continued to hold sway.




[2] The decision to allow this was made at Vatican II, which took place in Rome, 1962-1965.
[3] This dates back to the 9th century.
[4] This is, generally speaking, not a good idea, as it is much like making a tape of a tape, in that the number of errors is bound to increase, much like the hiss on a recording increases.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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 it is the idea that seed was scatted by throwing it from a bag carried round the farmer's shoulder. This could be explained in the para-

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