The difficulty of translation

The TNIV is being discontinued.

Wow... I am a little surprised. In my mind I thought that the competition was between the ESV and TNIV for the future dominant english Bible. I thought perhaps they both would win out with the ESV being used by more gender conservative churches and the TNIV by less conservative churches. One problem though, is that the NIV is still a very popular translation though now out of date, not just for language but also due to time giving better insight into the meaning of particular words and passages. The TNIV would have to remarkably different and better to supplant its predecessor. I find myself having to regularly think about how I will "clarify" the NIV translation. It was a good translation and an updated one is needed.

This highlights the difficulties of translating from one language to another. Words have meanings, but its particular meaning is only given with respect to its relationship in its sentence and the greater context. This does not just include the context of a passage or the bible but also the native tongue of the host culture. In order to properly translate Scripture we must wrestle with what a native ancient speaker of Hebrew or Greek would mean by the words "heart, love, God" etc. Translators then also have to be aware of the cultural milieu of the language in which they are trying to translate it, be it English, Spanish, or German. Missionaries have been debating for centuries about the proper word for God to use in Chinese culture. This is the result of the the differences between the way protestants rendered the early translations and catholics. I believe the debate is about the word Tao. You would think God would be one of the easier ones. It is not that simple. Think about it, Theos, the Greek word for God, was the same word used for all the Greek gods in their mythologies. It had connotations that could have compromised the true nature of God presented in the Bible.

The interesting thing about the TNIV is that the controversy is centered not around words like God, but around gender issues. Should the language of ancient worlds which used "man" to refer to all people, men and women, be changed to reflect contemporary gender sensitivity? This illustrates that views on the nature of gender in our culture are extremely unstable right now. Newsweek did an issue a few years ago in light of transgender people that seemed to argue gender is not biologically determined but determined by an individual's preference or desire. This does not even get to more particularly sensitive issues in churches related to the roles of men and women and the problems our culture has in trying to interpret seemingly chauvinist passages like 1 Cor 14:34 and 1 Tim 2:12. What seemed clear less than a century ago is hardly the case now.

I could go on to explain some of the thought that goes into rendering a translation. But the central issue of the matter relates to contextualizing the message of the Bible, the gospel, that God has acted in human history through Jesus Christ to reconcile us to himself and renew all of creation (Col 1:15-20). What is needed is both faithfulness is rendering the language to the gospel message and faithfulness in preaching the gospel for the salvation of its hearers. Translators cannot do it by themselves, but Christians, all of whom are preachers to varying degrees, need to study the word to correct misunderstandings and faithfully communicate God's love of us chiefly demonstrated in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Heb 1:3; 1 Jn 3:16; 1 Tim 4:16; 6:20; 2 Tim 1:8-14).