Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
The Terms of Translation
Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators
by Roy E. Ciampa
I
was able to carry a naïve assumption throughout more than twenty years
as a seminary professor of biblical studies. I often see it in my students as
well. It probably has surfaced because of fifteen years in Bible translation.
It’s simply the assumption that the teaching of the Bible will inevitably result
in a positive impact on the lives of others. That assumption reflects my own
experience of the Bible and the ideological context in which I have operated
since first gaining significant knowledge of it through personal reading. Of
course the Bible has been experienced by millions of people as liberating, free-
ing, transforming, saving, and empowering. It provides the key to understand-
ing God’s love for us, how that love has been manifested, and how it’s to be
expressed one to another.
This is true of Bible translators as well. They have experienced the Bible’s
ability to impact their lives for the better. It has granted them a life-
changing understanding of God, of themselves, of salvation, and of their
purpose in life. Given such a positive relationship with the Scriptures,
Roy Ciampa is Professor of New and their high regard for its authority and inspiration, they might natu-
Testament, Director of the Th.M. rally assume that the Bible’s impact on new peoples and cultures will
program in Biblical Studies and
Chair of the Division of Biblical inevitably be positive.
Studies at Gordon-Conwell
Theological Seminary in South We who translate the Bible are usually aware of the historical role of the
Hamilton, Massachusetts. He is also Bible in promoting cultural changes that benefit society, including the
co-mentor of the seminary’s Doctor of
Ministry track in Bible Translation. establishment of orphanages, hospitals, schools and other institutions, and its
He previously served as a missionary remarkable role in the fight against slavery, prejudice and other social evils.
in Portugal where he taught in two
theological schools and worked with But as a professor training present and future Christian ministers and work-
the Bible Society of Portugal in ers, I recognize that this same material, so wonderfully transformative in
the revision of their contemporary
Portuguese translation of the Bible. people’s lives, has also been taught and used in ways that harm vast numbers
He has published numerous articles of people. My fear is that somehow I and my students would add to those
and essays and is co-author of the
numbers, and so I want to consider in this article one translation practice
Pillar New Testament Commentary
on 1 Corinthians (Eerdmans, 2010). that might help us prevent an inappropriate use of Scripture.
International Journal of Frontier Missiology 28:3 Fall 2011•139140 Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators
The Bible and I need to hear from others to better be the strengthening of existing
able to recognize my real or perceived churches and/or believers, or for
Ideological Criticism
blind spots and complicities. I need other purposes)
The abuses I am most concerned
to be receptive to critiques, especially • how are we translating?
with in this essay are those that re-
those that alert me to harm or injustice (by whose rules, philosophy,
sult from the ideologies we hold and
that is established or sustained by my funding, accountability,
bring to Scripture. These ideologies
way of perceiving and acting in the or technology)
are often applied and reinforced in
world. As an evangelical Bible transla- • who decides all of these things?
our translation and interpretation
tor my ideology has tended to make (who has the power, and why)
of the Bible, most often in uncon-
me (and many others like me) assume
scious and unintended ways. Sandra Power is reflected and exerted at every
that the translation (and preaching) of
Schneiders offers a simple definition one of these points, and the extent to
the Bible is obviously and inevitably a
of ideology, framing it as “that entire which people recognize or feel any
positive activity that could hardly do
generalized theoretical structuring concern for how power and implicit
anything but good in the world. Those
of reality through which one expe- agendas are at work will depend upon
who do not share my ideology will
riences all of life.”1 But she offers their own ideologies.3 While this ap-
more readily recognize problematical
another definition (in passing) that plies to Bible translation work in both
consequences of my translation (and
does more to highlight the relation- missionary and in established Chris-
preaching) of the Bible.
ship of ideology to issues of power. tian contexts, these issues are especially
Ideology has to do with “a thought Ideological issues related to Bible sensitive in contexts where missionar-
world generated by and supportive of translation are innumerable. They ies are working to provide Bible trans-
a particular power agenda . . . usually lations for those who do not yet have
only visible to those excluded from the Bible in their own language.
the power system.”2
The Ideological Roots
I find both of Schneiders’ definitions
very helpful, but would offer the fol-
My ideology leads of the English Bible
Certain word choices in the early trans-
lowing as my more inclusive defini- me to perceive certain lation of the English Bible are clear
tion of ideology for the purposes of
this essay: things as natural or examples of the influence of ideology.
When William Tyndale used “congre-
The complex set of individual and obvious—beyond any gation” in the place of “church,” “senior”
socially-shared conscious and un-
conscious loyalties (whether philo- need for validation (and later, “elder”) instead of “priest,”
“repent” instead of “do penance,” and
sophical, interpersonal, emotional or “love” instead of “charity,” he was un-
whatever) that are influenced and
derstood to be undermining direct ties
reinforced by my cognitive mapping
with traditional church vocabulary and
of my world and which lead me to
relate to every aspect of Bible transla- doctrines, and how the Scriptures had
prefer certain ways of seeing myself,
my context and the broader world
tion, including issues like: been traditionally understood in that
around me, to perceive some things • who translates the Bible? context. He was attacked as a heretic
as problematical and not others (people within the receiving trying to pass off his heresies as though
(which other people might consider community or outsiders or some they were inscribed in Scripture itself.4
problematical), and to prefer particu- combination that reflects a English Bible translators were very
lar ways of addressing the problems particular power structure) aware that their word choices would be
which come to my attention.
• what parts are prioritized? understood in light of their potential
The reference to “loyalties” in my defi- (starting with the Old implications for contemporary and
nition is intended to highlight the re- Testament or the New, whole future political and religious power
lationship between ideology and power books or portions, and which structures. The King James Version (of
agendas as well as the unconscious books or portions) 1611) was prepared after the separa-
nature of this relationship for most • for whom are we translating? tion from Rome, in a context where
people. My ideology leads me to per- (for churches, groups of King James I was motivated to reduce
ceive certain things as natural or obvi- believers, unreached peoples) the level of conflicts between Anglican
ous—beyond any need for validation or • why are we translating? bishops and Puritans in his realm. The
defense. Because we all tend to be blind (with clear evangelistic/ churches were divided on numerous
to our own ideological commitments, missionary purposes or for subjects, and that division was both
International Journal of Frontier MissiologyRoy E. Ciampa 141
T
reflected in and reinforced by the dif-
ferent Bibles they used. The Geneva
he text of the Bible has been and can be used
Bible (of 1560), which was favored by to promote injustice and oppression, and these
Puritans, included marginal notes that
promoted Calvinistic and antiroyal-
reflect a translator’s ideology
ist views. As Bruce Metzger points the translation of virtually any other There are many different ways in
out, “One of the reasons that led King piece of literature, due to its status as which the text of the Bible has been
James, in 1604, to agree readily to a a sacred text to the vast majority of its and can be used to promote injustice
new translation of the Scriptures was readers. Since it carries much greater and oppression, and these reflect a
his dislike of the politics preached in influence than other writings, whether translator’s ideology or his ideological
the margins of the Geneva Bible.”5 ancient or modern, it has the potential blinders. The task of Bible translation
He invited scholars from both camps to do both much greater good and must be done with an awareness of the
to work on the project, to develop a much greater harm than other docu- ideological issues it raises, and transla-
Bible that would be acceptable to both ments or translations. tors need to think carefully about what
groups. Among the rules to be followed steps can be taken to reduce unintend-
by the translators, however, included The Bible is a Dangerous Book ed collateral damage that could result
the stipulations that the Bishops’ Bible So, the Bible, amidst all its tremendous from a lack of attention to ideology (in
(of 1568) was to be followed except good, can be considered a dangerous light of what has actually happened in
when faithfulness to the original would book. More than two thousand years the history of the use of the Bible). In
not allow it, that the “Old Ecclesiasti- of Bible translation and Bible usage this paper, therefore, I wish to address
cal Words” (like “church” and “charity”) provide us with innumerable examples one particular way in which Bible
were to be used rather than recently of ways in which the Bible has been translation reflects and shapes people’s
proposed alternatives (like “congrega- used to promote or justify oppressive ideologies. It relates to that intuitive
tion” and “love”), and that there were relationships, institutions and customs, understanding of many translators
to be no marginal notes except where including crusades, inquisitions, slav- who value “direct transferability” in
necessary to explain Greek or Hebrew ery, anti-Semitism, apartheid, geno- their translation.
words (Metzger 2001:71). cide, and the abuse of women, children
The decision to produce a translation and minorities. It has been used to Ideological Commitments
based on work by scholars from both empower the powerful at the expense to Direct Transferability and
camps clearly reflects the (ideological) of the powerless. It has also been used Their Consequences
commitment to promote a more peace- in the decimation of native peoples By “direct transferability” I’m refer-
ful coexistence (on royal terms). The and cultures and the oppression of ring to the idea that readers of Bible
rules regarding the use of the Bishops’ those who do not submit to its teach- translations should feel that the Bible
Bible and traditional ecclesiastical ing. There are others who willingly (and God, through the Bible) directly
terms may be understood to reflect submitted to their understanding (or addresses them in their particular
other parts of the king’s ideology, and others’ understandings) of its teaching, circumstances. Approaches to Bible
the rule about minimal marginal notes but who found it anything but a lib- translation that, in Schleiermacher’s
(to eliminate promotion of the views erating experience. A letter signed by terms, move the biblical writer toward
of one side or the other) may also be Andean Indians and addressed to John the reader (domestication) rather than
seen as essential to the goal of having Paul II when he visited Peru in 1985 forcing the reader to accommodate to
a translation acceptable to both parties included the following indictment: the biblical writer (‘foreignization’), are
(in light of the role such notes played in We, the Indians of the Andes and of most susceptible to the problems I am
making the Geneva Bible unacceptable the Americas would like to take this concerned with here. Domesticating
to the king and other Anglican leaders). opportunity of John Paul II’s visit to the Bible to the receptors of a Bible
The King James Version is like all other give the Bible back to him, because, in translation is often seen in the attempt
translations in that it is not merely five centuries, it has not given us love,
to create equivalence. Nida and Taber
the result of an objective scientific (or nor peace nor justice. Please take back
describe “dynamic equivalence” as “a
pietistic) process of finding linguistic your Bible and hand it over to our op-
pressors because they need it more
quality of a translation in which the
equivalents, but reflects the impact of language of the original text has been
ideology in a variety of ways, which than we do. In fact, since Christopher
Columbus set foot here, one culture, so transported into the receptor lan-
would include word choices. guage that the response of the receptor is
one language, one religion and values
Ideological issues in the translation of intrinsically European were imposed essentially like that of the original recep-
the Bible are more serious than with upon America by force.6 tors” (emphasis added).7 By “response”
28:3 Fall 2011142 Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators
they mean “the sum of the reactions for the first time they heard God speak- for what we might call “dys-functional
of a receptor to a message in terms ing to them directly from the Bible. equivalence.” Tremendous power is
of understanding (or lack of it), emo- exerted, in particular, whenever a Bible
Translators, and indeed churches, need
tional attitude, decision and action”.8 translation is taken to refer to groups
to think through whether, or to what
It would seem that a primary reason in the target culture. This is what I
extent, leading readers to think the
one would respond the same way as refer to as the “mapping of identities.”
Bible is addressing them directly is an
the original receptors is because one
ethically, ideologically or theologically On Direct Transferability and
believes that one’s situation reflects
appropriate result, or not. One possible the Mapping of Identities
that of the original receptors and,
conclusion might be that such a result By a “mapping of identities” I mean
therefore, one has been addressed
is more appropriate for some parts of the idea that people or groups in
directly in precisely the same way.
the Bible than others. the biblical text are identified with
The more a Bible translation speaks in
Direct transferability is seen as highly people or groups in the recep-
the idioms of my particular language
desirable (and thanks to the ideology tor culture and context, with one
and refers to artifacts or concepts
of many, quite natural) to many Bible identity being mapped onto another.
from my cultural environment (e.g.,
translators (and readers) but, in my This takes place, for instance, when
dollars, pounds, kilometers, etc.),9 the
opinion, is also a potential source of readers of Bible translations directly
more predisposed I am to adopt the
much danger and abuse. In case after apply biblical referents (i.e., “priests,”
perspective that it was written with my
case, unless the context clearly does “lawyers,” “tax collectors,” “kings/
particular context and culture in view
not allow for it, readers of the Bible rulers,” “Jews,” “slaves,” or “wives”)
and to speak directly to me and my
to people they believe fit those labels
neighbors. I believe “dynamic equiva-
in their own society. They immedi-
lent” (and other more domesticating) ately see the cultural similarity or
translations have distinct advantages parallel between the group in the
and benefits and that they will be the biblical world and their own world.
best approach in many instances, but
we should be aware of potential prob- For the first time Even when translators recognize that
there is no exact parallel between
lems or harm to readers if they are not they heard God speaking the referents in these two cultures,
used wisely.
Harriet Hill points out that “Naïve
to them directly they may decide to label a biblical
category or group with the name of a
audiences often consider God to be from the Bible similar group in the receptor culture.
speaking to them directly through There is a tremendous amount of
Scripture. (Their perceptions of God, power being exercised in this choice,
and thus the mutual cognitive envi- since translators are deciding which
ronment they access, are often heavily group(s) should be identified with
influenced by those who have told have shown they expect the function a positively or negatively referenced
them about him, however.) They use to be the same even if the original and people in the original text (e.g., a
naïve interpretation, accessing cultural receptor audiences and contexts are in group that is made to “stand in” for
assumptions from their own cogni- the Samaritans, or for any of the
fact significantly different.
tive environment to process Scripture groups mentioned above).
as best they are able. This can lead Ideological/ethical challenges arise
In the following sections I will look
to misunderstanding of the author’s (among other cases) when a translator
at several cases where the mapping of
intended meaning.”10 I am simply does not give very careful attention to
identities between biblical referents
pointing out that the naïveté to which parts of the translation that refer to
and groups within receptor cultures
she refers is quite common, and often source text social or cultural realities
has led to extremely troubling results.
reflected even in statements of Bible that will be interpreted in the transla-
translators themselves regarding the tion as references to target audience Masters and Slaves
power of new Bible translations. It social or cultural realities. That is, the Since the New Testament refers to
is not uncommon for translators and text is expected to function in the slaves as a part of the Greco-Roman
other Christian leaders to inform their same way in the receiving community household, English-speaking read-
supporters that when people began to as in the community of the original ers of the Bible found a basis (and
hear the Bible being read in their own receivers, due in part to lack of aware- created further bases) for the view
language for the very first time they ness of the differences between the that the Bible condoned modern
responded in dramatic ways, because two audiences and the implications slavery—and even the transatlantic
International Journal of Frontier MissiologyRoy E. Ciampa 143
T
slave trade—generating interpreta-
tions of other biblical texts to support
ranslators are deciding which group(s) should
the (now clearly unbiblical) view that be identified with a positively or negatively
people of color were under God’s
curse and born to serve white people
referenced people in the original text
as slaves.11 The fact that the slavery of Husbands and Wives statements about how wives and hus-
the Roman world (a horrible evil in Since slavery is no longer an ac- bands should relate to each other are
its day) was of a different nature and ceptable part of Western culture (at addressed not to wives and husbands
origin than modern racism and slav- least not explicit, legalized slavery), who married peers of similar age and
ery, was deemed inconsequential.12 It when readers come to biblical texts life experience as in modern western
was sufficient that the Bible spoke of that mention slaves and masters they cultures, but to wives and husbands
slavery without explicit condemna- realize instantly that the texts, if they within the asymmetrical relationship
tion, and thereby the direct trans- are to be applied, cannot be directly that was the Greco-Roman marriage.
ference condoned a more modern transferred. Since husbands and wives Should all that the New Testament
institution of slavery. are omnipresent across all societies, authors wrote about husbands and
people without in-depth knowledge wives be considered directly trans-
Allen Dwight Callahan reminds us
of biblical cultures readily assume that ferable to husbands and wives who
that “the abolitionists of the North
the marital relationships being refer- do not reflect the cultural inequities
and the planter class of the South
enced and addressed in the biblical (i.e., unequal ages, levels of maturity,
read from the same Bible. Long education and life experience) of the
before Lincoln, [Frederick] Douglass texts closely parallel those with which
everyone in their context is familiar. Greco-Roman marriage? More to the
had learned that the Bible was the point of this essay: how could readers
highest authority of American slavery Most Bible readers are not familiar
with important aspects of marriage even begin to ask this kind of question if
and the strongest link in the chain of there is nothing in the translation to alert
oppression and violence that war- relationships in the Greco-Roman
them to the differences between the people
ranted slavery as the sacred basis for world. In that particular context, mar-
addressed in the original context and
the Christian culture of what would riages were not typically entered into
those who have those same labels (hus-
become the Confederacy”.13 by men and women of similar ages,
band/wife) in their own contexts?
but by adolescent girls and fully adult
I understand that one of the reasons men. And, although there are refer- This is, I think, a real challenge. We
some members of the ESV transla- ences to well-educated women in the are certainly not going to translate the
tion committee supported a decision Greco-Roman world, they seem to be Greek terms as “Greco-Roman wives”
to change the translation of δοῦλος exceptions to the rule (and considered or “Greco-Roman husbands”! And we
in 1 Corinthians 7 from “slave” to noteworthy, literally, by the ancient can’t translate one of the terms “child-
“bond-servant” is because the former authors). Normally men and husbands bride” (especially since many of the
term could too easily be identified were much better educated and had wives would no longer be adolescents as
with slavery as it is known by English greater exposure to information and when they were first married). Again, it
readers and the second translation experience outside the household. This may be that the best that can be done
was felt more likely to cause read- is implicit even within one of the most is to provide paratextual material (a
ers to hesitate before making such an remarkable texts of the New Testa- footnote or sidebar) that gives some in-
identification. This changing of terms ment relating to this subject. In 1 Cor- dication of the distinctive aspects of the
is one approach to avoiding premature inthians 14:34-35 Paul says women roles and relationships in the original
transference based on the assumption or wives are not allowed to speak in cultural context. Perhaps other solu-
that the text addresses the reality we the church meeting (in fact it would tions will be discerned or developed,
are familiar with. Perhaps a neologism be shameful to do so), but should ask but only if translators become aware of
like “bond-slave” would be even bet- their own husbands at home if they the problem and struggle with it.
ter than “bond-servant” (since most have any questions. This latter clause During the 2009 Nida School of
people distinguish servants from slaves only makes sense in a context where it Translation Studies, a missionary Bible
in terms of ownership/employment).14 is safe to assume that a wife’s husband translator with more than twenty years
In many cases it may be best to handle is better informed and therefore ca- of experience told me he had never
this issue by explaining the different pable of answering whatever questions been aware of the differences between
nuances of this cultural reality through the wife might have. Such was the Greco-Roman marriages and marriage
the use of paratextual material (e.g., a context of the typical Greco-Roman as he had known it all his life. This
footnote or sidebar). marriage.15 All of the New Testament lack of awareness may be a factor in
28:3 Fall 2011144 Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators
the terrible track record of the global ing Jesus was not the fact that they dirt whatever will not burn . . . that
church. These texts have been used to were Jews, but that they were religious their houses also be razed and de-
justify wife abuse in both developed leaders openly opposed to Jesus. The stroyed . . . that all their prayer books
and developing countries. On another author is hardly condemning all “Jews” and Talmudic writings, in which such
occasion a translation consultant told a but has a focus on the particular group idolatry, lies, cursing and blasphemy
group of translators (including myself ) that was opposing and would seek the are taught, be taken from them . . .
about a situation where he returned death of Jesus.16 that their rabbis be forbidden to
after a seminar break to find one na- teach . . . that safe conduct on the
Martin Luther is the most notorious
tional Bible translator telling another highways be abolished completely for
example of an influential Christian
(with regard to one of the passages the Jews.”18 His bloodcurdling call for
leader whose assumption of direct trans-
on submission), “See, this is where pogroms was later used by the Nazis to
ferability in this area has been used to
the Bible says we can beat our wives.” support their odious agenda. Indeed,
justify atrocities against Jews. In his 1543
Thankfully he took the opportunity Luther was a gifted Bible scholar
tract, On The Jews and Their Lies, notice
to explain that the Bible says no such and university lecturer (and a former
how Luther implies that whatever was
thing. We would all reject any sugges- Augustinian friar), but his intuitive
said about the particular Jews who were
tion that the Bible supports wife abuse, approach of reading the text as directly
addressed by John the Baptist and by
but many Christians unwittingly teach transferable, with a mapping of the
Jesus may be directly applied to Jews in
wives and husbands to relate to each identity of the ancient opponents of
general in his own days. (I have italicized
other according to a Christianized Jesus onto all Jews of all times, was
“them” and “they” so as to highlight how
version of Greco-Roman standards, the result of an ideological blinder of
Luther identifies the two in his context.)
without being aware of or contemplat- cataclysmic proportions.
ing the significance of the differences. Because of the misunderstandings
that have been caused by passages
“The Jews”: Some or All, like this, some translators have pro-
Then and Now? posed renderings that are less likely
Certainly one of the ugliest ways in
which direct transferability has mani-
These texts have been to mislead. For example the NET
translates the key words as “the Jew-
fested in Christian history has been used to justify wife abuse ish leaders”. Some other translators
with respect to references to “Jews”
in the New Testament. Statements in both developed and have suggested rendering it as “some
of the Jews”. Still others refer to all
made about particular Jews or Jewish
leaders or groups in the New Testa-
developing countries first century Jews as “Judeans”, an at-
tempt to distinguish those terms that
ment have been taken to be accurate refer to modern ethnic and religious
descriptions of all Jews in different identities from those that refer to the
times and places. The fact that the ancient people who predated Rab-
Gospel of John uses οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι (usu- binic and modern Judaism. I think an
ally translated “the Jews”) to refer to a He did not call them Abraham’s chil-
dren, but a ‘brood of vipers’ [Matt. historical awareness of the potential
prominent group of Jewish opponents misunderstandings of the traditional
3:7]. Oh, that was too insulting for
of Jesus, intending to focus only on translation should lead translators to
the noble blood and race of Israel,
some Jewish religious leaders, hasn’t and they declared, ‘He has a demon’ either adopt one of these translation
helped things throughout history. [Matt. 11:18]. Our Lord also calls strategies or make use of paratextual
So, for example, the ESV renders them a ‘brood of vipers’; further- materials to explain the terms. This
John 5:16-18 as follows: “And this was more in John 8 [vv. 39, 44] he states: would minimize the risk that Jewish
why the Jews were persecuting Jesus, ‘If you were Abraham’s children ye people today will continue to be pro-
because he was doing these things on would do what Abraham did. . . . You filed as “villains” due to an inappro-
the Sabbath. . . . This was why the Jews are of your father the devil.’ It was priate identification with opponents
were seeking all the more to kill him intolerable to them to hear that they
found in texts of the New Testament.
. . .” (emphasis added). Modern readers were not Abraham’s but the devil’s
easily forget that all of the characters children, nor can they bear to hear Sexual Identities in the
this today.17
in the story are Jews, as were Jesus, his New Testament?
disciples, the invalids mentioned in v. Near the end of this same tract The case of sexual identity is rather
3 (including the one Jesus healed), and he goes on to call on his readers different from those addressed above.
even the author of the book. What “to set fire to their synagogues or The traditional translations of “slave,”
distinguished the people persecut- schools and to bury and cover with “wife,” “husband,” and “Jews” have
International Journal of Frontier MissiologyRoy E. Ciampa 145
M
often undergirded abusive ideologies
across a very long history due to an
odern ideological pressures from the homo-
unfortunate intuitive use of direct sexual debate can make us evangelicals
transferability in translation choices.
In contrast, the word “homosexu-
want to expand Paul’s terminology
als” (or “homosexuality”) appeared in of whether he primarily had sexual clear to most first century Jews,
English Bible translations for the very relations with people of the same or including Paul, that the only licit
first time in the twentieth century, the opposite sex, but on the basis of sexual relations were sexual relations
reflecting the fact that the conceptual whether he had the dominant posi- between heterosexual spouses. But
framing of homosexual and hetero- tion in sexual intercourse. Same-sex the translation of his terms should be
sexual orientations or identities took behaviors were most often engaged in faithful to the behaviors and context
hold in English-speaking contexts by married men who practiced pro- to which he referred and beware
within that century.19 But in light of creational sex with their wives but also of mapping sexual behaviors of the
the tendency towards direct transfer- engaged in recreational sex with male Roman world onto people identified
ability, it’s important to understand household slaves and/or prostitutes. with a sexual orientation or identity
that the Bible is not speaking of One of the terrible realities of house- in our own world.23 In a society where
sexual orientations but of sexual prac- hold slaves in the Roman world (both people are marginalized, bullied and
tices, regardless of one’s orientation. males and females) was that they were end up committing suicide because
This is not the place to develop a full subject to the sexual requirements of they are identified (or identify
biblical treatment of ‘homosexuality’, their masters. These immoral same-sex themselves) as gay or homosexual,
a treatment that would require a more practices were endemic throughout the Bible translators must be especially
complete integration of different por- entire Roman world, and more broadly circumspect about inscribing that
tions of Scripture. I only wish to point practiced than any modern attempt identity into the middle of a New
out that modern ideological pressures to isolate a particular demographic of Testament vice list if it is not exactly
from the homosexual debate can make same-sex identity. what Paul had in mind.
us evangelicals want to expand Paul’s A particular modern sexual identity/
terminology to include everything demographic—one that was never part Other Historical or
we think ought to be included in his of the cognitive environment of Paul’s Potential Mappings
choice of terms. This is particularly ancient context—came to be explic- These four mappings of identity are
the case in the listing of the terms for itly identified as the object of New merely examples, but they strike me
sexual vices in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Testament vice lists by introducing as some of the most important ex-
where the term ‘homosexual’ has more the term “homosexuals” into modern amples in the global movement of the
recently been applied. My view is that Bible translations. Modern readers, church. One can easily see the histor-
Paul uses the term porneia (‘sexual im- therefore, are led to believe that Paul ical and the potential consequences.
morality’) to prohibit all illicit sexual has “homosexuals” in mind (whether Other potentially harmful mappings
activity (including all sexual activ- practicing or not) rather than men in in the use of direct transferability
ity outside of the one-flesh union of his own world who practiced forms of would include the translation of He-
husband and wife), but that his use sexual exploitation (mainly of other brew and Greek terms for “king” or
of further terms in that listing needs males) that were familiar to his ancient “ruler” (potentially translated “chief ”
to be understood within the moral readers but possibly quite foreign to in some contexts), for “tax collectors,”
landscape of the Roman world. Paul is us.22 In my view, the introduction “lawyers,” or “judges”.
cutting across the sexual landscape of of the modern socially-constructed Wittingly or unwittingly, certain
his time, not ours.20 concept of a sexual orientation/iden- power structures and ideological
It’s remarkable that most classi- tity and demographic entails a reverse- agendas are both reflected in,
cal scholars agree that the ancient mapping which reflects ideological blind- and established by, the use of
Romans did not have a concept of ers of recent origin. This transference translations. They can encourage
sexual identity or orientation (hetero-/ ends up “targeting” certain members readers to reflexively associate
homo-/bi-sexual). Rather, they had a of a modern demographic that was references to people or roles in
concept of gender identity, one that not part of the social or conceptual their own social contexts (including
identified maleness with the dominant landscape in Paul’s world. social identities or structures
position in sexual intercourse.21 A None of this is meant to suggest never contemplated by the ancient
man’s reputation and social standing that Paul would condone same- authors) to ones that referred to
as a man was secured not on the basis sex relations of any kind. It was particular groups, social structures
28:3 Fall 2011146 Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators
or roles in the original biblical applications of direct transferability. But perhaps translators could be more
contexts. Of course Christians need Another strategy would be to intentional about footnoting those
to apply ancient texts to their own incorporate guidance into a preface terms that seem to automatically map
contemporary contexts, but I have or introductory materials, suggesting identities, items in the text which carry
attempted to address some of the both appropriate ways of reading cultural distinctions that may not be
problems that arise when Christians the texts as well as some of the otherwise obvious to readers.
understand their translations to be unfortunate and inappropriate ways
speaking directly to their own social in which they have been read in the Conclusion
context. So a key question confronts past. (This could include the tendency We who love the Bible cannot afford
Bible translators: to what extent to take references to certain people or to be naïve about its impact. While
should readers of a new translation kinds of people in the text as ciphers it has brought great good to people’s
be informed that the text does not referring directly to a particular type lives throughout the world, it has also
address them directly, and that of person or people in the context been used to promote or justify op-
serious consequences might ensue if of those receiving the translation.) pressive relationships, institutions or
they apply the text as though it did. They might also be encouraged to cultural customs. It has been used to
hold themselves and other readers empower the powerful at the expense
Translators’ Responsibility for accountable for making sure the Bible of the powerless.
Guiding Product Usage is only used in ways that promote Those of us involved in the work of
Producers and distributors of com- the proper love of God and others. Bible translation and interpretation
mercial products with potential The translation should not reflect the need to work with a more profound
dangers or side effects often provide awareness of the darkness of the hu-
consumers with warning labels or man heart, including our own hearts.
exhortations to refrain from improper We need a profound suspicion of the
usage. Advertisements for medica-
tions are accompanied by remarkable
Translators could uses and relations of power, includ-
ing ways in which “love” has been
disclaimers that point out all the dan- be more intentional co-opted by the powerful to justify
gers that may be associated with the
drug. The medications are still recom- about footnoting the asymmetrical power relations in
society (so clear in the argument that
mended and prescribed by doctors,
but with an awareness of the potential
those terms that the enslavement of Africans reflected
love and benevolence in “civilizing”
complications and damage. seem to automatically and “Christianizing” them).
Like these producers and distributors, map identities While we may believe in human de-
I believe Bible translators should rec- pravity, have we fully thought through
ognize their responsibility to take steps the implications of this depravity in
to minimize the possibility that their what people might do with their Bible
products will be used in ways that are interests of powerful people or groups
translations? In my view it is a respon-
abusive or harmful. I’m speaking of at the expense of the powerless.
sibility of the translator to sensitize
the impact of ideologies that end up It should be clear that I am most readers to issues of power and moral
being improperly underwritten by the concerned about terms that relate responsibility with respect to the
translation. Translators need to be fully to social groups or roles, and whose vulnerable, and to suspect the infinite
conscious of the ways in which biblical translation may have implications for human capacity to rationalize unjust
texts have been used to support unjust how social relations are configured or structures, institutions and behaviors.
and oppressive power structures in reinforced within the receiving culture. When their products are well received,
societies that have historically em- This happens especially when readers Bible translators end up becoming
braced them. They must consider what are not given any reason to think twice crucial shapers of the cultures that
preventative measures might be taken about it. For this reason, translators receive their translations, whether they
in their work. might reconsider the kinds of issues recognize it or not. They must think
Undoubtedly, there are numerous that get addressed in footnotes or through issues of ideology and how
strategies that might be adopted. sidebars. The tendency has been to Bible translations impact or justify
One would be to consider, where use footnotes to address textual issues, certain power relations in the receiv-
feasible, potentially ‘foreignizing’ alternative translations, or references ing community, and do what they can
the translations of terms that might to what are considered culturally to minimize unhealthy consequences
be likely candidates for improper unusual elements in the original texts. wherever possible. IJFM
International Journal of Frontier MissiologyRoy E. Ciampa 147
Katz, Jonathan Treggiari, S.
References 1993 Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges
Byron, John 2007 The Invention of Heterosexuality:
2004 “Paul and the Background of With a New Preface. Chicago: from the Time of Cicero to
Slavery: The Status Quaestionis University of Chicago Press. the Time of Ulpian. Oxford:
in New Testament Scholarship”. Lefkowitz, Mary R. and Maureen B. Fant Clarendon Press.
Currents in Biblical Research 1992 Women’s Life in Greece and Rome. Williams, Craig A.
3(1):116-39. A Source Book in Translation. 2nd 2010 Roman Homosexuality. Oxford:
Callahan, Allen Dwight ed. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Oxford University Press.
2006 The Talking Book: African Ameri- University Press. Witherington, Ben
cans and the Bible. New Haven, Luther, Martin 1988 Women in the Earliest Churches.
CT: Yale University Press. 1543 “On the Jews and Their Lies”. Cambridge: Cambridge
Ciampa, Roy E. In Luther’s Works, Vol. 47: The University Press.
2011 “‘Flee Sexual Immorality’: Sex Christian in Society IV, edited by
and the City of Corinth”. In The J. J. Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald Endnotes
1
Wisdom of the Cross: Exploring and Helmut T. Lehmann. Sandra Marie Schneiders, The
1 Corinthians, edited by Brian S. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999. Revelatory Text: Interpreting the New
Rosner. Nottingham, England: Martin, Dale B. Testament As Sacred Scripture (Collegeville,
Apollos/InterVarsity. MN: Liturgical Press, 1999), p. 170.
2006 Sex and the Single Savior:
Cohick, Lynn H.
2
Ibid., p. 120.
Gender and Sexuality in Biblical
2009 Women in the World of the Earliest
3
I am using “ideology” where some
Interpretation. Louisville, KY:
Christians: Illuminating Ancient missiologists might prefer the term
Westminster John Knox Press.
Ways of Life. Grand Rapids, MI: “worldview”. But worldviews reflect ideas
Metzger, Bruce M.
Baker Academic. about reality, understandings of origins, of
2001 The Bible in Translation: Ancient what exists and doesn’t exist, of how the
Davidson, Arnold and English Versions. Grand world is constructed, and how that world
1992 “Sex and the Emergence of Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. works (materialism, spiritism, Christian,
Sexuality”. In Forms of Desire: Nida, Eugene A. and Charles R. Taber. etc). The questions of our ingrained loyal-
Sexual Orientation and the Social 2003 The Theory and Practice of ties and our taken-for-granted relation-
Constructionist Controversy, edited Translation. Leiden: Brill. ships to power structures are not usually
by Edward Stein. New York:
Noss, Philip A., ed. part of what we have in mind when we
Routledge.
2007 A History of Bible Translation. think of a worldview. Tyndale and Luther,
Dreger, Alice Domurat
Rome: Edizioni de storia to whom I refer in this article, thought
1998 Hermaphrodites and the Medical
e letteratura. they were simply expressing a biblical
Invention of Sex. Cambridge, MA:
Paris, Jenell Williams worldview, one more accurate and bibli-
Harvard University Press.
2011 The End of Sexual Identity: Why cal than that of Roman Catholics. The
Ellingworth, Paul
Sex Is Too Important to Define vast majority of Bible translators that I
2007 “Translation Techniques in Modern know would probably say they are also
Who We Are. Downers Grove, IL:
Bible Translations”. In A History of simply seeking to express their biblical
InterVarsity.
Bible Translation, edited by Philip worldview. It is usually only with some
A. Noss. Rome: Edizioni de storia Richlin, Amy
2003 “Sexuality”. In The Oxford Clas- significant hindsight and cultural distance
e letteratura, pp. 307-334. that we can recognize the extent to which
Evans Grubbs, Judith sical Dictionary, edited by Simon
Hornblower and Anthony Spaw- work was carried out in a way which
2002 Women and the Law in the Roman reflected unconscious loyalty to particular
Empire: A Sourcebook on Marriage, forth. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, p. 1399. power structures. This loyalty simply went
Divorce and Widowhood. London unrecognized at the time. People like me,
and New York: Routledge. Sánchez-Cetina, Edesio
and indeed many Bible translators, tend to
Glancy, Jennifer A. 2007 “Word of God, Word of the
remain unaware of the extent to which all
2006 Slavery in Early Christianity. People: Translating the Bible
thinking is tied up with, and can end up
Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. in Post-Missionary Times”. In
supporting, an ideology that lives within
Hallett, Judith P. and Marilyn B. Skinner, eds. A History of Bible Translation, worldviews as do germs in even healthy
1993 Roman Sexualities. Princeton, NJ: edited by Philip A. Noss. Rome: human bodies. Ideology is a better term
Princeton University Press. Edizioni de storia e letteratura, for incorporating this dimension of power.
Harrill, James Albert pp. 387-408. 4
See Paul Ellingworth, “Translation
2006 Slaves in the New Testament: Schneiders, Sandra Marie Techniquess in Modern Bible Translations”,
Literary, Social, and Moral Dimensions. 1999 The Revelatory Text: Interpreting in Philip A. Noss (ed.) A History of Bible
Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. the New Testament As Sacred Translation (Rome: Edizioni de storia e let-
Hill, Harriet S. Scripture. Collegeville, MN: teratura, 2007), p. 319.
2006 The Bible at Cultural Liturgical Press. 5
See Bruce Metzger, The Bible in
Crossroads: From Translation to Skinner, Marilyn B. Translation: Ancient and English Versions
Communication. Manchester, UK: 2005 Sexuality in Greek and Roman (Grand Rapids, MI; Baker Academic,
St. Jerome Publishers. Culture. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 2001), p. 65.
28:3 Fall 2011148 Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators
6
Edesio Sánchez-Cetina, “Word of Oswald and Helmut T. Lehmann (eds.), (Nottingham, England: Apollos/InterVar-
God, Word of the People: Translating the Luther’s Works, Vol. 47: The Christian in Society sity, 2011), pp. 111-118.
Bible in Post-Missionary Times”, in Philip IV (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999), p. 141. 21
On same-sex behavior in the Roman
A. Noss (ed.) A History of Bible Translation 18
Ibid., pp. 268-270. world and the background to what Paul ad-
(Rome: Edizioni de storia e letteratura, 19
As far as I can tell, the earliest ap- dresses in 1 Cor. 6:9, see Hallett and Skinner
2007), pp. 391-392. pearance of any of the related terms in a 1993, Richlin 2003, Skinner 2005, Williams
7
Eugene A. Nida and Charles R. Bible translation was in the Amplified Bible 2010, Paris 2011, Ciampa 2011. To be abso-
Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation of 1958, which translated the final two vices lutely clear, by “dominant position” we have in
(Leiden: Brill, 2003), p. 200. in 1 Cor. 6:9 as “those who participate in mind the Roman distinction between those
8
Ibid., p. 206. homosexuality.” In 1961 the New English who sexually penetrate others and those who
9
The new Common English Bible Bible translated the key words, “homosexual are sexually penetrated. In Roman thinking,
uses the expression “God’s DNA” at perversion.” Those words were paraphrased true masculine gender was understood to be
1 John 3:9, a fine example of the sort of simply as “homosexuals” in the Living Bible established by maintaining the former role
thing I have in mind. (originally in 1962 in Living Letters). Since and absolute avoidance of the latter role.
10
See Harriet Hill, The Bible at Cul- then, translations have regularly referred to 22
The Greek terms Paul uses are
tural Crossroads: From Translation to Com- “homosexuals” (NASB, NKJ) “practicing μαλακοί and ἀρσενοκοῖται. One possible
munication. (Manchester, UK; St. Jerome homosexuals” (NAB, NET), “homosexual of- way of translating them would be to refer to
Publications, 2006), pp. 30-31. fenders” (NIV 1984), “homosexual perverts” “men who don’t respect sexual boundaries
11
See Allen Dwight Callahan, The (TEV), or, most broadly (and in direct con- (or men who actively disregard standards
Talking Book: African Americans and the Bible flict with the point being made here), “any of sexual behavior) or who sexually exploit
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006). kind of homosexual” (HCSB, changed in boys or men.” For more on the background
12
See Byron 2004, Glancy 2006, later printings of the same edition to “anyone to Paul’s language, see Williams 2010:164-
Harrill 2006. practicing homosexuality”). Most Bible read- 165 and Ciampa, 2011:111-118. To avoid
13
See Callahan, ibid., p. 23. ers today understand their Bibles to refer di- any inappropriate application of direct
14
This usage or invention of a term rectly to those in our own societies known as transferability it may be important, where
reflects what the KJV and other English “homosexuals.” Before the twentieth century possible or acceptable, for Bible translations
translations have done with translitera- the various translations tended to be vague to include footnotes that clarify the Roman
tions like ‘deacon’, ‘apostle’, ‘baptize’, etc. or use euphemisms for same-sex behavior. background and how it may differ from the
These were not (originally) translations but For empirical evidence on the usage of the sexual landscape of the receiving culture.
transliterations of Greek words, and can be language of “homosexuals” (and “hetero- 23
The 2011 revision of the NIV transla-
used to cue readers that we are introducing sexuals”) see: http://books.google.com/ngrams/ tion has dropped the word “homosexuals” and
a different reality. graph?content=homosexuals%2Cheterosexuals now translates the key terms as “men who
15
See Treggiari 1993, Evans Grubbs %2Chomosexuality&year_start=1600&year_ have sex with men.” That is a significant im-
2002, Lefkowitz and Fant 1992, Cohick end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=3. For provement, as it describes a particular behavior
2009, Witherington 1988. discussion of the historical development of the rather than people of a particular sexual ori-
16
The usage is not that dissimilar to concepts see, e.g., Dreger 2000:127; Davidson entation (or even the behaviors of people with
the reference to “the Romans” in John 11:48, 1990; Katz 2007; Paris 2011. a particular sexual orientation or identity).
where Roman soldiers are meant (sent by the 20
See my fuller treatment of this in Of course, without any further information
Emperor), and not Romans in general. “‘Flee Sexual Immorality’: Sex and the City twenty-first century readers will still take that
17
Martin Luther, “On the Jews and of Corinth”, in Brian S. Rosner (ed.), The descriptive translation to be another way of
Their Lies”, in In J. J. Pelikan, Hilton C. Wisdom of the Cross: Exploring 1 Corinthians simply referring to “homosexuals.”
International Journal of Frontier MissiologyYou can also read
