[B-Greek] "Why do we make pastors translate?"
Dr. Don Wilkins
drdwilkins at verizon.net
Mon Dec 14 15:12:29 EST 2009
I, too, second Carl's comments. I'm about to embark on teaching Greek
at my church, focusing on concepts as opposed to paradigm
memorization, so I'll be asking for advice from the list as I
encounter problems and options. I taught Greek for many years in
academia, where of course the conditions are very different than in
church, where the love of learning is the only incentive.
I haven't read all the posts on this thread in detail, so I apologize
if I repeat something already said; but IMO the root of the problem
is that pastors and others who grudgingly study Greek in seminary
because they have to aren't given a convincing reason why they should
bother. Part of the problem is institutional, in that we offer Bible
majors for which the languages are optional. The worst case I can
think of was the options I had when I began seminary. You could major
In English Bible, or in NT or OT along with other less academic
curricula. My pastor was an EB major, his reasoning being, "That's
the Bible we preach in," and his perception that he would not have
survived an NT or OT major. The clear but unarticulated message was
that we have faithful English Bibles and don't really need the
original languages to know what the Bible says. To suggest otherwise
was politically incorrect, if not unthinkable.
This position has long since prevailed, I think, both in academia and
on the streets. One of the goals of protestant Bible translation was
to make the Bible available and comprehensible to the masses, and if
anything, that goal has been met too well. Now, the public has the
perception that there are numerous reliable translations, and what
the Bible actually says can be discovered just by comparing the
translations, a perception that is usually strengthened from the
pulpit. One of my favorite poems from Catullus was his sarcastic
description of a competitor's poetry, written on fine paper with
beautiful edging, when, from C's viewpoint, it deserved rather to be
written on toilet paper. We have many translations with gilt edging,
fine leather binding, and even the words "Holy Bible" etched in the
leather, when in fact these are just translations, one more or less
faithful to the original than another.
In advertising my upcoming Greek class I am going out on a limb and
walking a tightrope with my pastor. I've been saying that no
translation is perfect, but beyond that I am telling people that if
they want to do deep or serious Bible (i.e. NT) study, they have to
learn Greek. The tightrope is to convince them of this without
undercutting their faith in translations. I told the pastor and my
fellow elders that I was going to do this, and I am very grateful for
their good will and tolerance. I am in a fortunate position to make
this claim as a principal representative for the NASB, since it is
perceived as bordering on wooden literalism. I can honestly tell
people that I don't have faith in the NASB as a replacement for the
Bible in its original languages, let alone less literal translations.
I assume that everyone on the list shares at heart the same opinion,
i.e. that no translation is a substitute for the original, even (or
especially) if we have to derive the original from varying
manuscripts through textual criticism. The very fact that even the
more literal translations disagree at many points seems to make this
truth self-evident. So if we really believe it, then it would be
gross negligence to put people behind the pulpit who lack the skills
to study the text in the original language. And if the powers that be
really believed that, then we would probably see some significant
changes in curricula, financial constraints permitting.
Don Wilkins
On Dec 13, 2009, at 2:20 AM, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, December 12, 2009, at 06:18PM, <wmhboyd at aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps a "Gold Standard" for pastors should be to know enough
>> Greek to protect themselves from professors.
>>
>> : )
>>
>> William (The Barbarian) Boyd
>> Greensboro, NC
>
> There's a great deal to be said for this warning, and I shall be
> the first to say or second it. Having sat through and even
> taken minutes for University Faculty meetings, I would be the last
> to defend any proposition that any special wisdom
> belongs to academic "scholars."
>
> What disturbs me most about the "least-common-denominator" standard
> of competence in Greek for those whose
> vocation is interpretation of the Biblical text for others is that
> these pastors and laymen are at the mercy of all those
> who claim to know "better" -- those who write commentaries, those
> who offer their opinions freely on lists like B-Greek.
> The "gold standard" for competence in Greek ought, I think, to be
> ability and confidence to make up one's own mind
> about issues of interpretation. That won't yield uniformity of
> opinion, and it may just as well bring judgments that others
> will deem highly questionable, but I do think that readers of the
> Greek text need to be able to resolve the issues to
> their own satisfaction and be able to use some discrimination in
> dealing with diversity of alternative views about texts
> under consideration.
>
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (ret)
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list