Date: Tue Nov 28 1995 - 03:30:41 EST
In a message dated 95-11-28 02:14:27 EST, PW Hofreiter writes:
> I would be most interested in hearing from those on this list as to
>their views on this process of translation. We currently use the NRSV
>in our courses.
> I am interested in a related matter. As a composer, I have
>normally gone with either my own translations of scripture (with the
>less difficult texts) or translations by others whom I know to be
>sensitive to issues of nuance. What are preferences of those on this
I have for some time myself inserted the phrase "temple leaders" where I
knew the Greek read IOUDAIOI, esp. in John, during the public reading of
I haven't seen a copy of this version yet.
I wonder how it handles the "anti-semetic" conclusion of Luke at the end
of Acts (Acts 28:25-28). Or in the first epistle of John (1 Jn 2:22; 5:12).
Or Paul's Hagar and Sarah allegory.
While I think its a good idea to render certain words more acurately
withoutan anti-semitic bias, can the "anti-semitism" of the NT be totally
eliminated by simply re-translating a few terms? I wonder.
And I'm a little nervous about using the theology of Paul (Eph 2:14) to
correct the terminology of John. Isn't that "taking sides" in the canonical
dialog, like when Luther used Paul against James (the book of straw)? Mmm.
I've heard some thunder on the right murmering about the "new politically
correct" version, although I haven't seen that version either. Perhaps this
translation is what is being referred to.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:32 EDT