Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
$5.00
EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored 170+ books. Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).
The primary purpose is to give the Bible readers what God said by way of his human authors, not what a translator thinks God meant in its place. The primary goal is to be accurate and faithful to the original text. The meaning of a word is the responsibility of the interpreter (i.e., reader), not the translator. The translation of God’s Word from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek is a task unlike any other and should never be taken lightly. It carries with it the heaviest responsibility: the translator renders God’s thoughts into a modern language.
Being a person who just finished the 16-year task of translating the entire Bible (UASV), the English language is just fine, better than most. Being the husband of a Chilean woman, and having lived in Chile for the past four years, I can tell you that no language can be rendered perfectly into another language in an absolute sense. My wife translates our books (CPH) into English using the same translation principles we used with the Bible. Some scholars have gone off into the deep end with their criticism of the English language. The irony if it was so bad; then, what is the purpose.
As William Tyndale said in 1526, ‘you simply translate corresponding English in a thousand places.’ It is those difficult ones that can ravage you for a couple of hours on which lexical term is best. Do all English renderings absolutely reflect what the Greek or Hebrew word meant to the original readers? No, not absolutely. Which language has the word for it …
WORDS IN THE DICTIONARY
English 171,476
Russian 150,000
Spanish 93,000
Chinese 85,568
English has far more choices to get the right correspondence and equivalence. If not, we generate a phrase. gnosis means knowledge, and the meaning of the intensified epignosis means accurate knowledge or full knowledge. So, like the UASV, we used a phrase, accurate knowledge the 20+ times Paul used epignosis. The others simply say knowledge, which is a bad translation choice to me.
What else do we have? We have footnotes where we can add more information. And we have lexicons. So, the Bible readers today are lacking nothing. They simply have to work a little harder than the original readers. But even then, the apostle Peter said of Paul’s letters that ‘they were difficult to understand.’ I think these so-called language experts need to do a better job with their English language and convey things better because they are creating two problems: (1) churchgoers think English is lazy and cannot convey the original language acceptably into the receptor language. (2) It also gives fuel to Bible critics.
For example, abide and remain are both in the lexicon (μένω menō), so they are both literal translation choices. So, it has nothing to do with laziness. It is a fact, that one translation made a better word choice over the other.
John 8:31 Updated American Standard Version (UASV) 31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you remain in my word, you are truly my disciples,
(ESV abide in my word, CSB, LEB NASB continue in my word)
Love is not lazy either just because you have some view of it that does not supposedly fit the Greek Love in the English diction has the primary meaning, “an intense feeling of deep affection.” The sense of the Greek (ἀγαπάω agapaō) is very similar, meaning ‘to have great affection or care for or loyalty.’
John 21:15-17 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
Peter Affirms His Love for Jesus
15 So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love[1] me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know I have affection[2] for you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.” 16 He said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love[3] me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I have affection[4] for you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.” 17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you have affection for[5] me?” Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, “Do you have affection for[6] me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I have affection for[7] you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep.
[1] Gr agapao; to have love for someone or something, based on sincere appreciation and high regard. It has to do with the mind: it is not simply an emotion.
[2] Gr phileo; to have love or affection for someone or something based on association.
[3] Gr agapao; see note on vs 15
[4] Gr phileo; see note on vs 15
[5] Gr phileo; see note on vs 15
[6] Gr phileo; see note on vs 15
[7] Gr phileo; see note on vs 15
There is a distinction between the Greek verbs (φιλέω phileō) and (ἀγαπάω agapaō), although many translators do not differentiate between these words. (ASV, ESV, CSB LEB NASB) Regarding the difference, F. Zorell (Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti, Paris, 1961, col. 1402) says: “[Agapao] signifies a kind of love for someone or something occasioned freely and of our own accord because of clearly perceived reasons; [phileo] differs from this in that it indicates a tender and affectionate kind of love such as arises spontaneously in our souls towards relatives or friends, and towards things we deem delightful.”
The use of phileō and agapaō in John 21: Jesus asks Peter twice if he loved him, using the verb agapaō, rendered love in the UASV and others. In both cases, Peter, with sincere and intense conviction, affirmed that he had phileō affection (UASV, while the ASV, ESV, CSB LEB NASB stay with “love”) for Jesus. Phileō is the more personal word. (John 21:15-16) At last, Jesus asked Peter: “Do you have affection for me?” And Peter again asserted that he did. (John 21:17) Thus, Peter affirmed his warm, personal attachment and his intense feeling of deep affection for Jesus.
Leave a Reply