On April 25th, Continuing Education will feature a talk by the Reverend Peter Clarke on the challenges that arise from translating a sacred text into a language which is not necessarily part of the religious, cultural, and historical context in which the divine message was originally embedded. The Hebrew Bible (Torah) is the case in point, and those who are interested in some background on the debate will find a New York Times article in the attachment.
Peter holds a degree in Physics from Oxford University and in Theology from London University as well as completing Jewish Studies in the Rabbinical Seminary in Buenos Aires.
He has taught Old Testament Studies and Biblical Hebrew.
Continuing Education Meeting Notes
At the April Continuing Education meeting Reverend Peter Clarke spoke about an article published in the New York Times which announced the publication of a new English translation of the Hebrew Bible by Robert Alter, a Berkeley University scholar. This translation and commentary is the result of more than two decades of work.
Peter spoke about the examples of linguistic challenges mentioned in the article and pointed to the impact on the use of words of the prevailing culture at the time the books were written. The books Christians call the “Old Testament” are the components of the Hebrew Bible, although they are found in a different order. Some sections were written in Aramaic.
Already in the third century BC Jewish scholars gathered in Alexandria, Egypt, to translate these texts into Greek. The Greek version of the He- brew Bible was aimed at the Greek speaking Jews residing on the Mediterranean basin. This translation apparently used some texts which are no longer available. It incorporated some writings that were never incorporated into the Hebrew Bible, the so-called “apocryphal” books which are normally included in Bibles published by Roman Catholics, but not in those published by Protestants.
In addition to the linguistic problems intrinsic to the translation of ancient texts, the age of the documents poses a significant challenge. The originals were written on vellum or parchment. Often they are severely damaged and only fragments have survived. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the 1940s confirmed some previously known facts with additional manuscripts. As an example it confirmed the authenticity of the book of the Prophet Isaiah. The Scrolls include some writings of a monastic community in the Judean desert, probably that called the Essenes. They preserved some of the ancient texts, but really very little is known about them. It is going much too far to say that “Jesus was an Essene” as some have done!
Translation of the books that make the “New Testament” has encountered less difficulty because the originals are newer, and they were written mostly in Greek. Ideas originating in Greek philosophy such as duality of body and soul are behind the thoughts describing the life and beliefs of the first Christian communities, and many later Christians, but this duality is not found in the New Testament itself. The writers of the New Testament wrote in Greek, but thought in Hebrew, and the Hebrew word nefesh, usually translated as “soul” refers to the whole human personality, not to a disembodied spirit.
Translating the Bible is an immensely complex matter, with many unresolved questions. Most of the problems, however, concern minor differences in the Hebrew or Greek texts available to us, and overall we can consider that the translations we read reflect the thought of the writers. The basic meaning of the text is not “lost in translation”.
Peter also discussed the status of women in Biblical times and what Biblical injunctions did to help them. He also helped us imagine ourselves in those times of very different availability of soap and water. Did that impact the descriptions we read?
After the presentation we shared refreshments provided by our gracious hostess, Barbara Grünenfelder- Elliker.
Mariel