cuisine-spirit.com
tickckAvatar de tickck30 billets | Profil Recherche Google

ce blog tous
Derniers billets Connexion
Archives

cuisine-spirit

15/05/2013

the word relationship

Read that a couple of times, play with the word relationships, and you'll realize how a translator could come to either of the above translations.  (Wright is hardly breaking new ground here.)  

These translations are separated by the answers to two major and one minor translational questions.  First, does "in quietness" refer to the woman or the environment?  The Greek word is given in the abstract, rather than adverbially as the ESV has it.  The abstract noun "in quietness" could be understood either way, and then be translated accordingly: so either quietly or undisturbed (that is, in a quiet environment) is quite possible.  If I read it one way and you read it the other, neither of us is deliberately mistranslating it; we simply disagree on an unclear issue.  

Second, is Paul's second clause ("I do not permit a woman to teach") building on the first point, or qualifying it? If you think he's saying something like, "A woman, when she learns, should do so silently and submissively, and should not teach men or have authority over them," you will translate de as "and."  If you think he's saying something like, "A woman should be able to learn, but not to have authority over a man," you will render de as "but."  Neither one is a mistranslation, as de is notoriously difficult to predict and always depends on interpretation of the writer's logic to translate one way or the other.

And finally, and less importantly, Paul says a woman should learn in submission.  Period.  Does he mean submission to a man, or to the material she is studying, or to the church body as a whole, or to God?  It could be any of them.  Now, I agree that Wright is setting himself up by answering the question for us when Paul did not, I cannot call it a deliberate mistranslation.  

Moreover, I would not call the result "entirely unrelated" to what Paul is saying.  I think it's as likely a translation of the text as the ESV version.  The only thing that will determine which one a person finds more persuasive is their understanding of the role of women in scripture and of the context in which Paul wrote 1 Timothy.  Personally, I believe Wright's translation makes a lot more sense given those two considerations, but I understand that many scholars believe otherwise, and I happily grant that.  And those scholars will feel that the ESV provides the better translation.  Their theology dictates how they translate Paul.  But I do not for that reason feel that they are deliberately mistranslating the text; they are simply working as their lights best direct.

20/09/2019

Poster un commentaire

Pour pouvoir associer un pseudo à votre commentaire, il faut créer votre blog et que vous soyez connectés.



Ton commentaire est soumis aux conditions générales d'utilisation. Il est interdit de poster des commentaires racistes, injurieux, etc. Si un tiers porte plainte, ton adresse ip sera utilisée pour t'identifier.

Ce formulaire utilise la technologie javascript.