Essays on some Bible words
Trying to nudge English Bible translation into the 21st century
If you try to read many of the books that call themselves Bibles*, you’ll find that the text often feels very formal, in fact so much so that many readers now expect that a Bible translation must sound formal. What most readers don’t realise, is that there are three main reasons that Bible translations sound ‘formal’ or ‘quaint’:
1. Because Hebrew or Greek word order is often carried through into English translations, e.g., ‘son of Abraham’ rather than the more natural modern English ‘Abraham’s son’,
2. Because Hebrew or Greek idioms are often carried through into English translations, e.g., ‘God delivered him from the hand of the Philistines’ when we’d never use that idiom in natural English speech.
3. Because Hebrew or Greek euphemisms are often carried through into English translations, e.g., ‘Adam knew Eve and they had a son’ when we’d never use that particular euphemism in natural English speech.
4. Because ancient English word choices (some going back all the way to John Wycliffe** in the 1300’s) are still present in so-called ‘modern’ English translations, e.g., using ‘For’ instead of ‘Because’, using ‘great’ where we would no longer use it, or using ‘wild beasts’ instead of ‘wild animals’.***
* Note: The OET intentionally doesn’t call itself a ‘Bible’ but a ‘translation of the Bible’ in an attempt to remind and educate our readers that we use an English translation of a collection of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek documents.
** Middle English: The English of the 1300’s that John Wycliffe translated into is now labelled as ‘Middle English’. We have included Wycliffe’s New Testament on our parallel verse pages so that you can view that early English translation and discover where much of our English scripture terminology originated, and then go upwards on the page from there to view the changes over the following centuries, e.g., see Mark 2:11.
*** Disclaimer: The founder of the OET lives in New Zealand where we make some different word choices from the country where English originated (England, 55+ million people), and even more noticeable, from the country with the largest native-‘English’-speaking population (USA, 330+ million people). Please do let us know if anything stated on this page isn’t true for your English dialect.
For
‘For God so loved the world…’ So what does the word ‘For’ mean at the beginning of that very well-known sentence? Most people we’ve questioned can’t really answer that question, although many do realise that the modern equivalent would be ‘Because’, but then that confuses them because they never memorised what came before John 3:16. And why didn’t they? Because ‘For’ is unnatural at the beginning of a sentence in modern English and so sadly, they hadn’t even asked themselves what it’s there for. However, scan down the page for that verse and see how even recent English translations copy the same sentence structure that John Wycliffe first used in the 1300’s.
Sadly, even many English translations that claim to be ‘modern’ or ‘new’ are still full of archaic sentences starting with ‘For’.
See more in the blog.
Of (genitive/possessive)
The English word ‘of’ seems so small and insignificant that it surely couldn’t have too much effect on a modern Bible translation? But it does, and this issue has become more significant over the centuries because of English language change.
Imagine if I said, ‘I’m just going to drop in at the house of Simon.’ Sounds a bit weird? But in the 1300’s when John Wycliffe was translating from Latin to what we now call ‘Middle English’, ‘the house of Simon’ was a quite normal construction. However now, some seven hundred years later, it’s more normal to say ‘Simon’s house’. The OET tries hard to use modern English forms as much as possible, however many of the archaic forms are still carried over into other English translations that would consider themselves to be ‘modern’, e.g., ‘hand of God’, ‘temple of God’, ‘Son of God’, ‘Son of Man’, etc., etc. As mentioned above, one of the reasons why so many of our Bibles sound ‘quaint’ or ‘authoritative’ (depending on your perspective) is that they place tradition above natural language use and so they sound more ‘formal’ than more modern English narratives and essays.
There is another problem with interpreting the Greek genitive in that it can be ambiguous. Consider ‘love of God’ in the sentence ‘The love of God for people is amazing.’ This could be rewritten as ‘God’s love for people is amazing.’ On the contrary, ‘Mary really lives out her love of God.’ Here ‘love of God’ can’t be replaced with ‘God’s love’ but rather with ‘love for God’, hence ‘Mary really lives out her love for God.’ So we realise that the ‘of’ (Greek genitive) form is ambiguous: it can often be translated with the English possessive form (usually expressed with apostrophe in modern English) but sometimes we must choose a different English construction, and occasionally we might need to bring the ambiguous form across to English because we can’t be certain which option the writer intended.
All to say that you’ll find many less ‘of’ constructions in the OET and although that might make it sound unfamiliar to long-term Bible readers, it will feel considerably less ‘quaint’ or ‘weird’ to first-time readers.
Word
What’s a ‘word’? It usually refers to the things on this page. Greek ‘λόγος’ (logos) doesn't mean ‘word’ ... more coming ... For now see the blog article and Gary Gagliardi’s excellent write-up.
Arise/Arose
Was everyone in the Hebrew Scriptures sitting or lying down when they were told by someone else to go somewhere? So many English translations say something like ‘So he got up and went to …’. In modern-English that would seem to normally imply ‘he got out (of bed) and went …’, although it could also mean ‘he stood up (from the table) and went …’. However, that probably wasn’t the word picture in the mind of the original author. It’s more likely to mean ‘he packed up and went …’ or ‘he got ready and went …’ or even just ‘he departed and walked to …’ in that context it seems. In other contexts, a better modern equivalent is often something like ‘he took action by …’.
Deliver
Pretty much the only things that get ‘delivered’ in modern times are packages, pizzas, and babies. Slaves taken by ISIS get ‘rescued’ rather than ‘delivered’, and God might help the army to ‘defeat’ or ‘conquer’ the enemy, not ‘deliver them into your hand’. Addicts ‘break’ the habit. Prisoners (or sinners) get ‘released’ or ‘set free’ rather than getting ‘delivered’ in modern English.
Great
Have you watched a great movie recently? In modern English, the word ‘great’ typically has a positive connotation of being ‘good’. However, back in the 1300’s when John Wycliffe translated the New Testament into English (from Latin), the word ‘great’ mostly meant ‘large’. So in Rev 16:18, he used that word to describe a terrible earthquake. No doubt any modern reader who’s had their house damaged in an earthquake wouldn’t naturally use the phase ‘great earthquake’ to describe the frightening event. However, many recent English Bible translations still do just that.
Wild beasts
In the past, you might have taken a tour of an African safari park to view the ‘wild beasts’, but nowadays, we would be more likely to call them ‘wild animals’. The word ‘beast’ does linger on in English in specific contexts such as ‘a farmer killing a beast’ (meaning a cow). However, apart from ‘Beauty and the Beast’, modern English generally favours the word ‘animal’ over ‘beast’. Tragically though, even quite modern English Bible translations persist in their use of the word ‘beast’, most noticeably in Yohan’s Revelation, but it’s likely producing the wrong word picture in the minds of many readers.
Ark
Sadly, the word ‘ark’ raises connotation of a boat-shaped object for modern readers—perhaps largely influenced by (inaccurate?) Noah’s Ark picture books. Of course, the big problem with that is when you come to the ‘Ark of the Covenant’ and try to figure out the connection.
The real meaning of the Hebrew word ‘תֵּבַת’ (tēvat) (traditionally translated as ‘ark’) is ‘(wooden) chest’ or ‘box’.
Way
‘Get out of the way!’ ‘What’s the quickest way to your place?’ Yes, we can still use ‘way’ in certain contexts in English to mean ‘path’ or ‘road’.
But that’s not the most common meaning of ‘way’ in modern-English. More like ‘What’s the best way to get that open?’ where ‘way’ is more of a verbal noun meaning ‘method’ or ‘series of steps’.
So what about Psalm 1 which often talks about ‘not standing in the way of sinners’? Take the ESV: ‘Blessed is the man who walks not …, nor stands in the way of sinners, …’ A godly person shouldn’t ‘stand in the way of sinners’, i.e., ‘Don’t try to prevent sinners from doing anything they want’? No, that’s not what it’s even talking about—it’s talking about how godly people shouldn’t stand on the path to the casino or the brothel in case they’re talked into accompanying the sinners that walk that way.
A large number of modern English Bible translations still overuse ‘way’ where they should be saying ‘path’ or ‘road’. English has changed a lot since the 1500’s.
Yohan (John) 14:6: Yeshua (Jesus) answered, “I am the way the path and the truth and the life. No one can get to the father except via me.” OET-RV
Struck
A common use of ‘struck’ in modern English might be to be ‘struck by lightning’ or ‘struck by a speeding car’. However, the Bible was written in an era when wars, fighting, and law & order were often carried out with weapons like swords and spears. The word translated ‘struck’ belongs to that era, and isn’t necessarily so relevant in our era of guns (and even drones). When someone was ‘struck’, it was often a euphemism for something like ‘run through with a sword and killed’.
For the sake of clarity, the OET-RV will try to avoid ‘struck’, and replace it with a phrase like ‘killed in battle’ (depending on the context) which we believe will be clearer to all of our younger readers of modern English.
Perish
In modern English, we mostly use ‘perish’ to describe what happens to food that’s been left sitting around for too long—it loses its crispness and begins to degrade and eventually rot.
In older English (and yes, it’s still understood by many modern readers), ‘perish’ could be used to refer to someone (who’s unwanted, such as an enemy) dying—often killed in battle.
The OET-RV will avoid ‘perish’, and try to use phrases like ‘killed in battle’ (depending on the context) which we believe will be clearer to all of our younger readers of modern English.
Forsake
To abandon ... coming ...
Woe to …
“Woe to you kids if you don’t get your room tidied up quickly!” Well, maybe not in modern-English (although ‘woe and betide’ seems to come to my mind from somewhere deep down).
To come to a bad end ... coming ...
Coming and going
In English, if you’re inside a house, you could watch someone else come in. But a third person standing out on the street might be able to watch that second person go into the house. It’s all to do with the relative perspective, but different languages (including Hebrew and Greek) don’t necessarily have the same rules as English. (Sadly, many Bible students who’ve learnt Hebrew or Greek but don’t actually speak and think in a language from a different language family might have learnt ‘come’ or ‘go’ as glosses on certain Biblical words, and don’t necessarily pay much attention to the hearer’s and speaker’s perspectives when translating, resulting in unnatural English.)
So if your father told you, ‘Come into your room.’ where would he be standing when he said that? Well, obviously, he’s already in your room and you're somewhere outside the room. So if someone said, ‘Do such-and-such when you come into your room.’ where was that person speaking from? The speaker must already be inside that room, else or they would have said, ‘… when you go into your room.’
So why, in Luke 23:42 does nearly every English translation say, ‘Remember me when you come into your kingdom.’? The speaker (one of the two thieves on the stakes beside Yeshua/Jesus) was NOT inside the kingdom that he was speaking about, so he should have said, ‘… when you go into your kingdom.’ Note that in this particular case, our Readers’ Version uses ‘… when you enter your kingdom.’ (which is independant of the hearer’s perspective), but in other examples, don’t be surprised if the OET-RV changes words like ‘come’ and ‘go’ to conform with normal English usage (rather than carrying through any differing Hebrew or Greek perspectives).
This and that
Also depends on perspective ... coming ...
Behold!
Wow! ... coming ...
Pieces of silver
So many English translations still use the term ‘pieces of silver’, e.g., a donkey’s head going for eighty pieces of silver during a famine. To a modern reader, that makes it sound like the silver was sliced off a block like ‘pieces of apple’, but it was most probably a small (crude compared to modern coins, yet somewhat standardised) silver coin. Some translations substitute ‘shekels of silver’ which is a move in the right direction. The OET-RV uses ‘silver coins’ which might be slightly anachronistic, yet still helpfully guides the modern reader into understanding that those ‘silver pieces’ were standardised even back then.
Saves
Saves/delivers/rescues ... coming ...
Earth/Land
The Hebrew scriptures use ‘אֶרֶץ’ (ʼereʦ) sometimes to refer to the area occupied by Israel, and this is often translated as the ‘land’, but the OET-RV will often translate it more naturally as the ‘country’ or adjust it further (see below).
Other times it refers to the entire area of human habitation, and that’s often translated as the ‘earth’ rather than just the ‘land’, but the OET-RV will often translate it more naturally as the ‘world’.
Land of …
Would you like a holiday in the ‘land of Australia’ or in the ‘land of California’? Well, maybe you would, but we don’t usually talk like that. However, many older English translations still do, using ‘land of …’ sometimes for entire countries, and sometimes for regions within countries.
The OET-RV tries to avoid that unnatural English terminology and uses terms like ‘Persian empire’ and ‘Negev region’.
Rejoice
See Google Books Ngram Viewer ... coming ...
More coming...
Note about parts of speech
Would this be modern, natural English? “He saved me by grabbing my jacket as I started to fall.” Yes, I think using ‘saved’ is quite natural. But what about “He was my salvation because he grabbed my jacket just as I started to fall.” Probably the use of the noun ‘salvation’ increases the risk that it’s not so natural. (See the n-grams here.) In the OET Literal Version we aim to keep the same part of speech as the original language wherever possible, but in the Readers’ Version, we will frequently change from a verbal noun to a phrase and/or make other adjustments in order to try to use the same English that we actually speak in our daily lives.