It’s All Greek to Me: The Difficulty of Translations of Scripture

Fr. Nicholas Newman

The Bible is important. In a world of thousands of different denominations that differ wildly in theology and practice, this is one statement that nearly every person who calls himself a Christian would agree with. Scripture is so significant that its accessibility has been of highest priority throughout Christian history. There are more than 20,000 manuscripts of the New Testament alone. Many are in Greek -- the original language of the New Testament (except possibly the Gospel of Matthew) -- but as early as the third and fourth centuries, translations were being made into Coptic, Latin, and other languages such as Syriac and Gothic.  Copies of Scripture were treasures, copied by hand and mostly kept in church treasuries, and read during the divine services. As missionaries entered into Eastern Europe and Russia, Scripture was translated into Old Church Slavonic. The advent of the printing press, which made it possible for Scripture to be more widely distributed, as well as the Protestant Reformation, saw the translation of Scripture into many other languages, including English. 

There are currently over 450 (with some estimates as high as 900) English translations of the Bible. Each one takes a slightly different approach regarding its purpose, tone, and methodology. Some translations are tailored for specific audiences – such as youth, mothers, fathers, or soldiers – and are translated in a way that is best suited to appeal to those audiences. 

While these numerous different translations provide millions of people access to the Scriptures, issues arise when depending solely on a translation. When preparing a text, the translator must make numerous decisions regarding ambiguous grammar or vocabulary. In these situations, it is only natural that a translator’s personal theological or ideological leanings will shape how he deals with the difficulty. Consequently, when reading a translation, the reader encounters both interpretive and translational work. This is not a problem if the reader is aware and can compare the passage between translations – or ideally with the original text—but many people are not aware that such nuance even exists. 

To illustrate how different approaches to the text can affect the theological meaning of the passage, we will look at a few examples.  

Luke 11:27-28: 

Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ λέγειν αὐτὸν ταῦτα ἐπάρασά τις φωνὴν γυνὴ ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου εἶπεν αὐτῷ,  

Μακαρία ἡ κοιλία ἡ βαστάσασά σε καὶ μαστοὶ οὓς ἐθήλασας. αὐτὸς δὲ εἶπεν, Μενοῦν μακάριοι οἱ ἀκούοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ φυλάσσοντες.   

Some translations, in this case the NIV translation, render this passage as: “As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, ‘Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.’ He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.” This translation has some very important theological implications. Is the Virgin Mary worthy of veneration as the mother of Christ? This is what the woman from the crowd implies, when she cries out that the womb that bore Him is “blessed.” Christ corrects her, or seems to, saying that it is obedience to God that brings blessing, not merely a filial relationship.  

One of the issues with this passage is the word Μενοῦν (menoun). This word can mean “rather/nay, rather,” but it can also mean “indeed/yes, and” depending on the context. The way that the translator chooses to interpret this word, then, has a major impact on the translation of the passage: “blessed rather are those...” vs. “indeed, and blessed are they...” Neither of these translations would be “incorrect,” so to speak, as Μενοῦν can be used in both ways; however, the translations are certainly mutually exclusive. How, then, can the translator decide how he should approach this passage?  

The “nay, rather” translation creates a rhetorical dichotomy between the motherhood of the Virgin Mary, and those who follow Christ out of conviction, juxtaposing a familial relationship with a relationship built on faith. This translation assumes both that Μενοῦν should be understood as “nay rather” and that τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ (ton logon tou theou) “the word of God” means Scripture (which is why it is translated as “it”).  This understanding of the passage, however, is not internally consistent with how the Virgin Mary, and her relationship with Christ, is shown in other parts of the Gospel of Luke.  

In Luke 1:28, the Angel Gabriel appears to the Virgin Mary to announce to her that she is to be the mother of God: “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!” (This passage is actually also one with problematic translation. The Greek κεχαριτωμένη is a middle/passive perfect participle, “having been favored with grace” is a better translation, if a bit of a mouthful in English) The angel goes on to say: “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus.” In the angel’s address, we see that the motherhood of the Virgin Mary, and faithfulness to God are not separate, juxtaposed things, but are part of one continuum.  

The Virgin Mary has found favor with God through her faithfulness, and because of this, she has been chosen to receive the blessing of being the Mother of God. We see the same duality in Elizabeth’s response to Mary’s arrival in Luke 1:43-45: “But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. Blessed is she who believed, for there will be a fulfillment of those things which were told her from the Lord.” Elizabeth is astounded that Mary comes to her, recognizing her unworthiness because she is the Mother of the Lord (echoing King David’s exclamation in 2 Samuel 6:9: “How can the Ark of the Lord ever come to me?”).  

The ending of the passage is actually problematic as well (thank you to Fr. Constantine Newman for pointing out the following). The Greek τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ is usually understood as an impersonal thing, like Scripture, which together with the φυλάσσοντες (filassontes) means to “keep it (i.e. the word of God).” The Greek does not necessarily require the neuter pronoun “it.” The λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ is not necessarily the commandments or Scripture, but Christ Himself, the Word of God! The term φυλάσσοντες (filassontes), can be translated readily as “guard” or “protect” rather than keep. With this understanding the end of the passage becomes an underpinning of her motherhood as well: “’Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breast that you sucked.’ He replied, ‘Yes, and blessed rather are those who hear the Word of God and guard Him.”  

Mary is blessed, because she “believed,” for her faithfulness. She is blessed because she gives birth to God, and she is blessed because she guards Him. To maintain consistency with the rest of the Gospel of Luke, this passage should not be read as a juxtaposition, but as two sides of the same coin, so to speak. The change from the singular in the exclamation of the woman to the plural of Christ’s response gives a beautiful theological message as well. The Theotokos is unique, she is the only one who ever gives birth to God in the flesh. She is also our example of what it means to “hear the word of God and guard Him.” Our spiritual life is not a matter of reading books and theological abstractions, but is a relationship. We must hear Christ, and guard/keep Him in our lives, as the Theotokos does and, metaphorically, bring Christ into the world by becoming Christlike.  

Another interesting example is Hebrews 1:8: 

πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν, ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος, καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος τῆς εὐθύτητος ῥάβδος τῆς βασιλείας σου. 

The New World Translation of this passage is: “But about the Son, he says: ‘God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness.’” The New World Translation offers a discussion of why they offer this translation, which is not the standard translation of the passage: 

"Jehovah God is Jesus’ throne in the sense that Jehovah is the Source of Jesus’ royal office or authority. Jehovah gave his Son “rulership, honor, and a kingdom.” (Da 7:13, 14; Lu 1:32) At Heb 1:8, 9, Paul quotes Ps 45:6, 7. The Greek text allows for the rendering found in many translations: “Your throne, O God, is forever.” However, there are good reasons to render it as in the New World Translation (and some other translations): “God is your throne forever.” For instance, the context at Heb 1:9 says, “God, your God, anointed you,” showing that the one addressed at Heb 1:8 (or at Ps 45:6) is, not Almighty God, but one of his worshippers. In addition, Ps 45:6, 7 was originally addressed, not to God himself, but to a human king of Israel who was appointed by God. As a prophecy, then, it likewise pointed to a great King whom God appointed —the Messiah." (Hebrews 1:1-14 | The New World Translation (Study Edition) | NWT Study Bible) 

The translation issue centers on the short section: ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός.  ὁ θεός (o theos) is a nominative singular, so theoretically it could function here as a predicate nominative to the subject ὁ θρόνος σου (o thronos sou). The two would have to be connected by an implied third person singular of the verb “to be,” which falls away (a fairly normal thing for it to do in Greek). If you interpret the passage in this way, then you could argue that the New World Translation is valid. This is what the comments NWT Study Bible refer to. This assumes, however, that the author phrases this in a very awkward way. A preferable phrasing of the Greek for a translation like this would be: ὁ θεός θρόνος σου instead. We even see, in the next phrase, which is set up  with this type of a predicate nominative, that the predicate normally does not take the definite article, which ὁ θεός has here.   

A major assumption made by interpreting it this way is that ὁ θεός is a nominative rather than a vocative. We see, however, in Mark, that the translation of ελωι ελωι λεμα σαβαχθανι (eloi, eloi, lema sabachthani) into Greek is: ὁ θεός μου ὁ θεός μου (o theos mou, o theos mou), “my God, my God.” Thomas also says to Christ ὁ θεός μου (o theos mou), “my God” in John 20:28. There are only three examples of the vocative form Θεέ (thee) in the New Testament, so there are just as many direct addresses in the nominative as in the vocative proper. All of this points to the standard translation: “To the Son, ‘Your throne, O God, is to the ages. And the scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.”  

To be fair, the NWT Study Bible does say that the text can be read this way. They admit, though, that their translation choice has more to do with their denial of Christ’s divinity than it does the grammar of the Greek. Their explanation of why they decide to translate this passage the way they do focuses on the following verse: “Heb 1:9 says, “God, your God, anointed you,” showing that the one addressed at Heb 1:8 (or at Ps 45:6) is, not Almighty God, but one of his worshippers.” This argument fails to take the relationship between the Persons of the Trinity into account. They claim that Hebrews 1:9 saying “your God” precludes the divinity of Christ, and so verse 1:8 cannot be calling Christ God to be internally consistent. We see, however, the dichotomy of Christ being recognized as God (as in John 20:28) or claiming divinity (as in John 8:58 “Before Abraham was, I am”) and Christ carrying out the will of God (like in the garden of Gethsemane, where Christ says: “but not as I will, but as you will” in Matthew 26:39). Scripture is not self-contradictory, and it cannot say Christ is God, and Christ is not God, at the same time. We must understand this seeming contradiction in terms of the Trinity. Christ is God, but Christ is not God the Father. If we read Hebrews 1:9 as a witness to the monarchy of the Father within the Trinity, however, then there is no issue of consistency between the two verses. 

We see another example in Colossians 2:23: 

ἅτινά ἐστιν λόγον μὲν ἔχοντα σοφίας ἐν ἐθελοθρησκίᾳ καὶ ταπεινοφροσύνῃ [καὶ] ἀφειδίᾳ  σώματoς, οὐκ ἐν τιμῇ τινι πρὸς πλησμονὴν τῆς σαρκός. 

The New King James Version renders this passage as: “These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.” Other translations, for example the English Standard Version, translate the passage: “These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.” The discrepancy in the translations centers on the term ταπεινοφροσύνη (tapeinophrosini), which the NKJV gives as “false humility” and the ESV gives as “asceticism.” An analysis of the term shows that this is a compound word made up of three elements: ταπεινός - which is an adjective meaning “low or dejected;”  φρων, a stem that appears in adjectives that have to do with the mind; and the suffix -σύνη a suffix used to create an abstract noun. Taken together, then, the term means something like “the state of being low or dejected in mind.” From this analysis, we see that “humility,” as the NKJV translates the term, is a much better translation than “asceticism.” This is particularly the case because the ESV version translates ταπεινοφροσύνη as “humility” in the following chapter of Colossians: “Put on then, as God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience” (Colossians 3:12).  

The difference between the two verses is that in Colossians 2:23, ταπεινοφροσύνη is used in a negative context, while in Colossians 3:12, it is being used positively. The NKJV indicates the negative and positive connotation by adding the qualifier “false.” The ESV, however, offers not only a translation, but also an interpretation of what humility in a negative context could be: asceticism. This creates a value judgement of ascetic practices, one which the text itself does not make. We see a similar situation with the translation of παραδόσις (paradosis). The term is another compound word – made up of παρά (para), which means “over or across” and δόσις (dosis), which means “giving.” Depending on the context, some translations, such as the NIV, use “tradition” as a translation when the context is negative, such as in Colossians 2:8, but as “teachings” in a positive context, such as in 2 Thessalonians 2:15. 

Using an English translation of Scripture is a necessity for most Christians. It is important, however, that we understand what a translation is. Greek and English have comparably sized vocabularies, and the nuanced meanings of the Greek words are sometimes difficult to render in English. The grammars of Greek and English are also complex, but in different ways. This makes a translation not a simple one-to-one rendering of a text, but an interpretation of the Greek then rendered into English. This means that the translation choices made often reflect the preconceived theological, historical, and sometimes even political ideologies of the translator. This is why it is important, when reading Scripture in translation, that we avail ourselves of several translations for comparison, or use some other resources to be able to better approach the passage without being dependent on one translation.