Saturday, April 11, 2009

Literal Bibles: Sarah 2

I am not sure if there is any theological value in what I am writing about now. It is just a few curiosities of translation regarding women in the Bible. I hope you find this of interest. Sometimes one needs to look at these things without theological bias and just see what turns up. It shows, however, the power of the translation, how much is at the discretion of the translator.

Here is Hebrews 11:11 again about Sarah and Abraham. This same event - the conception of Isaac.

    KJV

    Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.

    NRSV

    By faith he received power of procreation, even though he was too old—and Sarah herself was barren—because he considered him faithful who had promised.

    Footnote: By faith Sarah herself, though barren, received power to conceive, even when she was too old, because she considered him faithful who had promised.

    ESV

    By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised.


    NIV

    By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was enabled to become a father because hea]">[a]considered him faithful who had made the promise.

    Footnotes:
    1. Hebrews 11:11 Or By faith even Sarah, who was past age, was enabled to bear children because she

    TNIV

    And by faith even Sarah, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because she [a] considered him faithful who had made the promise.

    Footnotes:
    1. Hebrews 11:11 Or By faith Abraham, even though he was too old to have children—and Sarah herself was not able to conceive—was enabled to become a father because he
You can see how the NIV and the NRSV produced a variant translation, supposing somehow that only a man could bear seed. The word in Greek is sperma but clearly means seed or offspring, that is, a child, or descendants.

So, overall, the ESV and the TNIV are equally literal. Perhaps the TNIV is more so, since it has the word child included, not only conceive.

3 comments:

J. K. Gayle said...

I am not sure if there is any theological value in what I am writing about now.

What you're writing about definitely speaks to the influence of sexist views on theology!

Ann Nyland translates Heb 11:11 as follows (with a fn):

"By faith Sarah herself - although she was sterile - also laid hold of power for the depositing* of offspring although she was well past it in age, since she considered that the promise was believable.

*καταβολη, katabole, in the sense of paying a deposit by installments rather than in the sense of merely 'having' offspring. This verse which shows that Sarah laid hold of power to have offspring, has caused a huge problem for translations and commentaries. Tyndale's 1534 translation translates correctly. However, some Bible versions add the word 'Abraham' and the words 'enabled to become a father', none of which appear in the Greek text, and has Abraham as the one who considered that the promise was believable. σπερμα, sperma, regularly means 'offspring'."

Some of us think that Aristotle may have influenced the attempt to reverse or to erase the Greek association of divine breath / godly spirit with mothers. He propagated the idea that male "seed" (or semen) was a combination of water and πνεῦμα (or "breath / spirit"), which he thought was the source of heat and therefore life of the soul. The female, according to Aristotle, did not have this seed, did not have this "hot living air plus water" combination. In Aristotle's view, the male had to give the female "soul" by his movements, his form, and his seed. The woman is the passive recipient; and even the embryo depends on the fathering male, according to this "science." Aristotle also wrote, in the same treatise, that females are botched or mutilated males, and the blame for all deformed babies goes to the mother, in these cases bad recipients of the pneuma containing seed. This supposed "objectivity" is all very well documented in Aristotle’s treatise the Generation of Animals (see 2.2, 2.3, 2.6, 3.11).

But before Aristotle was a different view. Euripides, for example, has Hippolytus, the protagonist of one of his plays, address the virgin goddess Artemis. She not only possesses but also is her own πνεῦμα (pneuma) -- the very thing which this male does not have; (”Hippolytus,” lines 1390-93):

ἔα·
ὦ θεῖον ὀδμῆς πνεῦμα· καὶ γὰρ ἐν κακοῖς
ὢν ᾐσθόμην σου κἀνεκουφίσθην δέμας·
ἔστ’ ἐν τόποισι τοισίδ’ Ἄρτεμις θεά.

"But what is this?
O breath of divine fragrance! Though I am in misfortune
I sense you and my body’s pain is lightened.
The goddess Artemis is in this place!"

Hillary said...

These side-by-side translations are very enlightening! Thank you for posting them.

Suzanne McCarthy said...

Kurk,

Thanks so much for the detail that you add here. In the LXX women clearly have "seed" or sperma, but I can see that Aristotle says they don't. A woman is just a "furrow to be plowed." I can't remember who said that but one of those ancient Greeks no doubt.

Hillary,

Its good to meet you. I have been following your blog as well as the NLQ blog.