Lost in Misinterpretation: a Myth
Poor Translations Have Marked Christianity Since Its Beginning
May 26, 2008
Every translator has to face a challenge when dealing with old writings: should they respect the language of the time when the work was written or modernise it for present-day readers in order to make the writing even more appealing?
Adapting any classic text carries with it considerable power. However this power comes with a price: the possibility of inadvertently making mistakes or being tempted to “amend” things according to one’s own criteria. A truly professional translator would always avoid such a crime, but consider what could happen when unscrupulous people try to achieve a specific aim.
The Virgin Mary
Fast forward several years to an article by the Hungarian translator Zsuzsanna Ardó. In this article she discusses those translation mistakes that lead to misinterpretations. One striking example was the concept of virgin birth. According to Ms Ardó, the Old Testament speaks about “almah” that means “young woman” rather than “bethulah” which means “virgin.”
When in the 3rd century it was translated into Greek, the word “parthenos” was used, which also means “virgin” and it remained so in all subsequent translations of the Bible. The concept of the “virgin birth” is due to a translation mistake. Or is it? Could it be that the misinterpretation of the words was deliberate in order to justify a growing dogma and belief about the birth of Jesus?
Paul and Homosexuality
In the New Testament, Paul’s words appear to provide a further example of damaging mistranslation. Scholars believe that the word "malakoi" he uses refers to people who behave in a sexually provocative manner.
In the Vulgate version of the Bible by Saint Jerome, "malakoi" is translated as "effeminati" which means “a man who wears feminine clothes to serve in the temple as a prostitute”, thus confirming this point of view. Scholars are still divided between those who believe that Paul was speaking about men who took part in sexual activities in the celebration of pagan rituals and those who think that Paul was being critical of men who embraced same sex relationships. This is yet another mistranslation or misinterpretation which condemns today’s homosexual population to the infamous fires of hell.
The Injustice of Misinterpretation
It appears that the Church is not willing to admit mistakes or to modify centuries of oppression, injustice and bigotry. Their interpretation of the Bible and the various translation pitfalls seem to suit their purpose. Christian churches seem to have forgotten that they owe their existence to the teachings of Jesus Christ who never once condemned homosexuality. If He thought that a loving relationship between two men or two women was wrong, He would have certainly mentioned it, but He did not.
It was only several centuries after His death that some nameless authority in the medieval Catholic Church made the decision to transform it into a sin under the nickname of “sodomy”. That decision has become a stigma for millions of men and women all over the world, for thousands of people who bear their sexuality with shame and fear and for thousands of youngsters who kill or harm themselves because their sexuality is not understood by certain segments of society.
While science has long accepted that homosexuality is not an illness or depraved behaviour, certain Christian churches and certain religions still maintain that misinterpretation is much more important than life and love.
References:
Ardó, Zsuzsanna. “Virgin Birth and Red Underpants – The Translator’s Responsibility in Shaping Our Worldview”
 |
