صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

ON THE TRANSLATION OF Διδάσκᾶλος, πειράω, πειράζω, AND το πτερύγιον, IN THE AUTHORISED VERSION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

BY J. BIRKBECK NEVINS, M.D., LOND.

THE words which I desire to bring before your consideration are Διδάσκᾶλος, πειράω, and το πτερύγιον, and I submit them to your criticism, because the changes which I shall propose in the manner of translating them in some places appear to me to be more correct, according, at any rate, to modern usage of English words, and also to render the narratives in which they occur more in accordance with the events they relate.

Διδάσκᾶλος is generally, although not always, translated "master" in the authorised version of the New Testament, and while, in most places, this renders its meaning accurately, there are others in which it does not convey the true sense, but leads to misapprehension that would be removed if the word "teacher" was substituted for "master."

The other word, πειράω, though sometimes translated "prove," is generally translated "tempt," as if the two words were identical in meaning. I submit that, in several cases, the true sense of the passage would be more accurately rendered by substituting the word "prove," or "test," for the word "tempt," and that valuable instruction would then be found in the narrative which is now obscured or lost. The changes which I am about to submit to you are, therefore, the substitution of "teacher" for "master" in certain places, and of "prove" or "test" for "tempt" in others.* The passages which principally illustrate the case are found in St. Luke x. 25; in St. Mark xii. 28; and St. Matthew xxii. 34 and 35: "A certain lawyer stood up and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"-(έκπειράζων and Διδάσκᾶλε)-Luke x. 25.

* It is unnecessary to inform scholars that "tempt" has been used in English as an equivalent for "prove," without necessarily implying a bad

In St. Mark, one of the Scribes, having heard them reasoning, and perceiving that he answered them well,

sense, not only in the authorised version of the New Testament, but also by Spencer (rarely), by Shakespeare (more rarely still), and in one or two instances so lately as by Dryden. But the first two authors are of an earlier date than the authorised version; and the word "tempt," as meaning simply

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

prove or "try," has practically disappeared from modern English. The Bible is intended for the use not only of scholars, but of unlearned people; and "lead us not into temptation," and "to be tempted of the devil," have so stamped an evil sense upon the word, that such an interpretation would naturally be put upon it at the present day, unless it was expressly contradicted. The following quotations from modern authors upon the passages commented upon in the following Paper, show that prove" or try" is not universally accepted by "teachers" as the sense of πειράω in these passages.

66

[ocr errors]

Dean Alford, in his New Testament, retains "tempting him" as the translation, and adds a note that the circumstances would not appear to indicate a malicious intention on the part of the lawyer in putting the question; but he does not point out what circumstances in these instances remove the evil sense from "tempting him."

The two English versions of the Bible, authorised by the Roman Catholic Hierarchy of Ireland and America, employ "tempt," both in Matthew and Luke, but without comment, though they have a note explaining that "tempt," in Genesis xxii. 1, means simply "try."

Davies (Scripture Manuals for use in tuition) distinctly attributes a bad sense to it, both in Matt. and Luke; and Stock (Lessons on the Life of Our Lord, published by the "Church of England Sunday School Institute, for the use of Sunday School Teachers,) attributes the sense of "probable curiosity, if not malice," "perhaps perplex Him," "get hasty answer." The Cambridge Bible for Schools adopts a bad sense, and Pulliblank (Teacher's Handbook) sends us to ask a Scholar what the Bible means by the word. These examples, from modern Scripture teachers, appear to furnish sufficient reason for desiring, in a Book which is to be read by all -learned and unlearned alike-and which is the great lesson Book of the Christian world, the substitution, where appropriate, of a word to which no evil attaches-" prove "for the word "tempt," to which evil does attach generally, if not always, in modern English. To show where such a change is called for is the object of the present Paper.

“asked” him (ἐπηρώτησεν αυτον), "Which is the first commandment of all?" and this same event is related somewhat differently, as follows, by St. Matthew : - " But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Saducees to silence, they were gathered together. Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him, tempting him (πειράζων), and saying, Master (Διδάσκᾶλε), which is the great commandment in the law?" Premising that Διδάσκᾶλος means literally "teacher," we see that to translate it "master" is to apply to it an acknowledgment of respect and submission which does not necessarily belong to it. A man may teach truth or error and still be a teacher, and he may be acknowledged and submitted to as a true teacher, or he may be repudiated as a false one.

In the one case he might naturally be thought of as "master" by his attached hearers, while in the other case he would only be addressed as "Master" in scorn by those who rejected his teaching. But he might still receive the appellation of "Teacher" as a term of indifferent signification, both from those who disputed his authority, and from others who were still simply in doubt, and desiring to satisfy themselves.

Let us now try to put ourselves in the position occupied by this teacher and his hearers at the times described in these narratives.

An eloquent preacher had recently made his appearance on the banks of the Jordan, and had told his hearers of some one who would succeed him, and do still more than he had done; and some one had, in fact, succeeded him, and gone about the country and villages teaching, and, according to popular rumour, doing many remarkable works also, such as healing the sick, etc. Now, his "teaching" would appear to have been of an unusual character, for it is described by one of his hearers as follows:-" The people were astonished, for he taught (ήν γαρ διδάσκων) them as one having authority." This teaching and wonder-working continued, and the noise of it was spread abroad, until the rulers and people in high places heard of it, and began to take notice of it; but his teaching was opposed to the orthodox schools of the time, and his practice, in many instances, was opposed to the habits of the day; for he did many of his most wonderful and merciful deeds on the Sabbath. He was also followed by large multitudes, with the expectation on their part that he would eventually become their king and military leader against the Romans, though he himself never assumed this position, but rather appeared to shrink from it.

Now, in this position of affairs, learned men and official teachers of the people came to hear him, and judge for themselves of his claim to respect. And some even went further, and put questions to him to "prove" him. One of these, having listened to various questions put by men who appeared desirous of tripping him up, "entangling him in his talk," and "having perceived that he had answered them wisely," puts his own question-" Which is the first commandment of all?"-Mark xii. 28. Now, here we have a simple, but very important, question put by an apparently thoughtful and earnest man, without any complimentary preface, and without any express purpose being mentioned by the narrator, Mark. But another historian (Matthew xxii. 35), relating the same events, and the same question, describes it at greater length, and says that the lawyer addressed him with the courtesytitle of "Teacher.” (Διδάσκᾶλε.) Now, in this title there is nothing which implies more than the recognition of the fact that the man whom he was addressing was a teacher. It neither acknowledges nor repudiates his right to be a teacher; and it implies neither the scoffing nor the recognition of his authority, which is implied (according to modern usage) by the term "Master," employed in the authorised version, as the translation of Διδάσκᾶλε. But the narrative proceeds-"He asked him a question, tempting him." Now, I think that very few persons read this narrative without receiving the impression that the lawyer was scoffing at the person he was addressing by calling him "Master," while, at the same time, he was trying to trip him up by his questionwas, in fact, "tempting” him in the ordinary sense of the word.* But the account of the same events already given by Mark produces no such impression about either the lawyer or his question, and if πειράζων was here translated proving " or "testing," instead of "tempting," the whole character of the narrative in Matthew would be changed, and we should have simply an account of a thoughtful man, who, having seen that this new teacher had answered others wisely, but being still in some doubt about his character, puts his own test or trial question, ""Teacher,' which is the great commandment of the law?"

66

We can imagine this lawyer questioning within himself, "Now will he say, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour (the Jew), and hate thine enemy (the Roman)' hoping himself to gain popularity, and become a king of the people. Or will he say, 'Thou shalt do no manner of work on the Sabbath day,' which is the popular cry of so many of the upper classes. Or will he say, 'If any man shall say Corban-it is a gifthe has fulfilled the law,' in order to curry favour with the priests. Or will he say that prayers in public places and ostentatious ceremonial and sacrifices are the great duty of

man.

Does he indeed himself know what is the great commandment of the law while he is professing to teach others?”

The question appears to have been received with an unhesitating acknowledgment of its honesty. And the answer with which we are familiar was at once given; and now the questioner's doubts were solved. He had "proved"

* See note on Davies, Stock, and others, p. 191.

« السابقةمتابعة »