Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Jonathan,

I do not intend to continue this discussion, but would like to make a few
comments on your chicken-egg problem or better, on circularity.
>
>I think there's an interesting chicken-and-egg problem here. The way you
>create a lexicon is to examine the use of words in various contexts, and
>determine their semantic range. I have several Greek lexica, and they
>disagree somewhat as to the semantic range of certain words. Louw and Nida,
>a well-respected Greek lexicon - one of the "big three", includes the
>following definition of PRWTOTOKOS:
>
>L&N 87.47 pertaining to existing superior to all else of the same or
>related class - `superior to, above all.'
>
>Another meaning that is given is this:
>
>L&N 13.79 pertaining to existing prior to something else - `existing first,
>existing before.'
>
>In their discussion of the primary meaning of PRWTOTOKOS,
>
>L&N 10.43 pertaining to being a firstborn child
>
>They also mention the following:
>
>       In Jewish society the rights and responsibilities
>       of being a firstborn son resulted in considerable
>       prestige and status. The firstborn son, for example,
>       received twice as much in inheritance as any other
>       offspring.
>
>Since Louw and Nida have both influenced a great deal of influence on
>modern linguistics, including lexicography, I assume they know how it's
>done. You may disagree with their results, just as you may disagree with
>certain translations of this passage.

Your quotations above are excellent examples of how the "functional
equivalence" model of Nida ( and de Waard) and the "semantic domain" model
of Louw and Nida both allows and encourages  Bible translators to read
orthodox theology into the biblical text.

Nida's two central principles were: (1) There is only one target group: the
general readers (who do not want to work with the text themselves). (2) The
individual words have little meaning, what is to be translated are not
words, but "kernels", which are found by a semantic (interpretative)
analysis. (See J de Waard, E.A. Nida, 1986," Functional Equivalence in
Bible Translating From One Language to Another")

A central principle for "semantic domain" is thus expressed: "a word does
not have a meaning without a context, it only has possibilities of
meaning." J. P. Louw ,1982, "Semantics of New Testament Greek", p 40. When
the words does not have any meaning in itself, who are the ones who can
find the meaning by help of the context? Of course the translators! And
this gives all power to the translators.

With other words: When the single word neither has an individual meaning
nor play the role as the fundamental translation unit, there are no longer
any controls which the readers can use to avaluate the translation, but
they are at the mercy of the translators.

To illustrate the points above, I give below the whole entry regarding
PRWTOTOKOS in Louw/Nida with a transcription of the Greek characters. What
is the bilical evidence according to this lexicon for PRWTOTOKOS meaning
"existing prior to" or "existing before" or "existing superior to".  The
evidence is Col 1:15!!!!!!!!  Can anything be more circular? In order to
understand Col 1:15, we seek evidence from the Bible of a meaning different
from "firstborn", and voila! we have a lexicon that gives such meanings.
And what are the references of that lexicon? Col 1:15. Sigh: "Poor Bible
readers."

"10.43 PRWTOTOKOS a , on: pertaining to being a firstborn child (normal? in
contexts speaking of people but also used in reference to domestic animals)
- 'firstborn.' ETEKEN TON hUION AUTHS TON PRWTOTOKON   'she gave birth to
her firstborn son' Lk 2:7.
13.79  PRWTOTOKOS , on: pertaining to existing prior to something else -
'existing first, existing before.' PRWTOTOKOS PASHS KTISEWS 'existing
before all creation' or 'existing before anything was created' Col 1:15. It
is possible to understand PRWTOTOKOS in Col 1:15 as 'superior in status'
(see 87.47). See also discussion at 10.43.

87.47  PRWTOTOKOS c , on: pertaining to existing superior to all else of
the same or related class - 'superior to, above all.' PRWTOTOKOS PASHS
KTISEWS 'existing superior to all creation' Col 1:15. For another
interpretation of PRWTOTOKOS in Col 1:15, see 13.79; see also discussion at
10.43."


>>THE CRUCIAL POINT NO ONE: IS JESUS THE CREATOR (DIRECT AGENT OF CREATION)
>>OR THE INDIRECT AGENT?
>
>>THE CRUCIAL POINT NO TWO: IS TA PANTA IDENTICAL WITH PASHS KTISEWS?
>
>Your answers to these two questions may affect your translation, and any
>answer involves theology. Obviously, each translator may have a different
>understanding of how the original recipients may have read this. I think
>there is more than one reasonable way to answer these. Obviously, different
>translations will reflect this fact. But since lexicons and grammar both
>support this as one possible meaning, I can't say I would call it biased
>using the definition you gave above.
>

When commentators and translators refuse to use the literal translation
"the firstborn of all creation", the argument is always that *the context*
forbids it. My two questions above was posed to point to the two principal
sides of the context argument, sides which never are being discussed by the
proponents of the context argument, and by this to show that there is no
context argument.

I will stand by the view that when the only *meaning* the lexica gives for
PRWTOTOKOS is "firstborn", and the Bible translations translates the word
as "firstborn" in all cases except Col 1:15, and the only lexicon which
gives the  additional meanings "existing prior to" or "existing before" or
"existing superior to" uses as evidence their own theological view of the
meaning of Col 1:15, then the Revised English Bible rendering "his is the
primacy over all creation" and similar renderings are biased.



Regards
Rolf


Rolf Furuli
Lecturer in Semitic languages
University of Oslo