life habit of reading different translations of the Bible. Each
year he journeyed through yet another one. My application of his
advice? I've stayed with the same translation for 28 years. Oh,
I keep seven translations on my PDA for instant access. But
change the Bible I use in my personal time with God? May it
never be! But… maybe. In light of our joint journey through the
New Testament – would this be the time to actually use a
different translation? Perplexing and disturbing question.
What shall I do? My solution -- I'm waffling, reading both.
Already, in the first week, I've been shocked. "This is my Son,
whom I love; with him I am well pleased." Rich, comfortable,
familiar, so right. But this NLT has the nerve to say that "He
brings me great joy." Objections fly up within me… that's not
what it says. To find something "pleasing" is to approve, to see
the rightness of it, to have it pass the test after examining it
well. But "joy" is about emotions and feeling. It's so shallow
in comparison to "pleasing." Should we even be thinking about
the emotions of God?
Well, I thought, I'd better check the Greek word (eudokeo) and
see. Know what I discovered in this battle between an objective
"pleasingness" and an emotional "great joy"? You've probably
guessed. It's both. One English word simply isn't enough.
So, what's the point? This translation is OK? Nope. The point
is that, yes, God is pleased with His Son; and, yes indeed, God
experiences great joy as He beholds His Son. I needed to think
about that. About the joy of a father over his son when he takes
his first breath, his first step, makes his first score; about
the delight of a father over his adult son's character and soul.
All of us fathers know something of this joy. Wrap up all our
joys, multiply them a gazillion times, and you've got maybe a
glimmer of the joy the Father had as He beheld His own Son that
day. This is Jesus.
John
2 comments:
So, why in your last paragraph do you say the translation is not okay if the traditional translation doesn't adequately express the full meaning of εὐδοκέω either?
You might find it interesting that while you are quoting the second edition NLT (2004), the first edition (1996) reads this way:
“And a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with him.”” (Matt 3:17 NLT)
What's interesting is that while I don't always agree with every change made between the first and second editions of the NLT, most of the ones in verses like this are made to achieve greater accuracy. The fact that a few other recent traditions outside the Tyndale tradition have made this change, too, probably demonstrate a growing scholarly opinion that a rendering such as the NLTse's is probably more accurate.
Consider the HCSB (2004):
“And there came a voice from heaven:
This is My beloved Son.
I take delight in Him!” (Matt 3:17 HCSB)
Also, the REB (1989):
“And there came a voice from heaven saying, ‘This is my beloved Son, in whom I take delight.’” (Matt 3:17 REB)
I agree with you that εὐδοκέω entails both meanings of being well pleased AND great joy or delight. However, I think it's unfair to say that one is incorrect and the other is correct if neither full express the meaning.
vs 13 "But instead of going to Nazareth, he went to Capernaum, beside the Sea of Galilee." vs 15b, "Galilee where so many Gentiles live..." vs 16, "the people who sat in darkness have seen a great light"
Jesus came to bring life also to the Gentiles. His ministry begins by placing Himself in the midst of a people group that knew Him not. It makes me think of what we are trying to do through my job with Campus Crusade. We talk a lot about starting new movements in people groups on campus that aren't being reached with the gospel. We use examples of Paul and other apostles in doing this, but I had never seen so clearly (or thought about it I guess) Jesus doing this first. They were able to hear the good news, vs 17b "Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near."
Post a Comment