The Hebrew and Greek What is translated into English as “the wrath of God” (Good News Translation: “God’s anger”) has to be referred to in Bengali as judgment, punishment or whatever fits the context. In Bengali culture, anger is by definition bad and can never be predicated of God. (Source: David Clark)
In Kikuyu the whole phrase that is translated in English as “storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath” or similar is translated as “you are increasing for yourself God’s wrath.” (Source: Jan Sterk)
In Quetzaltepec Mixe it is translated with a term “that not only expresses anger, but also punishment” (source: Robert Bascom), in Western Bukidnon Manobo as “the coming punishment of God on mankind” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation), in Kankanaey as “God’s fearful/terrible future punishing of people” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation), in Tagbanwa as “the coming anger/hatred of God” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation), and in Tenango Otomi as “the punishment which will come” (source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation).
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff.) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal ta (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential ta (祂) is used.”
In that system one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and one for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff) explains in the following way: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff.)
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible, but most translations, especially those published in the 21st century, do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
See also this chapter in the World Atlas of Language Structures on different approaches to personal pronouns.
In contrast to the elders and honored men of the community, the young and others in need of the community’s special care are now in focus. However, the prophet brands them all together as evil. After he makes this assessment of the situation in Israel, he ends with the familiar refrain. We need to examine closely the flow of thought in this verse.
Therefore the Lord does not rejoice over their young men, and has no compassion on their fatherless and widows: God is not happy with the situation that exists. The opening connector Therefore seems to link the information that follows back to what has been just mentioned, namely, that the leaders are misleaders and the people are confused. There is a slight problem with this view since it is clear that responsibility lies with the leaders and not with those who are led. It is possible that Therefore as a connector points forward rather than backward. In other words, the reason God does not rejoice over the young and others (lines 1-2) is that everyone is godless (lines 3-4). Translators may restructure the verse to make this point clear by placing lines 3-4 at the beginning of it (see the first example below).
For the Lord, see Isa 9.8.
Does not rejoice and has no compassion are parallel. Instead of does not rejoice, Good News Translation has “will not let … escape.” What lies behind the Good News Translation interpretation is an alternative text from Dead Sea Scrolls, which has a verb meaning “to spare.” Although this provides a good parallel to “have compassion,” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project does not recommend it. But neither does Hebrew Old Testament Text Project recommend the Masoretic Text reading yismach (“he rejoices”). It gives slight preference to an emended text yishmach, which means “he favors” or “he shows mercy.” Thus de~Waard recommends the Revised English Bible rendering for the first line, which reads “That is why the Lord showed no mercy to their youths” (similarly New Revised Standard Version).
Young men, the fatherless, and widows are people most in need of help and leadership. Normally God cared for these people, but not here. Young men is literally “chosen ones.” The Hebrew word here is a masculine technical term referring to young men who are of an age to fight. For fatherless and widows, see the comments at 1.17.
For every one is godless and an evildoer: This line and the next one give the reason for God’s apparent lack of concern for the community. The double charge that everyone is godless and an evildoer is a serious one. The statement is emphatic. The people are all sinners both toward God and their neighbors. The Hebrew term rendered godless can also mean “profane/hypocritical/irreligious.” New International Version has “ungodly,” and Bible en français courant says “unfaithful” (similarly Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). For evildoer see 1.4.
And every mouth speaks folly does not mean their speech is silly or foolish. Here the Hebrew term for folly refers to something evil (so Good News Translation) or disgraceful (compare 32.6).
For all this his anger is not turned away and his hand is stretched out still: This final sentence is the concluding statement we have seen in 5.25 and 9.12. It should be rendered in the same way here to reinforce the structure of the units.
Translation examples for this verse are:
• Since everyone is godless and evil,
speaking vile things,
therefore my Lord did not show mercy to the young warriors,
nor did he have any compassion on the orphans and widows.
Despite that, God is still angry
and will continue to punish Israel.
• My Lord did not extend mercy to the young soldiers nor have compassion on the orphans and widows for this reason: they all deny him and are evil, speaking vile things. Even so, God’s anger is not complete; he will yet punish Israel.
Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Sterk, Jan. A Handbook on Isaiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.