Alternativas

The first and most basic task in interpreting Scripture is to ensure that one has access to what is indeed the Holy Scriptures—both in the original languages and in modern translation. This requires attention to textual studies and to principles of translation.

1.Textual Studies

a.The preservation of the biblical text. Since the hermeneutical enterprise focuses on the written Word, the original text of the Bible must be ascertained as far as possible. The Bible itself underscores the necessity of preserving the words of sacred Scripture. Moses wrote with regard to the Torah, ―You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it‖ (Deut. 4:2; cf. 12:32). The book of Proverbs expands this principle to the whole Word of God: ―Every word of God proves true … . Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you, and you be found a liar‖ (Prov. 30:5, 6). At the close of the biblical canon, a similar warning is found: ―If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city‖ (Rev. 22:18, 19).

In OT Israel, provision was made for preserving the Torah by depositing ―the book of the law‖ in the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary beside the ark of the covenant (Deut. 31:26). There

was to be public reading of the Torah every seven years at the Feast of Tabernacles (verses 9– 13).

Unfortunately, no autograph copies of either OT or NT Scriptures remain. But the history of textual transmission reveals how carefully and painstakingly the biblical text has been preserved down through the centuries to the present day. Before the end of World War II critical scholars had a very low estimate of the accuracy of the received (Masoretic) Hebrew text, since its earliest manuscript dated back only to about A.D.900 and critical editions of the Hebrew Bible proposed thousands of conjectured emendments to the text. But since 1947 and the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls, which contained manuscripts or fragments of every OT book except Esther, scholars have been amazed to discover how the Masoretes had handed down virtually without change the textual tradition from a thousand years earlier.

The amount of MS evidence for the Greek text of the NT is far more abundant than for any other document of the ancient world. There are more than 3,000 Greek MSS of part or all of the NT text, in addition some 2,000 ancient Greek lectionaries (NT readings arranged in order of liturgical usage), about 8,000 Latin MSS, more than 2,000 MSS in other ancient versions such as Syriac and Coptic, and thousands of quotations—virtually the whole NT—in citations by the various early Church Fathers (Greenlee 697, 707). The actual amount of substantive variation among these many manuscripts is very small. F. F. Bruce affirms, ―The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice‖ (19, 20).

b.The need for textual studies. Although the past 150 years of diligent textual study assure us that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written, there are small variations among the many ancient biblical MSS. The science (or art) of coming as close as possible to the original text of the Old and New Testaments is textual study, often called ―textual criticism.‖ This study, as practiced by one who accepts the full authority of Scripture, rejects the presuppositions of the historical-critical method (see IV. F, G) and insists that the final norm for determining the authentic text of Scripture is found within Scripture itself.

Basic articles on textual study are found in The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary and need not be reproduced here. The standard Hebrew and Greek Bibles give detailed information on major textual variants in the apparatus at the bottom of each page of text.2.Translations and Versions

The Scriptures themselves give numerous examples of translation to make meaning clear. Among these are Nehemiah 8:8; Matthew 1:23; Mark 5:41; 15:22, 34; John 1:42; 9:7; Acts 9:36; 13:8; Hebrews 7:2. The emphasis given to the need for understanding Scripture (see Acts 8:30– 35) suggests the importance of faithful translation.

a.The challenges involved in translation. It is difficult to represent accurately the form and content of the original languages of the Bible in the modern target languages because in the process the translator must seek to bridge various barriers, such as gaps of time, culture, and geography; changed socioeconomic-political situations; and different thought patterns.

The most significant challenge to the translation process lies in the differences in the

languages themselves. The range of meaning of a word in the original language may be larger or smaller than its equivalent in the target language. Thereby the connotations of the original word are distorted by the unrelated meanings associated with the closest modern equivalent.

Grammatical and syntactical features of the original languages are not always possible to adequately represent in the modern translation. For example, the Hebrew verb stresses state, the Greek verb stresses kind of action, while the English verb emphasizes time.

At times the meaning of the original is ambiguous. The translator must decide whether to leave the translation ambiguous or attempt to remove the ambiguity—which could be potentially misleading if the incorrect meaning is chosen.

b.Translation types. Three major philosophies or theories concerning what makes the best translation result in three very different kinds of translations. Formal translations emphasize word-for-word equivalency in the translation process. This process gives a more exact and literal rendering of the original Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek. The result is an excellent study Bible. However, its readings are often rather wooden and stilted, and the aesthetic quality and cadences of the original may be lost. Dynamic translations emphasize meaning-for-meaning instead of word-for-word equivalence. The translator restructures the translation into idiomatic usage that represents the equivalent thought or meaning. The advantage of the dynamic translation is its idiomatic contemporaneity, its readability and clarity. Its drawback is that the interpretation may be misleading or erroneous—depending upon the correctness or incorrectness of the translator‘s interpretation. A paraphrase is far more free with the original than the dynamic translations. It is often intended more for devotional use than serious doctrinal study. Because a paraphrase is often more interpretation than translation, readers need to be careful how they use it.

Given the difficulties in translation and the different ways translation can be done, Bible students should be cautious in their choice of translations. A Bible translation prepared by a single denomination may be slanted or even skewed to support certain doctrines. A similar weakness also exists in a one-translator Bible, without the balance and input of many minds. Caution is also in order with regard to Bibles with systems of notes or interpretation. Likewise, translations into simplified modern language for children run the risk of distorting crucial biblical themes. The more interpretative versions should be diligently compared with a formal word-for-word translation, if not with the original Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek.