Translation Issues
Translation Issues
Alternative Translations?
In the search for an explanation
in harmony with the rest of New Testament teaching, we offer several
alternative translations. Some are indicated in standard versions like KJV,
RSV, NIV, NRSV; some are suggested in commentaries and books. The bringing in
of alternative translations may seem a neat, but deceptive way of sliding round
an unacceptable statement: re-translate it to one’s preference and the problem
is gone! This, of course, is not our aim – nor, we hope, anyone’s. In many cases
no one particular translation is correct, or several may be correct. Where
words have a range of meaning, there can be many possibilities. Which one
adequately conveys the meaning of the author cannot be known with certainty. In
presenting various translations, we have not sought to say: “This one is
correct, and this alone, and this solves the problem.” We simply aim to show
that various translations are possible, and that different outcomes are reached
depending on how one chooses.
The Greek Words “Anthropos”, “Aner”, and “Gyne”
There are two words in Greek which can be translated “man”. Anthropos generally means “man” or
“mankind” (as distinct from God). The plural is anthropoi which usually means “men and women” or “people”, or
“human beings”. The other word is aner
(plural andres) which usually means
“man/men” as distinct from “woman/women”. It also is the Greek word for
“husband”. Gyne means “woman” or
“wife”. Whether aner should be
translated “husband”, or gyne “wife”
depends on the context and (as indicated by the translations) this is often a
matter of opinion, dependent on the translators’ understanding.
For example, in 1 Timothy 2:12
the NRSV offers the following:
I permit
no woman to teach or to have authority over a man.
But the footnotes indicate the translation could be:
I permit
no wife to teach or to have authority over her husband.
If the first is correct, the context is wider, and presumably in a
church setting. If the second, it appears to be restricted to a home setting,
or to a husband and wife matter within a church setting.
“Have Authority” or “Dominate”?
I do not
permit a woman to teach or to have authority (authentein) over a man. (1 Timothy 2:12, NIV)
There is disagreement among scholars as to the meaning of the word
authentein which occurs only here in
the New Testament. Suggested translations are “have authority” in a good sense,
or “dominate” in a bad sense.
Authentein contains within it the Greek word “self”, and self-assertiveness
in an undesirable sense is one of the meanings attributed to it. The King James
Version translates it as “usurp authority”; NEB “domineer over man”; RSV, NRSV,
NIV and GNB “have authority”; the Jerusalem Bible “tell a man what to do”;
Revised English Bible (1989) “dictate to the men”. W. E. Vine, in Expository Dictionary of New Testament
Words (1940) defines it as:
to
exercise authority on one’s own account, to domineer over.... In the earlier
usage of the word it signified one who with his own hand killed either others
or himself. Later it came to denote one who acts on his own authority; hence to
exercise authority, dominion.
The difficulty is that an answer cannot be sought by simply
looking up the word in Greek dictionaries or in word books (as in W. E. Vine,
quoted above), because they derive their definitions by deduction from usages
elsewhere in Greek literature. The discussions tend to be circular, because
some subjectivity inevitably creeps in when scholars examine the context and
draw conclusions. Translators in turn base their translations on the results of
academic research. Over the last twenty years the existence of the TLG (Thesaurus Linguae Graecae =
Treasury of the Greek Language) – a computer database with as many Greek texts
as can be found – has made a wider analysis possible, but this has not settled
the matter.
By typing authentein
into any internet search engine (like Google), many hundreds of entries will be
listed, many copying from one another, and some repeating material many decades
old.
The most recent analyses using the TLG seem to be by H. Scott
Baldwin (1995)
and Albert Wolters (2000), repeated in the 2005 edition of Women in the Church – An
Analysis and application of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, by Andreas Köstenberger and
Thomas R. Schreiner (editors). H. Scott Baldwin, studying
the verb authentein, considers “the
one unifying concept is that of authority”
and he lists the following as possible meanings in 1 Timothy 2:12: “to
control”, “to dominate”, “to compel”, “to influence someone”, “to flout the
authority of”. Which is the appropriate meaning has to be decided by context.
Albert Wolters, after examining the associated noun, authentes, considers that “there seems to be no basis for the claim
that authentein in 1 Tim. 2.12 has a
pejorative connotation, as in ‘usurp authority’ or ‘domineer’”. He would
approve, therefore, the translation “have authority”. But the meanings given by
H. Scott Baldwin do seem to us to be pejorative (e.g. “dominate”, “compel”) and
we should not assume that “the one unifying concept is that of authority” is the same as saying that authentein basically means “have
authority” in a good sense. Other writers continue to maintain the word has a
negative meaning. I. H. Marshall, The
Pastoral Epistles (1999), writes: “Ideas such as autocratic or domineering
abuses of power and authority appear to be more naturally linked with the verb
in view of the cognate nouns authentes
and authenteia”. Bruce W. Winter (2003) concludes his discussion
on authentein: “... it seems that
here the term carries not only the connotation of authority but also an
inappropriate misuse of it.”
In view of the authority which Paul elsewhere considers acceptable
for sisters such as his fellow workers (1 Corinthian 16:16), it seems
reasonable to think that the word authentein
bears the meaning of exercising a dominating and therefore undesirable
influence or authority. The normal word for “authority” in an acceptable sense
is exousia, the verb being exousiazein. Paul uses it several times:
“... the wife does not rule (exousiazein)
over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule (exousiazein) over his own body, but the
wife does” (1 Corinthians 7:4); “... the authority (exousia) which the Lord has given me for building up and not for
tearing down” (2 Corinthians 13:10).
It seems strange therefore if Paul had intended to say that a
woman should not exercise authority as such over a man that he does not use the
normal word exousiazein, the meaning
of which is comparatively straightforward.
Authority, in a good sense, is
rightly possessed by God alone. Jesus said:
He who
speaks on his own authority [literally: “from himself”] seeks his own glory;
but he who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no
falsehood. (John 7:18)
For I have
not spoken on my own authority [literally: “out of myself”]; the Father who
sent me has himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak. (John 12:49)
When authority is rightly exercised by Jesus, by Paul or by any
human being, it is a delegated authority. If authentein suggests an authority which is not delegated but seized
(KJV “usurp authority”), or exercised in a dominating manner, this would
reasonably explain Paul’s objection to a woman exercising it over a man, or a
wife over husband – or, of course, vice-versa.
If, on the other hand, authentein
does simply mean “have authority” in a neutral sense (as urged by scholars like
G. W. Knight III, and given in various translations), the context of 1 Timothy
– the crisis of false teaching and practice which Paul commissions Timothy to
sort out, problems in the behaviour, attitude and dress of women in Ephesus,
their need to learn rather than to teach – all these need to be borne in mind
when assessing this comment in the light of Scripture elsewhere, and before
seeking to make any modern application.
It will be interesting to see if research on Greek usage comes to
any agreed conclusion in years ahead. At the moment, looking at the debate in
books and on the internet, those who favour the wide involvement of women in
church work tend to argue that authentein
means “exercise a dominating authority”, while those who consider it
unscriptural for women to take any leadership or teaching positions, argue that
authentein means “exercise authority”
in a good sense (and that Paul forbids this to women). The issue is not
settled, therefore, by debate over the usage of authentein in Greek literature. The position we adopt in this book
is to consider Scripture as a whole, and on that basis we consider the Bible
does support teaching and leadership by women, as by men, provided they are
properly taught and behave in a Christ-like manner.
I Suffer Not a Woman – Rethinking 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient
Evidence, Richard & Catherine Kroeger (1992). This book has been much
quoted and much criticised. The writers aim to give detailed background and
analysis, to compare parallel grammatical usages in the New Testament, and
explain how translation alternatives are reached. They suggest (page 103) that
1 Timothy 2:12 should be translated, “I do not permit woman to teach nor to
represent herself as originator of man.... For Adam was created first, then
Eve.” We quoted this in our 1996 draft version of this book. Their
suggested translation of authentein
as “claim to be the originator” has received some, but not general, acceptance.
In their notes they
also refer to a fourth possibility which relies on understanding didaskein (“to teach”) as governing a
dative case rather than the usual accusative. This construction is used in
Revelation 2:14: “Balaam, who taught Balak [dative] to ...”. This would then
produce something like: “I certainly do not permit people to teach a woman that
she is superior to a man but she is to behave quietly. For Adam was created
first, then Eve.” If such a translation is correct, Paul is objecting to what
is taught to women, not by women, but we would like to see some
definite support amongst reputable scholars before advocating a translation
like this.
The Kroegers’ book
has been critically reviewed by S. M. Baugh in Westminster Theological Journal, Vol 56, 1994, pages 153-171, “The
Apostle Among the Amazons”. S. M. Baugh disagrees with their grammatical
analysis and their claims about Artemis and the influence of the priestess of
Artemis.
(www.cbmw.org/resources/reviews/suffernot.php).