Preaching as Translation

In Nehemiah 8 we read that a congregation of men, women and children of a certain age (assuming this is what was meant by “all who could understand…” in v.2) asked Ezra the scribe to read to them the Book of the Law. They had constructed a wooden platform (v.4) for him to speak from. And beside him stood various men tasked with helping the people to understand the Law (vv.4 & 7). Verse 8 reads, “They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and theygave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.” (ESV).

The important phrase I have bolded has caused some consternation among scholars. What activity exactly is Nehemiah referring to? One commentator writes,

“Much has been written on the term mᵉp̄ōrāš  in v. 8. We have translated it “translate,”… We must recognize that the Jews who spoke Aramaic needed someone to translate the Hebrew of the law for them in their own vernacular. Some modern scholars are not convinced, however, that mᵉp̄ōrāš denotes translation. They accept that the Jews in Judah could understand enough Hebrew to follow the reading of Ezra. It is thus either translating or interpreting. In v. 8, however, it seems that a distinction is made between translating (prš) and interpreting (bı̂n). In such a case our rendering is to be preferred.”[1]

Now, it is not my intention here to scrutinize the details of Nehemiah to work out exactly what happened at that bible conference. Rather, I want to ask a broader question about the distinction between “translating” and “interpreting” that is highlighted by this passage.[2] What is the difference between what translators do (like the translators of the ESV, or the NIV) and what paraphrasers, commentators and preachers do?

To give you my answer up front, there is not a sharp distinction between these roles. They are on a spectrum, part of the same process of “giving the sense” (or communicating the meaning) of God’s revelation.  

First, it might be helpful to ask ourselves, what is a word? A word is not (in the first place) a series of squiggles on a page, or a sequence of vibrations at different frequencies. These are ‘symbols’ of the word itself. A word is a packet of meaning. Words bring meaning from one person’s mind to another. When it comes to thinking about God’s word it is worth considering a few levels. I tend to think of a triangle:

What this diagram is meant to illustrate is that ultimately, the exact expression of the Father is the Son. Jesus is the Word of God. He is the full communication of God’s mind to us, through whom we come to have communion with God. Moving down a level, the word (i.e. message) about Jesus is the gospel. The gospel tells us that Jesus is Lord. And finally, moving to the bottom of the triangle, the words contained in the bible – arranged in sentences and paragraphs and books etc. bring the gospel of the Lord Jesus to us. As we approach the scriptures, we must consider (at least) these three levels if we are to clearly understand the mind of God. Jesus controls our exegesis of every word in scripture, and every word in scripture controls our understanding of who the real Jesus is.

But to return to our original question then: what is the difference between “translating” and “explaining” or preaching God’s word? God ordained that his exact, infallible words would be written down by Prophets and Apostles. These words were then copied by fallible Scribes, translated by fallible Scholars, and preached by fallible Evangelists and Pastor-Teachers. This means of course that we cannot trust everything our Pastors say, or our translations, or even every manuscript we have. There is no point encouraging a false confidence in these things – as some have attempted to do by making grand claims, for instance, about the LXX or the KJV or other translations as if God’s sovereignty has specially protected the perfection of these translations.

Instead, we need to encourage each other to understand this process and to listen to the inerrant, infallible word of God through the fallible preachers and translations we have in front of us. For be assured, it can still be clearly heard at every level – Jesus was and is with us (John 1:18), he is Lord (John 20:28), the kind of Lord who once healed a blind man (John 9:7). Moreover, this ‘messy’ process is not bad news. Rather, it is part of the good news that God includes and involves us in bringing his revelation to the world. We get to participate in bringing the truth about God to every tribe and tongue – even though our tongues are flawed and feeble.

In order to give the sense, different kinds of translations are required. Some allow us to go into the details and nuances of the exact original words. Others help us understand the context and flow of the passage better. As an example, how might we translate the phrase κύριον Ἰησοῦν⸃ in Romans 10:9. Most english translations go for “Jesus is Lord”, but other possible translations might communicate the meaning more fully. Given the reference to Joel 2 in v.13, perhaps “Jesus is Yahweh” would be a helpful translation, or “Jesus is the Lord”. And of course we could flesh out what Lord really means… “Jesus is the ruler of the Kingdom of God, the eternal sovereign of the universe, he bought you, he owns you, he is the dictator over your sex life and wallet.”  

Oftentimes I will hear people call this kind of preaching “Application”. But it seems to me that application has become an unhelpful term for us. What most people mean by “Application” is that once the preacher has communicated the sense of God’s word, he must then add in his own additional comments about what the congregation are to do or think in response. This is not the role of the preacher. The bible does its own application. Take 1 Cor. 1 for example – what is the application of Paul’sexposéof worldly wisdom throughout the chapter – boast in the Lord (v.31). As a preacher, I am not trying to add in additional ‘applications’ on top of the text, I am simply trying to translate the full meaning of the text to my hearers.

[1] F. Charles Fensham, The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, NICOT. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 217-218. Emphasis Added. mᵉp̄ōrāš is the word translated “clearly” in the ESV, while wayyāḇinû (with the root bı̂n) is translated “understood”.

[2] It is worth noting that the word “interpreting” here does not mean “giving one’s perspective on the text” as the word is often used by postmodernists today. Rather, in the older sense, it simply meant “explaining the meaning of the text” according to what the author intended to communicate.