They used textual criticism (comparing of texts/translations) even though they had very few copies to work with:
Therefore let no man’s eye be evil, because his Majesty’s is good; neither
let any be grieved, that we have a Prince that seeketh the increase of the
spiritual wealth of Israel; (let Sanballats and Tobiahs do so, which therefore
do bear their just reproof) but let us rather bless God from the
ground of our heart for working this religious care in him to have the
translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined.
They did not condemn other translations as not being the Word of God:
Now to the latter we answer, that we do not deny, nay, we affirm
and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English set
forth by men of our profession (for we have seen none of theirs of the
whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of
God: as the King’s speech which he uttered in Parliament, being translated
into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King’s speech,
though it be not interpreted by every translator with the like grace, nor
peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, every where.
They did not consider any translation to be a perfect translation of the Word of God, did not agree that translations shouldn’t be updated, but still affirmed that imperfect translations were still the Word of God:
No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word,
or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes
may be noted in the setting forth of it.
Their work needed improvement, and although they were criticized for amending/changing their previous work, they refused to stop so that they could continually improve upon the translation (they did not consider their translation work the static authority, and did not leave the 1611 translation untouched/unimproved):
Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavil and objection of
theirs against us, for altering and amending our Translations so oft;
wherein truly they deal hardly and strangely with us. For to whom ever
was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he
had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? If we will be sons of the truth, we must consider what it speaketh, and trample upon our own credit, yea, and upon other men’s too, if either be any way a hinderance to it. This to the cause.
The Translators established the Greek and Hebrew as the authority, NOT their work, and set the standard that Hebrew/Greek manuscripts are the authority, not English translations of it:
If you ask what they had before them, truly it was the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the
Greek of the New. These are the two golden pipes, or rather conduits, where through the olive branches empty themselves into the gold. If truth be to be tried by these tongues, then whence should a translation be made, but out of them? These tongues therefore (the Scriptures, we say, in those tongues) we set before us to translate, being the tongues wherein God was pleased to speak to his Church by his Prophets and Apostles.
In cases where there were not enough evidences of a word or passage for them to confidently translate it, they left it out, or footnoted it:
It hath pleased God in his Divine Providence here and there to scatter
words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness, not in doctrinal
points that concern salvation, (for in such it hath been vouched that the
Scriptures are plain) but in matters of less moment, that fearfulness
would better beseem us than confidence, and if we will resolve, to resolve
upon modesty with S. Augustine, (though not in this same case altogether,
yet upon the same ground) Melius est dubitare de occultis, quam
litigare de incertis: It is better to make doubt of those things which are secret,
than to strive about those things that are uncertain. There be many words
in the Scriptures which be never found there but once, (having neither
brother nor neighbour, as the Hebrews speak) so that we cannot be
holpen by conference of places…Now in such a case doth not
a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily?
The Translators valued multiple source texts and translations to obtain clarity, and employed textual criticism on things that were doubtful from the Greek:
For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident; so to determine
of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the
judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption. Therefore as S.
Augustine saith, that variety of translations is profitable for the finding
out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense
in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good; yea, is
necessary, as we are persuaded.
The Translators intentionally avoided leaving in old, archaic words or words particular to the “church establishment” in their translation, or leaving in obscure wordings that might make their translation difficult to read (they translated intentionally into modern English in spite of criticism):
Lastly,we have on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when
they put washing for Baptism, and Congregation instead of Church: as
also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in
their Azimes, Tunike, Rational, Holocausts, Praepuce, Pasche, and a number
of such like, whereof their late translation is full, and that of purpose
to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by
the language thereof it may be kept from being understood.
The Translators believed they would make what was good better, NOT perfect:
so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen
by their labours, do endeavour to make that better which they left so
good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade
ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us.
No comments:
Post a Comment