By: author

author — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:43:06 +0000

More on how people read scripture: preachers say it is a matter of whether the Scriptures read us, that is, whether the Lord of the Scriptures has a hearing in receptive minds and hearts. I, with Luther and Rosenzweig, say that a society’s Bible-reading habits show up in that society’s character–let me suggest in the way it regards, cares for the poor, the orphans, the widowed, the prisoner, the foreigner. Neither the Tanakh/OT or Jesus let anyone “off the hook” on those counts.

By: author

author — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:33:49 +0000

Rosenzweig was saying more than that the two “spirits” joined as one in a new translation: the product good be for good or evil–that’s my way of saying it. For example, the Luther Bible became the basis (a leading basis?) for modern German; the case is strong for that. Rosenzweig and Martin Buber were preparing a new German translation of the Hebrew/OT Scriptures that would “make room for the Hebrew” as Oona Eisenstadt put it in a 2001 article in the Journal of the American Academy of Religion. The gist of the effort was that modern, Protestant, Lutheran, German society left little room for the Jews, and the Bible most Germans read was one reason for it. Well, Herr Professor Rosenzweig, there is something to that, but to impute so much systemic Anti-Semitism to the Scriptures in a modern German translation is too great a burden to shove onto Doktor Luther, even if he pulled his own antisemitic weight (the greatest ones sometimes have compensating flaws). But Rosenzweig had a point: at least many Germans, including German Jews, had developed Bible reading habits (if they read the Bible) that ranged far afield from the gospel teachings or the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings (Tanakh). Many people placed their highest Christian or cultural hopes in German imperialism and nationalism, and there was the potential terror. So what’s my point? It is that everyone and all groups sooner or later turn the Scriptures to their own preferred meanings and uses. The only antidote is to keep oneself turning constantly, faithfully to the LORD of Scripture. Rosenzweig and Buber translated so that modern, western Jews would change their minds and their reading habits as they read a new, modern German translation that resembled the Hebrew Scriptures in its meaning and force. And Rosenzweig had a point I think is true after all these years, that the Scripture translation most used in a Christian culture has dominant influence. That was true of the Authorized (“King James”) Version for the Protestant, English-speaking world, but no longer. (For Catholics it was the Latin Vulgate and its translation, and is it not true of Arabic culture and the Qur’an?) But look now at us with our multiple translations–our versions–and while we find great freedom in our textual choices, have we any more freedom in contemplating the will of the LORD? I believe the freedom is there should one seek it; I think few actually seek freedom’s depths as they might, the “oughts” and “habits” in which we move and have our being are so strong.

By: author

author — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:05:17 +0000

At least one translation uses the term “genii” instead of “spirits.” Aside from changes in the way we use language, “genii” fits – genius is an ancient word referring to the essential spirit of something; usually we connect it with pagan conceptions, but not always.

Comments on: The Wing-Beat

By: author

By: author

By: author