Book Review: The New Testament: A Translation by David Bentley Hart

 

The Veil of Translation

As modern readers of the New Testament, we must acknowledge that there are some irreconcilable differences between the language we read and the language in which the New Testament is written. There is a kind veil between the words named translation. To determine whether or not the veil brings clarity to the original text or obscurity, we are indebted to the meticulous labor of translators. It is the translator who must decide whether to choose words that are more precise or more readable; to translate word by word or idea by idea. The veil must exist between the original text and the translated text is one fashioned by the translator himself.  

In David Bentley Hart's translation of the New Testament, his aim not to provide readability nor emphasize particular doctrines and dogmas, but rather to "make the original text visible through as thin a layer of translation as possible." Whether or not he accomplished what he set out to do in creating a wholly transparent and unbiased translation is debatable, but many of these choices succeed in giving us a sense of the strangeness and uniqueness of this collection of ancient documents. When we anticipate the words to say the same thing we have heard many times, they say something else- not something entirely new, but stated in a new way.

The Good Tidings

Hart's translation manages to capture the urgency with which the New Testament was actually written. One will notice in the first few chapters of the gospel that the narrative switches between past tense and present tense, almost without cause. Matthew 3:13 reads "Then Jesus arrives at the Jordan, coming from Galilee to John to be baptized by him." (Present tense) and only a few sentences later "Then Jesus was led up into the wilderness by the Spirit to be tried by the Slanderer." (Past tense) The translation, while awkward to read at times, does give the desired effect of the urgency and lasting importance of Christ's actions, most emphatically in Mark's account of the crucifixion, reading simply, "They crucify him." 

Hart's decision against using words that have a presupposed theological connotation was another triumph of the text. Instead of the "repent" he uses "change your heart" or "change your mind." Instead of "predestination" he chose the very literal translation "marked out in advance". When we encounter these phrases, it is possible to leave behind the theology we have packed into these terms and appreciate moreso the context from which those terms arose.

Even more peculiar to our ears is what he decided not to translate at all, such as the Greek words Logos and cosmos. Two situations from the book of John stand out. He renders the prologue as:

In the origin there was the Logos, and the Logos was present with God, and the Logos was god.

And the famous John 3:16 is given as:

For God so loved the cosmos as to give the Son, the only one, so that everyone having faith in him might not perish but have the life of the Age.

Leaving these two words untranslated was a brilliant and bold decision on Hart's part for two reasons. First, he is assuming that the reader knows something of what the author meant by these words. In the first case, the Logos, representing not simply "the Word of God" but the creative cause, reason and expression of God to the world as they relate to the metaphysics of early Judean and Greek philosophy. Secondly, it allows the text to maintain a unity in concept of these terms, even when their uses may vary. Consider that St Paul uses the term "cosmos" when speaking of the cosmic scope of Christ's redemptive work, as does St Peter to denote the dichotomy between the spirit and cosmos. Whether or not the concepts are distinct is not made clear in Hart's translation- the same word is used regardless, giving the reader the final say.

The last unique feature of this translation is that Hart allowed the voices of the individual writers of the New Testament to remain distinct. St John writes with simple, laconic phrases. St Paul with energetic run-on sentences to preach the good tidings. In fact, the Pauline corpus in particular blooms in Hart's treatment. The many letters have distinctions in subject while maintaining the same stream-of-thought style dictated in long, winding sentences. With all the grandeur of Romans, the mysticism of Second Corinthians, the affection of Philippians- each somehow manage to remain in stark Pauline style, all ultimately being written with the same underlying tone: urgency. It is apparent that Paul felt that that the gospel- translated here as "good tidings"- needed to be preached to all with an immediacy that is palpable.

The Translator's Notes

The translation has some downfalls, namely in its preface, footnotes and postscript. Scattered throughout Hart's notes are references to his fringe position on universalism. Particularly on the notes for two words: aiōnios and gehenna. He translates aiōnios as "the Age" instead of "eternal" and gehenna is translated "Vale of Hinnom" (in Christ's day, this is reference to a location outside the city in which refuse was disposed of and burned) neither of which are intrinsically poor translations. Hart insists that with these translations it ought to be clear that the Vale of Hinnom is a place in which individuals spend a non-descript period of time in "salvation by fire" which will then come to an end and all will be restored to God. While I take no issue that Hart is convinced by this perspective, it seems a stretch to claim that the meaning is inherent in the words themselves. Christ's references to "the Age" and "Vale of Hinnom" are both metaphorical so we still must determine where the reality behind these words lie. In fact, even his choice of translation lends itself to an understanding that this place and time transcend the dimensions we know as locations and periods of time and refer to something beyond our experience, Hart admits such possibility as well. Hart's tendency toward subversion, even of the church at times, is one that betrays his own stated goal of a translator with unbiased resolve. We cannot fault a writer for saying what he believes; but we should take note when this is done under the banner of mere objectivity.

Lastly, Hart seems to indicate that the cause of the prevalence of any doctrine of hell is simply that people have misunderstood the greek via the translations they have read. In his preface, he writes that other translations either accidentally or intentionally distort the text as to lose all credibility. While it is not said outrightly, this sentiment gives the impression that unless one reads the greek directly one has not experienced the Word of God in its fullness. An even more disagreeable undertone is that the Scriptures are not to be clearly understood by every man, nor perhaps even the Church, but by the scholars who must parse through words to find definitive meanings to extract and make God visible. To favor scholarly pedigree over prevalent Church tradition is to take up the iconoclasm of the age; that which resents the authority of the Church and does so under the guise of neutrality. 

God in Translation

There is a subtle question raised in Hart's translation that is worth asking: is it possible that the God of the Scriptures could be obscured beyond recognition?  

In the book, we encounter the same Man- the Anointed One Jesus, the Son of God- in His movements and teachings on earth. He is born, grows into a man, gathers other men and women to follow him, teaching and working miracles for the people. He is often found in the wilderness to pray. He is often found teaching in the synagogue. He is often moved to compassion. He is loved by His disciples. Then he is betrayed by one of His own, whom He doubtless loved. He suffers. He is crucified.  

Then, He is raised from the dead.

These are the good tidings.  

When we encounter the Word of God, in any translation, the stories themselves are so potent as to overcome any misgivings from the translators. This is not to say that all translations are created equal and that all offer the same clarity of detail, but the historical reality of Christendom inspired by these texts have proved themselves to be understood by those of every tongue, tribe and nation. The words may differ, but the story is the same. And so, as Pilate declares to the people, he likewise declares to us: Behold the Man. And thus we behold Him, in all of His glory and wonder and compassion in the New Testament. He is the Light that shines through the veil of translation to be seen by all, the same Light shines in the darkness and is conquered not.