Comments on: The Son of Man and Other Fixed Phrases

By: Coming Back to English Generics « ΕΝ ΕΦΕΣΩ

Coming Back to English Generics « ΕΝ ΕΦΕΣΩ — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 05:29:50 +0000

[...] Joel thought such an approach might be valid for familiar phrases, but even then he wouldn’t consider it acceptable. [...]

By: Peter Kirk

Peter Kirk — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:14:09 +0000

For the title, how about “The Human Being” or “The Human One”?

I would agree that huios anthropou in for example Hebrews 2:6 doesn’t need to be translated the same, because it is a different expression and does not refer directly to Jesus anyway. But then “a human being” works well there except that there is an issue over the “him” or “them” at the end of the line.

By: Joel

Joel — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:06:25 +0000

My general question is precisely if well-known wrong translations should be retained.

Beyond that question, there are issues of fact. Which best translates the Greek: “Son of Man,” “Child of Man,” “Son of Humanity,” “Child of Humanity,” “Human Son,” “Member of Humanity,” “Human,” etc.?

Similarly, I think my own “thin whisper of a sound” captures the Hebrew better than “still, small voice.” But there are two questions: Am I right? And if so, what does that mean for future translations?

(Incidentally, I tend to think that uios tou anthropou, literally “son of the man,” need not be translated the same way as uios anthropou, literally “son of [a] man.” And I’m okay with “son” for uios, but I’m not convinced that “the anthropos” is “man” in modern English. But, again, whether I’m right or not, there are still two issues, one factual and one theoretical.)

By: Tim Goodbody

Tim Goodbody — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:31:26 +0000

Hi,
I think semiotically “The Son of Man”, referring (arguably even in Daniel) to Christ should be approached more cautiously in terms of inclusive language than the more general biblical phrase “son of man” which is not always specific in its reference and might therefore more easily be rendered as “child of humanity”. That does the trick in terms of inclusivity but it is rubbish because it will always be in the shadow of the original.

The same thing happened with 1 Kings 19 12. Gentle whisper (NIVI) or sound of sheer silence (NRSV) will always be secondary to “still small voice” (KJV) because of the last line of Dear Lord and Father of Mankind. I don’t know much Hebrew but I do recall that none of these three options fully encompass the “small thin silence” of the original.

Where a phrase has gained weight through cultural incorporation (as with the sparrow) we ought to tread carefully before discarding it, though of course “The Son of Man” does wield doctrinal significance as well!