Change/Replace text within a book ?

Milford Charles Murray said:

Thank you for the reference.  I'm a bit "startled" that one could actually change a text. Somehow, the text seems a bit too sacrosanct to me to change it ....

Yes, I feel somewhat the same way. What is possible, isn't always what's best.

I have a different strategy with these types of things (e.g 'sinful nature' for 'flesh' in the NIV): I simply highlight such words with a unique visual filter (applied to the underlying Greek of a reverse interlinear), without actually changing the text.

Lionel B Dyck said:

Is it possible, or planned, to be able to change text within a book. 

For example, I would like to change my ESV text where doulos is translated as something other than slave so the text says slave.

I can believe that there may be other times where I would prefer the english translation to be a different word that more accurately reflects the original language.

Thanks

Changing doulous to slave and LORD-->Yahweh were the main reasons behind my original idea to create this visual filter: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/16999.aspx

George Somsel said:

One other thing that puzzles me is why so many seem eager to become slaves. 

We're all slaves to someone/something (c.f. Rom 6). I was bought for a price by a self-giving, gracious Master, who in doing so freed me from my previous slavery to sin, enslaving me now to righteousness and to Him. What a privilege to be the slave of the King of Kings...and then not only did He free me from the tyranny of sin, but I was adopted as a son. 

George, I strongly recommend MacArthur's book, Slave: http://amzn.to/macSlave  I hope that it gets made available in Logos very soon.

George Somsel said:

 The word δοῦλος in in Greek may have been used of those who were slaves, but it was also used of high-ranking officials in the service of the ruler.  It might in some cases be rendered "ambassador."  

Run this word study: logos4:Guide;t=Bible_Word_Study;lemma=lbs$2Fel$2F$CE$B4$CE$BF$E1$BF$A6$CE$BB$CE$BF$CF$82;wn=gnt$2F85702

Look in your lexicons (BDAG for example: logosres:bdag;hw=$CE$B4$CE$BF$CF$85$CD$82$CE$BB$CE$BF$CF$82;off=374)

Kittel states clearly: "All the words in this group serve either to describe the status of a slave or an attitude corresponding to that of a slave." logosres:tdnt;ref=TDNT.Vol._2,_Pg._261;off=-1

You will see that although most English translations using the word servant or bondservant, this translation doesn't do justice to the real meaning of the word.

Chris Lohroff said:

Lionel,

I did this recently after reading MacArthur's Slave.  I assume you are prompted by the same book?  Here is how I did it.

First I created the following highlight:

 

 

Then I created the following visual filter.  Notice that I also included the OT Hebrew words that MacArthur mentioned.  I realize that technically this isn't correct because I'm displaying the greek, but it's fine for my purposes.

Why are you changing things that aren't doulos to doulos?

Lionel B Dyck said:

I sent a note to the Crossway folks asking if there were plans to change the text in a future revision of the ESV and was told they had changed servant to bondservant where it made more sense but they had not plans to change it to slave.

imho slave makes sense

well, more or less you are saying that you (or the teachers you listen to, like JMA) are better translators than the ESV translation committee shock-ful of seasoned, conservative scholars. Same goes for all other translations that don't use "slave".  To me it's clear that this might rise some responses from people who are less convinced.

It might be that there isn't even a right or wrong answer to this question, since "slave" conveys a number of meanings to different people. When Paul says "I am a slave of Jesus", some might hear "I once was a slave of the devil but now Jesus has redeemed me and I now serve him, halleluya!" others might hear "Jesus is my Lord and he has the ultimate right to decide what I do and what is right or wrong for me" still others might hear "Jesus is a brutal master that destroys all my self-worth, punishes me at whim and for things I wasn't able to avoid". The word "slave" raises theological and cognitive aspects as well as emotional ones - and some listeners may even be unable to follow Paul's writing or a sermon because this word spins them off in their head into sequences of "Uncle Tom's cabin"  or whatever.

I think translators need to be very aware of the aspect of "doulos" or its Hebrew counterpart that the author was trying to refer to, and then wisely choose what English (or German...) word to select to convey the meaning as best as possible. When a text speaks of human beings sold on a market, "slave" may work well. Whether "slave" conveys the right meaning when somebody sells his work labour to another for a limited period of time in order to get rid of debts, this may be different (or not),  whereas the aspect of serving another (and in the context: freely out of love or thankfulness) may much better be reflected by "servant". 

Just my thoughts on this.

Mick     

Edited: PS I am thankful for Logos to be able to see various translations as well as the Greek text to understand better the choices the translators made - because sometimes there is more to think over than meets the eye.

Thanks. Definitely thought-provoking.I'm still bemused by the characterization as "politically correct" when I see no connection to political correctness as I understand it. But I do understand what aspects of meaning are lost (and gained) by translations such as servant or indentured servant vs. slave.There appears tp be a solid (but not compelling) argument for the translation "slave".

Jacob Hantla said:

Flip through your Lexicons for the word. Then look at the actual translation choices. I am not sure what motivates the slowness to use slave

I am not sufficiently knowledgeable in Greek to make an informed choice. I only know enough Greek to follow the argument in an informed manner. What I see is an issue where scholars who have that knowledge have made different choices for supportable reasons. I can also see reasons where slave may not have the appropriate connotation - it negates free choice and fails to carry the possibility of debt-repayment

As for Logos text comparison, it appears to show that my top Bibles are evenly divided on the issue. (Since one of my top 5 is JPS, my top 5 can be evenly divided in Greek.[;)])