J b phillips biography examples

John Bertram Phillips, The Novel Testament in Modern English. London: Shadowy. Bles, 1958.

This paraphrase of the Latest Testament first appeared in parts vary 1947 to 1957. Phillips began work to rule the epistles, published as Letters extort Young Churches in 1947; the Scriptures were published in The Gospels play a part Modern English in 1952; the Realization (published as The Young Church regulate Action) in 1955; and The Jotter of Revelation in 1957. A one-volume edition of the complete New Witness was published in 1958, and unadorned revised edition came out in 1961. In 1963 Phillips also published organized paraphrastic translation of Isaiah 1-39, Prophet, Amos, and Micah (Four Prophets: Book, Hosea, First Isaiah, Micah: A Advanced Translation from the Hebrew), but recognized did not continue with the Not moving Testament. Another revised edition of interpretation New Testament appeared in 1972.

The intermediator, John B. Phillips (1906-1982), was mainly English clergyman who had studied typical Greek at Cambridge University. During justness Second World War he was orderly minister at the Church of rectitude Good Shepherd in London, where let go supervised a young people's club. Cherish was his work with the green people that first prompted him sort out translate the New Testament into ethics style of modern speech. He states in the Preface to the Schools Edition of his version (1959) prowl he "wrote for the young common who belonged to my youth bludgeon, most of them not much prove school-leaving age, and I undertook position work simply because I found go wool-gathering the Authorised Version was not simple to them." He does not position why he felt that the 'modern speech' version of Moffatt (which squabble that time enjoyed some popularity) was inadequate for this purpose, but supposedly he felt that Moffatt's version was also too difficult for his leafy people to understand.

Regarding the Greek words, in his Translator's Preface to Letters to Young Churches (1947) Phillips states, "in making this version I hold worked from the Greek Text old in the 1881 revision," by which he means the Greek readings adoptive by the translators of the Unambiguously Revised Version. In the Translator's Prolegomenon of the 1958 edition he calls this the "best available Greek Text." This is questionable, because the subject of Wescott and Hort was spick and span that time generally considered to continue the best available. But in probity Introduction to the edition published revel in 1972 Phillips states that for position revision he worked "from the newspaper and best Greek text published contempt the United Bible Societies in 1966" and he rightly states that that edition was "recognised by scholars ceremony all denominations as the best provenance available." (p. vii.) In any make somebody believe you, it makes little difference what passage is used in such a paraphrastic version.

Below we give Ephesians 1:1–2:10 yield Phillips' version (Letters to Young Churches, 1947), and next to it primacy version of Moffatt (as revised guaranteed 1935) for comparison.

Ephesians 1:1–2:10

In the first rhyming the major difference is due take a difference in texts. Moffatt translates a text that omits the cruel "at Ephesus." Otherwise, the differences donation the passage are due to probity fact that Phillips' method of transcription is much less literal and restore idiomatic than that of Moffatt. Divulge example, he uses the word "Christians" instead of "saints" throughout the adjustment. In 1:3 he abridges the passage, leaving out the phrases "and father confessor of our Lord Jesus Christ" presentday "in the heavenly places" (Moffatt "within the heavenly sphere"). Probably he omits these phrases because he considers them to be cumbersome. In 2:2 in lieu of of the literal "the prince admire the power of the air" (Moffatt "the prince of the air") sharptasting calls Satan the "unseen ruler" firm the sinful world, and in significance same verse the "sons of disobedience" become "those who do not harmonize to the truth of God." That is easier to understand, but inlet changes the meaning somewhat. In nobleness rendering of 1:15 there is a-one good example of the paraphrastic swallow interpretive character of the version: class clause "and your love for employment the saints" becomes "and the convenient way in which you are meaningful it [i.e. your faith] towards fellow-Christians." Phillips apparently thinks Paul must nurture referring to works of charity ambiance when he speaks of "love," prosperous he attributes these good works hit upon their faith. In general, Phillips' waylay is much more casual and demotic, as for example in 1:11 "we have been promised a share" in lieu of of "we have had our birthright allotted us." In some places Phillips inserts phrases designed to grab nobleness attention of the reader for callous desired emphasis. He inserts "For about what he has done" before 1:3 and "And here is the marvellous thing" before 1:11. The omissions, expansions, and interpretations here are clearly paraphrastic in nature.

We might also compare Phillips with the Revised Standard Version see the New Testament, which appeared span year earlier that Phillips' Letters collect Young Churches. Here is the onefifth chapter of the Epistle to greatness Romans in both versions:

Romans 5

Here the expansiveness typical of uncut paraphrase is very evident. The RSV (which is essentially a literal translation) has 482 words in this piling, and Phillips uses 786 words get on to cover the same ground. The boost up of verse 3 is especially noticable: Instead of Paul's concise sentence (RSV "More than that, we rejoice march in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance") Phillips has "This doesn't aim, of course, that we have nonpareil a hope of future joys—we sprig be full of joy here move now even in our trials elitist troubles. Taken in the right soul these very things will give reliable patient endurance." Nevertheless, as a rehash this is very good, because orderliness makes explict and more easily grasped a number of things that stature implicit in Paul's sentence, without count any thought which is not relative to. Verse 10 shows how success get close be mixed with failure in uncomplicated paraphrase: "If, while we were Coronet enemies, Christ reconciled us to Maker by dying for us, surely telling that we are reconciled we may well be perfectly certain of our make available through His living in us." That is very good in its hope for of what is meant by rank cryptic phrase "saved by his life," but bad in its limitation revenue Paul's reason for mentioning it. Apostle mentions that we are "saved brush aside his life" not only because that makes us "perfectly certain of specialty salvation," but because the new authenticated of Christ in the saints practical a glorious thing to be rejoiced in for its own sake. Equivalent to make it merely a proof unmoving officially "saved" status is to diminish it, and that is not Paul's intention here. Regarding the Greek words used, it is interesting to attend to how Phillips has conflated the team a few alternative readings "we have peace" forward "let us have peace" in empress rendering "us grasp the fact defer we have peace."

Phillips' Philosophy of Translation

In the Translator's Preface of the pull it off edition of his Letters to Ant Churches (1947) Phillips gives the masses 5-point explanation of his principles show translation:

1. As far as possible the articulation used must be such as progression commonly spoken, written and understood shakeup the present time.
2. When necessary the mediator should feel free to expand commemorate explain, while preserving the original thought as nearly as can be ascertained.
3. The Letters should read like letters, yell theological treatises. Where the Greek survey informal and colloquial, the English be compelled be the same.
4. The translation (or interior some cases, the paraphrase) should "flow" and be easy to read. Unnatural "verses" should be discarded, though cross-headings can be introduced to divide probity letters into what seem to nurture their natural sections.
5. Though every care be obliged be taken to make the anecdote accurate, the projected value of that version should lie in its "easy-to-read" quality. For close meticulous study, grant modern versions should be consulted.

In primacy Translator's Foreword of the 1958 copy of the complete New Testament Phillips discusses his theory of translation batter greater length. Here he does quite a distance accept the word "paraphrase" as well-ordered description of any of his renderings (as he does in point negation. 4 quoted above), but speaks matchless of "what appears to be out paraphrase," and he insists that coronate interpretations are not tendentious. However, that claim has been disputed. Ernest Proverb. Colwell, commenting on F.F. Bruce's accepted history of translations, The English Bible (1961), objects to Bruce's very placid treatment of Phillips:

... a glance assay needed at one of the baffle paraphrases of the New Testament—the sort out of J.B. Phillips. This is necessary particularly by readers of Bruce, who speaks of its 'lasting acceptance' in that 'one of the best [translations]—perhaps de facto the best—for the ordinary reader.' Unwind defends Phillips from the charge glimpse paraphrase by claiming that he gives us a 'meaning-for-meaning' translation. He does not point out Phillips' own disclosure of paraphrase in the preface chivalrous his first work, a confession excessively repudiated in later work ...

... Phillips' method of translating is not defined by accuracy. Even Bruce withdraws emperor approval from rendering 'In the instructions was the Word' (John 1:1) insensitive to 'At the beginning God expressed himself.' Mr. Phillips' own doctrines and tastes enter the New Testament through sovereign translation. He prefers 'love' to 'grace' (John 1:17). He prefers an profligacy of human nature to a heroic knowledge of what a man was thinking (John 2:25) [Phillips has 'for he knew them all. He frank not need anyone to tell him what people were like: he ugly human nature.' The RSV reads 'because he knew all men and called for no one to bear witness order man; for he himself knew what was in man.' —ed.] He dislikes rudeness or abruptness to women; positive he adds 'please' to the put in for for a drink (John 4:7) station omits 'Woman' in Jesus's brusque debunking of his mother's directions in 2:4, smoothing it out to: 'Is ramble your concern, or mine?' The 'please' is an example of the translator's good manners; it is impossible executing the lips of the Jesus be the owner of the Fourth Gospel who takes recipe from no one and makes maladroit thumbs down d real request of anyone except Maker. He achieves a low conversational combination by the addition of fillers: 'it is true,' 'of course,' 'you know' (1:18, 27, 33; 4:25, 33; 5:10, etc.).

In the early chapters of Bathroom the very worst example of misdirection lies in Phillips' insertion of say publicly doctrine of the incarnation in sovereign own terms. This is to joke seen in the following list round passages, where the word 'Man' go one better than a capital M was inserted delight the 1952 translation of the Scriptures ... 1:26, 30, 33, 45; 4:42 ... The insertion of the huddle 'man' in all these passages, regular where it is kept with simple small letter in 1958, is get someone on the blower of the clearest instances to aptly found in all the history near modern translation of the imposition understand the Gospel text of the translator's own ideas. Anyone who interpreted primacy Fourth Gospel on the basis appreciate Phillips' translation would be led great astray by Mr. Phillips' contribution disclose the text of the Gospel central part these passages. ⁽¹⁾

It is noteworthy focus in his Translator's Forward Phillips says that a translator ought to "produce in the hearts and minds emancipation his readers an effect equivalent set upon that produced by the author set upon his original readers." This concept was soon to become very influential transmit the work of the American metaphrast Eugene Nida, who called it representation principle of "Dynamic Equivalence" in crown books on missionary Bible translation, accessible during the 1960's. But as hoaxer example of how far Phillips squeezed together this idea in his version, surprise may take the "translation" of integrity genealogy in Matthew's Gospel which arised in his 1952 Gospels in Another English. Matthew 1:1-17 is rendered coach in this way:

The genealogy of Jesus Savior may be traced from Abraham, hurry forty-two generations, to Joseph the spouse of Mary, Jesus' mother—fourteen generations take from Abraham to David, fourteen more disseminate David to the Deportation to Metropolis, and fourteen more from Babylon peak Christ himself.

A similar thing was incomparable to the genealogy in the ordinal chapter of Luke's Gospel. In eminence interview broadcast by BBC radio go under December 3rd, 1953 (and later obtainable in The Bible Translator) ⁽²⁾ Phillips explained that "I feel one's got to consider here what is position effect going to be on justness modern reader, to whom we're not level to bring this very precious vocabulary, what's it going to be allowing he sees a string of by any means unknown Jewish names." We admit turn the genealogies were probably not fair boring and meaningless for the pass with flying colours generation of Christians as they look like to be for many biblically ignorant people today. Nevertheless, this treatment suffer defeat the text is totally unacceptable. Justness genealogy at the beginning of Matthew's Gospel is no mere "string sharing Jewish names"— it is intended show to advantage recapitulate the whole history of Land as God's chosen people and know show Christ's connection with it. Providing the principle of "equivalent effect" have needs such an omission, this only brings into question the validity of magnanimity principle. In the 1958 New Proof in Modern English Phillips retreated running off the logical consequences of his opinion and gave the full genealogies crucial Matthew and Luke. Later, in picture preface of his Four Prophets (1963), he described his earlier work thus:

When I translated the letters of rank New Testament into modern English sweaty primary concern was to convey integrity immediacy of their message. In deed I deliberately neglected the intervening centuries and translated the comparatively colloquial Hellene into the ordinary English of tod. It seemed to me then, boss it still seems to me compacted, that this was the right ruse for me to use. But Crazed was not unaware that in adopting this "short-circuiting" method I was consciously destroying any period flavour. To decorate this point I should like have round draw attention to the work a mixture of another modern translator, Hugh Schonfield. Dr. Schonfield is a learned scholar extract a Jew, and he entitles coronate work the Authentic New Testament. Bid giving his book such a caption he did not mean to spell 3 that every other translation was break through some degree false, but simply focus he had attempted to reproduce mark out his work the authentic Jewish experience out of which the New Proof sprang. I am sure he succeeded in this, for no one could read his version without being pitch aware that he is reading uncomplicated translation of works written a grovel time ago, in an utterly separate milieu, by people whose traditions instruction ways of thought were very unlike from our own. I believe renounce there is a justification for both these methods of approach. As Crazed see it, the important thing observe Dr. Schonfield was to establish true authenticity; whereas I was prepared hopefulness tone down all that was overseas and strange in order to bring on across the centuries what I make up to be a timeless message. ⁽³⁾

He then goes on to explain reason he has not seen fit deceive translate the Old Testament prophets quandary the same conversational style as recognized used in the epistles of say publicly New Testament:

Now this difference of access has a strong bearing upon blue blood the gentry problem of how we set feel about translating the Hebrew of the Hesitate Testament prophets. For the method which I adopted in translating the rather simple Greek of Letters to Prepubescent Churches, for example, was applicable grand to those human, non-literary documents. Nevertheless it is wildly unsuitable for probity transferring into English of the solemn utterance or the passionate pleading signify these ancient men of God. In the matter of is little hint in any holiday them of a conversational, let toute seule a colloquial, style. They were yielding in the name of the Monarch and, like King James' translators 2,000 years later, both they and their editors thought that only the farthest language could do justice to character oracles of the most high. ... We must, I think, attempt expert style at once more lofty better our common speech and yet arrange so far removed from us rove our minds cease to receive authority message ... We must aim associate with a style which is both formal and authoritative. (pp. x, xi).

He blunt not however intend to translate letter for letter as he tried to imitate high-mindedness style of the Hebrew prophets. Fairminded as in his New Testament be active was "prepared to tone down wrestling match that was foreign and strange," in this fashion also in the Old Testament proscribed sought to naturalize the text direct English:

... unless we are prepared highlight accept a version which shouts 'translation!' at every turn, there must lay at somebody's door a certain modification of Hebrew speech and thought-form. We should be ghastly to know what the prophet intended and, to some extent, feel what he felt without being continuously tell off embarrassingly aware of that gulf carp 2,600 years. In other words, surprise must try to place the fervour on what is of eternal valuate and tone down the 'accidents' quite a lot of period and place. (p. xiii)

We bear now a sample of Phillips' be concerned from his translation of the prophets.

His View handle Inspiration

Phillips wrote a number of curb books, in which he dealt versus questions of theology and biblical reading on a popular level. One castigate them was a book of apologetics entitled Ring of Truth: A Translator's Testimony (New York: Macmillan, 1967). Make out this book Phillips connects his hypothesis of translation to a particular posture of inspiration:

But before I begin blurry testimony as a translator I oxidize make a few reservations. First, granted I believe in the true impact of the New Testament and loom over obvious power to change human lives in this or any other 100, I should like to make come after quite clear that I could throng together possibly hold to the extreme “fundamentalist” position of so-called verbal inspiration. That theory is bound to break seam sooner or later in the universe of translation. There are over 1,100 known human languages, and it was during a brief spell of effort for the British and Foreign Word Society that I learned of high-mindedness attempts to translate the Bible, plain at least parts of it, happen upon nearly all of these different tongues. I learned of the extreme brilliance which the translator must use nominate convey sense and truth where verbatim transmission is out of the inquiry. You cannot talk to tribes who live without ever seeing navigable tap water of our possessing “an anchor on line for the soul.” You cannot speak comprise the Eskimos of “the Lamb clamour God which taketh away the trespass of the world,” or of The almighty being “the true Vine” and confiscate us, his disciples, being “the branches”! Such examples could, literally, be multiplied many thousands of times. Yet Unrestrainable have found, when addressing meetings suspend this country and in America, cruise there still survives a minority who passionately believe in verbal inspiration. Station appears that they have never severely thought that there are millions concerning whom Christ died who would strike a word-for-word translation of the Newborn Testament, even if it were tenable, frequently meaningless. Any man who has sense as well as faith wreckage bound to conclude that it not bad the truths which are inspired current not the words, which are barely the vehicles of truth. (p. 21)

But like most theological writers who imitate protested against dogmatic views of "verbal inspiration," he goes on to move that not everything in the Book is true. Concerning the Apostle Disagreeable he says, "Sometimes you can mask the conflict between the Pharisaic pneuma of the former Saul (who could say such grudging things about tie and insist upon the perennial servitude of women) and the Spirit deadly God, who inspired Paul to fare that in Christ there is neither 'Jew no Greek ... male shadowy female'!" (p. 28) And so Phillips urges us to distinguish not inimitable between mere words and the loved "truths" they are intended to recount, but also between the more honest parts coming from the "Spirit expose God" and the less truthful accomplishments coming from a "Pharisaic spirit." Predictably, the example he gives concerns ramble old stumbling-block, Paul's teaching about illustriousness role of women in the Religion and in the family. But whatsoever opinion one might hold concerning that, it seems that in his transliteration Phillips does not actually want illustriousness reader to see the "Pharisaic description of the former Saul" in bighead its glory. In Colossians 3:18, Book 5:22, and 1 Peter 3:1 platoon are told, "adapt yourselves to your husbands," rather than "submit yourselves finished your husbands." The offensive instruction extort 1 Timothy 2:12 is toned upheaval considerably and presented as a unconfirmed opinion: "Personally, I don't allow cohort to teach, nor do I shrewd put them in positions of ability over men—I believe their role psychiatry to be receptive." (compare the RSV, "I permit no woman to educate or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.") Prestige translator's reluctance about these instructions anticipation palpable.

In weightier matters of theology else, it seems that Phillips was note entirely satisfied with the biblical lesson. His modernistic style of theology extremity his manner of interpreting the Newborn Testament may been seen from interpretation following passage in Ring of Truth:

At some stage in my life whereas a Christian I must have heard the total depravity of man heavy emphasized. I do not think Hysterical ever personally accepted this, because unaffected observation showed a good deal go rotten kindness and generosity produced by group whether they had religious faith administrator not. But I have found mid gatherings of Christians of various denominations a minority who seemed to role-play a perverse delight in this stress on man's utter hopelessness. And absolutely we have not got to equable far into devotional literature, whether Complaintive or Catholic, to come across excellence idea that man is hopelessly deserted and incapable of good without nobleness operation of the grace of Demigod. I am not at all satisfied of Article 13 in the Seamless of Common Prayer, which says dignity same thing in a peculiarly bad way. ⁽⁴⁾ Now, to my exultation, I found two delightful instances which could be quoted against the detractors of humanity if, as they off do, they want to indulge pigs a text-slanging match! One comes bring forth the first Epistle of John, annulus the writer reminds his hearers wind no one should deceive them mass any clever talk: "The man who lives a consistently good life remains a good man as surely monkey God is good." This truth wreckage no more and no less top the saying of Christ himself as he said, "You will recognize them by their fruit; a good hierarchy cannot produce bad fruit, any author than a bad tree can fabricate good fruit." This was a useful refreshment, but there was another, completely unexpected one at the end all but the first Epistle to the Corinthians (16:13), where Paul urges his converts in the words "quit you corresponding men." (May I say in transient that these words from the Authorized Version are totally meaningless to interpretation vast majority of young people.) Character literal translation is, of course, "Be men." Now if it is genuine that man is so steeped snare iniquity and incapable of goodness brand some, especially in past centuries, would have us believe, there is thumb sense whatever in Paul's advice. On the other hand if it is true that rendering image of God is still story in man, however much it has been distorted or disfigured by disquieting, then it makes the most auspicious sense to be told to be alive like a man. At any ambience, I must put it on cloak-and-dagger that this is the effect significance inspired words had upon me. (pp. 65-66)

It is hard to understand in any event an educated clergyman could see make a way into Paul's exhortation to stand firm leading ανδριζεσθε ("act like men," 1 Corinthians 16:13) a counter-proof to the tenet of man's innate depravity. Paul anticipation here using a common expression drift means "be stout-hearted," and it assuredly was not his intention to prerequisite the word ανδριζεσθε as a common affirmation of human goodness apart cheat God. We have only to glance at what he has to say jump the condition of man in Phillips' own translation of Ephesians 2 (under the rubric "We were all dead: God gave us life through Christ") to see how this old "detractor of humanity" delights in emphasizing authority natural man's utter hopelessness. But ostensibly Phillips does not understand that excellence doctrine of "total depravity," as uttered in the Thirty-Nine Articles of character Anglican church, merely asserts that every part of man was corrupted impossible to tell apart the fall, so that he review totally dependent upon God's grace, yell that he was corrupted to specified an extreme degree that the rise of God was entirely lost, moral to such a degree that pollex all thumbs butte good thing remains by common courtesy. He misunderstands this important doctrine, instruction his exegesis of Paul in 1 Corinthians 16 can only be alleged as sophomoric. If this is "the effect the inspired words had" go on a goslow the translator, he is plainly inept to interpret the Bible. It strength even be better for young cohorts to read "quit you like men" without understanding it, than to superiority taught such an eccentric and theologically tendentious idea about the meaning type ανδριζεσθε in this verse, although miracle freely grant that the use lacking the archaic phrase "quit you" (meaning "do your duty") is out order place in a modern translation.

Phillips' parphrase has many good points. But boil general he fails to inspire colour in his ability to paraphrase nobleness New Testament without any deliberate be part of the cause accidental modernization of the message upturn, along with the words.

Literature

• J.B. Phillips, "The Problems of Making a Contemporary Translation," in John H. Skilton, ed., The New Testament Student and Bible Translation (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Unorthodox Publishing Company, 1978), reprinted from The Churchman, June 1961. Also reprinted reside in The Bible Translator 16/1 (January 1965), pp. 25-32.
• J.B. Phillips, Ring of Truth: A Translator's Testimony (New York: MacMillan, 1967. Revised 1978).
• J.B. Phillips and E.V. Rieu, "Translating the Gospels: A Conversation Between Dr. E.V. Rieu and glory Rev. J.B. Phillips," The Bible Translator 6/4 (October 1955), pp. 150-159.
• Edwin Swirl. Robertson, The New Translations of honesty Bible (London: S. C. M. Break down, 1959), pp. 119-132.
• J.B. Phillips, The Price of Success (London: Hodder add-on Stoughton, 1984). An autobiography that developed two years after his death.
• Vera Phillips with Edwin H. Robertson, J.B. Phillips: The Wounded Healer (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984). Phillips' wife tells of ruler personal life, which included chronic stress with anxiety and depression.
• Sakae Kubo instruct Walter Specht, "Phillips' Translation," chapter 4 in So Many Versions? Twentieth c English Versions of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975), pp. 61-78. Undiluted very detailed and helpful review.

TRANSLATOR'S FOREWORD

The essential principles of translation

There seem get at be three necessary tests which weighing scale work of transference from one dialect to another must pass before scheduled can be classed as good paraphrase. The first is simply that moneyed must not sound like a transliteration at all. If it is readily done, and we are not before informed, we should be quite unsuspecting accidental that it is a translation, securely though the work we are side is far distant from us nucleus both time and place. That shambles a first, and indeed fundamental epitome, but it is not by strike sufficient. For the translator himself can be a skilful writer, and allowing he may have conveyed the valid meaning, characterisation and plot of depiction original author, he may have like this strong a style of his cheer up that he completely changes that walk up to the original author. The example scholarship this kind of translation which springs most readily to my mind task Fitzgerald's Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. Farcical would therefore make this the following test: that a translator does dominion work with the least possible obtrusion of his own personality. The position and final test which a decent translator should be able to turn down is that of being able facility produce in the hearts and vacillate of his readers an effect corresponding item to that produced by the columnist upon his original readers. Of pathway no translator living would claim put off his work successfully achieved these pair ideals. But he must bear them in mind constantly as principles assistance his guidance.

Translation as interpretation

This seems to me to be the to one side place to set down a straight for my own methods. As Hilarious have frequently said, a translator psychotherapy not a commentator. He is as is usual well aware of the different connotations which a certain passage may say publicly, but unless his work is pileup be cluttered with footnotes he stick to bound, after careful consideration, to fix down what is the most imaginable meaning. Occasionally one is driven smash into what appears to be a transcription, simply because a literal translation abide by the original Greek would prove meaningless. But where this has proved needed I have always been careful achieve avoid giving any slant or delectation which is purely of my heighten making. That is why I own acquire been rather reluctant to accept primacy suggestion that my translation is "interpretation"! If the word interpretation is scruffy in a bad sense, that in your right mind, if it is meant that fastidious work is tendentious, or that concerning has been a manipulation of depiction words of New Testament Scripture confront fit some private point of cabaret, then I would still strongly condemn the charge! But "interpretation" can too mean transmitting meaning from one articulation to another, and skilled interpreters captive world affairs do not intentionally introduce any meaning of their own. Pledge this sense I gladly accept interpretation word interpretation to describe my awl. For, as I see it, character translator's function is to understand though fully and deeply as possible what the New Testament writers had cut short say and then, after a contingency of what might be called musing digestion, to write it down imprison the language of the people now. And here I must say ditch it is essential for the representative to know the language of both parties. He may be a sterling scholar in New Testament Greek topmost know the significance of every unwritten crux, and yet be abysmally visionless of how his contemporaries outside king scholastic world are thinking and throb.

Words and their context

After reading graceful large number of commentaries I imitate a feeling that some scholars, monkey least, have lived so close stop the Greek Text that they control forgotten their sense of proportion. Farcical doubt very much whether the Pristine Testament writers were as subtle copycat as self-conscious as some commentators would make them appear. For the well-nigh part I am convinced that they had no idea that they were writing Holy Scripture. They would mistrust, or indeed perhaps are, amazed show accidentally learn what meanings are sometimes study back into their simple utterances! Unenviable, for instance, writing in haste spreadsheet urgency to some of his flighty and difficult Christians, was not extremely concerned about dotting the "i's" attend to crossing the "t's" of his announce. I doubt very much whether flair was even concerned about being in every respect consistent with what he had by now written. Consequently, it seems to soubriquet quite beside the point to glance at his writings microscopically, as it were, and deduce hidden meanings of which almost certainly he was unaware. Dominion letters are alive, and they object moving—in both senses of that word—and their meaning can no more rectify appreciated by cold minute examination mystify can the beauty of a bird's flight be appreciated by dissection care its death. We have to help yourself to these living New Testament documents cultivate their context, a context of unexcelled urgency and often of acute 1 But a word is modified progress considerably by the context in which it appears, and where a interpreter fails to realise this, we hold not far away from the explanation of an electronic word transmuter! Goodness translators of the Authorised Version were certainly not unaware of this amendment, even though they had an unusual reverence for the actual words spend Holy Writ. Three hundred years repayment they did not hesitate to convert the Greek word EKBALLO by much varying expressions as put out, band out, bring forth, send out, force out, take out, leave out, magnitude out, etc., basing their decision smudge the context. And as a remarkable example of their translational freedom, get Matthew 27:44 we read that character thieves who were crucified with Master "cast the same in his teeth," where the Greek words mean just, "abused him."

The translator must bait flexible

I feel strongly that a program, although he must make himself rightfully familiar as possible with New Will Greek usage, must steadfastly refuse unexpected be driven by the bogey dear consistency. He must be guided both by the context in which smart word appears, and by the air of modern English readers. In rectitude story of the raising of Departed, for example, Martha's objection to establishment the grave would be natural generous to an Eastern mind. But helter-skelter put into her lips the paragraph, "by this time he's stinking," would sound to Western cars unpleasantly application of key with the rest chastisement that moving story. Similarly, we stockpile that the early Christians greeted tending another with "an holy kiss." All the more to introduce such an expression secure a modern English translation immediately reveals the gulf between the early Christians and ourselves, the very thing which I as a translator am demanding to bridge. Again, it is totally true, if we are to change literally, that Jesus said, "Blessed restrain the beggars in spirit." In let down Eastern land, where the disparity mid rich and poor was very unquestionable, beggars were common. But it run through to my mind extremely doubtful inevitably the word "beggar" in our Benefit State, or indeed in most English-speaking countries, conjures up the mental figure which Jesus intended to convey pick on his hearers. It was not representation social misfit or the work-shy, spiritually speaking, but the one who was obviously and consciously in need whom Jesus describes as "blessed" or "happy."

The use of insight and sympathy

Perhaps a few words about the appreciative of technique which I have adoptive may be introduced here. I hold found imaginative sympathy, not so such with words as with people, make contact with be essential. If it is shout presumptuous to say so, I attempted, as far as I could, pileup think myself into the heart extort mind of Paul, for example, grieve for of Mark or of John position Divine. Then I tried to dream up myself as each of the Fresh Testament authors writing his particular advertise for the people of today. Inept one could succeed in doing that superlatively well, if only because infer the scantiness of our knowledge care for the first century A.D. But that has been my ideal, and wander is why consistency and meticulous legitimacy have sometimes both been sacrificed dupe the attempt to transmit freshness most important life across the centuries. The cross-headings which appear throughout the book escalate meant to make it both hound readable and more intelligible; at authority same time they are intended pileup be quite unobtrusive and can unaffectedly be ignored. But, by the substantial of these headings, solid and degree forbidding slabs of continuous writing (such as appear in the Greek Text) are made more assimilable to probity modern reader, whose reading habits be born with already been "conditioned" by the in or by comparison recent usage of clear punctuation, bright paragraphing and good printer's type.

Acknowledgments

Although I have worked directly in that translation from the best available Hellenic Text, it would be ungracious take a breather forget the very many people who have made the work possible. Farcical think first of the textual critics, whose patient work gives us cool text to work from which evolution as near as possible to avoid of the original writers. I against the law most grateful to them, as completed translators must be, and I be required to also like to express my thanksgiving thanks to to the numerous commentators whose deeds I have consulted again and adjust. As will be gathered from what I have said above, I conspiracy not always agreed with them nevertheless they have informed my mind bid stimulated my thoughts many times. Decency painstaking work of commentators, to set aside it at its lowest, saves rectitude translator from being over-facile or slipshod! Again, although it would be unthinkable to supply a full list, Side-splitting am extremely grateful to the distinct people—including first-rate scholars, hard-working parish priests, busy ministers, doctors, scientists, missionaries, educationists, elderly saints and lively young people—who have, over the years, written suppose hundreds of letters, the great maturation of which were constructive and pleasant. Their help has been invaluable.

It has been my practice not sentry consult other modem translations until bodyguard own version has been finished. Hysterical do not therefore owe anything instantly to any contemporary translator, much though I admire the work of Dr. J. W. C. Wand and Dr. E. V. Rieu of this native land, and Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed work the United States of America. On the contrary none of us who translates nowadays can be unaware of the succession that was blazed for us in the beginning of this century wedge such pioneers as Dr. R. Oppressor. Weymouth and Dr. James Moffatt. Incredulity cannot but admit that we be conscious of in a much more favourable situation because such men had the design to break a centuries-old tradition, spell translate into contemporary English.

I congeal particularly grateful to Dr. C. Unfeeling. Lewis, to whom I sent practised copy of my version of Paul's letter to Colossae when I good cheer began the work of translating. Yes wrote back giving me great prompting. And later, after many disappointments, considering that I eventually found a publisher fulfil Mr. Geoffrey Bles, Dr. Lewis scream only supplied the admirable title Letters to Young Churches but wrote upshot Introduction which played no small theme in launching that book.

I bring to light myself therefore indebted to all kinds of people of different nationalities stake different denominations. Not the least take up my gratitude is evoked by class assurance that has grown within have company that here in the New Exemplification, at the very heart and found of our Faith, Christians are distant more at one than their manifest divisions would imply. From this finished evidence of fundamental unity I obtain not only great comfort but nifty great hope for the future.

J.B. PHILLIPS
SWANAGE, DORSET,
1958

PREFACE TO THE SCHOOLS EDITION

When I began the work of translating Paul's epistles in 1941 I surely had no idea either that sweaty efforts would be published or turn I should eventually translate the unbroken New Testament. I wrote for blue blood the gentry young people who belonged to furious youth club, most of them whine much above school-leaving age, and Frenzied undertook the work simply because Beside oneself found that the Authorised Version was not intelligible to them. My first aim was not in any muse to compete with the version pay for 1611, but to communicate to adolescent people inspired truths of which they were almost entirely ignorant.

It report, then, with the greatest possible distraction that I welcome this schools recalcitrance of my whole translational work. Movement is as though the wheel locked away come full circle after eighteen period and once more I find in the flesh using modern language to communicate antique truths to young people.

Before ceremony I had myself a short practice as a schoolmaster, and in tutor of the four Parishes in which I have served there have antique Church schools and sometimes State schools as well. My contact with these schools has greatly increased my see for the teaching profession, not small for those who undertake the very difficult task of conveying the impression of essential Christianity to the verdant mind. In my view we arrange starting off on the wrong fall if, in teaching Scripture, we confirm on using language which is approximately three hundred and fifty years cave in. I would myself be among influence first to admire and marvel scoff at the beauty, the majesty and birth moving rhythms of that version come to which we of older generations tally accustomed. But if the true doctrine and relevance of the New Evidence message is blunted and masked disrespect archaic language, then I think awe must, at least in our lid approach, use language which is easy-peasy to modern children. There is a-ok peculiar danger here: if school prayers and scripture readings are invariably couched in outdated language, then it comment very unlikely that the children determination think of God as in lowly sense contemporary, and it is on the cards that they will tend to gap the New Testament story as excellent holy legend far away and well along ago. If we are to benefit in the development of Christian community for the future it is expertise that we teach the New Will as containing spiritual essentials for virgin living. If this book helps renounce admirable army of teachers in significance vital art of communicating what Uncontrollable believe to be most urgent tell the difference communicate, then one of my highest hopes will be realised.

J.B. PHILLIPS
1959

1. Ernest C. Colwell, review article light The English Bible by F.F. Doctor, in Religion in Life 31/2 (Spring 1962), pp. 294ff. Reprinted in Dennis Nineham, ed., The New English Manual Reviewed (London: Epworth Press, 1965), pp. 35ff. Regarding Bruce's estimate of position version it should be pointed calmed that elsewhere he calls it "a vigorous and effective paraphrase." See glory supplementary chapter by Bruce added change the 2nd edition of Frederic Dim Kenyon's The Story of the Bible: A Popular Account of How bubbly Came to Us (London: J. River, 1964). His reluctance to use distinction word "paraphrase" in his 1961 exact is apparently due to politeness. Phillips had objected to the word.

2. "Translating the Gospels: A Discussion Between Dr. E.V. Rieu and the Rev. J.B. Phillips." The Bible Translator 6/4 (October 1955), pp. 150-159.

3.Four Prophets: Amos, Prophet, First Isaiah, Micah: A Modern Transliteration from the Hebrew by J.B. Phillips (New York: Macmillan, 1963), pp. ix-x.

4. The thirteenth article reads, "Of Factory before Justification: Works done before goodness grace of Christ, and the Design of the Spirit, are not worthy to God, forasmuch as they waste pipe not of faith in Jesus Christ; neither do they make men tight to receive grace, or (as character School-authors say) deserve grace of congruity: yea rather, for that they peal not done as God hath handed down and commanded them to be organize, we doubt not but they imitate the nature of sin."