13. The Scriptures in the original, and the translations, p. 415.
Because the Scriptures are certain for the use of all Christians without distinction of class, generation, age, etc., as they themselves teach very emphatically,1139) it is God's will that they also be translated into the various human languages. Recognizing the divine will, the first Christian Church also provided for translations of the Scriptures into foreign languages.1140) Nevertheless, there is not to be taught an absolute necessity of reading the Scriptures for the attainment of salvation. Absolutely necessary is only the knowledge of the main points of the Christian doctrines, through which repentance and faith in the forgiveness of sins acquired by Christ come about in a man.1141) This knowledge, however, can also be imparted by merely listening to a sermon, discourse, instruction, etc., taken from the Scriptures. This is also what the doctrines of dogmatism teach when they speak of the necessitas
1139) Deut. 6:6-9; Jos. 1:8; Is. 34:16; Neh. 8:2-8; 2 Kings 23:1-2; Luke 16:29 ff.; Jn. 5:39; 20:31; Acts 17:11; 2 Thess. 2:15; 1 Jn. 1:4; 2:13-14; 2 Tim. 3:15; Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 5:27. The dogmatists use to say: Finis cui Scripturae Sacrae omnes sunt Christiani, imo omnes homines. [“The end to which the Sacred Scriptures are for all Christians, yes, all men.”]
1140) Detailed news about it also with Gerhard, Loci, L. De Script. S., § 494 sqq. Cf. the article "Bible Translations" in some major encyclopedia, e.g. RE. 2 II, 437 ff; Meusel I, 429 ff. Also Fürbringer, Einl. in das N. T. St. Louis 1914, pp. 14 f.
1141) Luke 24:46-47.
416 ><w:t xml:space="preserve">The Holy Scriptures. [English ed. ~ 344]
Scripturae Sacrae. They add that a man can come to faith and thus become a member of the Christian Church without even knowing that there is a Holy Scriptures. Gerhard, for example, says:1142) Credere, quod sint aliquae divinae Scripturae, non est simpliciter et absolute necessarium ad salutem, nimirum si ex simplici ignorantia illud procedat, quia multi salvati sunt, qui substantialia sive fundamentalia fidei Christianae complexi sunt. [Google] But after they have become Christians, it is God's will that they also read the Scriptures, search them, and judge according to the Scriptures, as is evident from the passages of Scripture referred to above, and as will be further explained. The Roman objection that not all Christians should be allowed to read the Scriptures, because the "laity" would stand in danger of interpreting the Scriptures according to their own thoughts and thus bringing false doctrines onto the path, is already invalid because experience shows that it is primarily the "clergy" and, as primus omnium, the Pope, who have interpreted the Scriptures according to their own meaning and have filled the church and the world with the most atrocious false doctrines.1143)
1142) Loci, L. De Ecclesia, § 121. Likewise Quenstedt, Systema I, 313.
1143) Rome consistently treats Scripture as a dangerous book. The reading of Scripture is to be permitted only to certain laymen, namely those to whom, in the judgment of the pastor or confessor, Scripture is not harmful. The main rules of the Roman Church are compiled in "De Libris Prohibitis Regulae Decem per Patres a Tridentina Synodo Delectos Concinnatae et a Pio Papa IV. Comprobatae", regula IV.: Cum experimento manifestum sit, si Sacra Biblia vulgari lingua passim sine discrimine permittantur, plus inde, ob hominum temeritatem, detrimenti, quam utilitatis, oriri; hac in parte iudicio episcopi aut inquisitoris stetur: ut cum consilio parochi vel confessarii Bibliorum a catholieis auctoribus versorum lectionem in vulgari lingua eis concedere possint, quos intellexerint ex huiusmodi lectione non damnum, sed fidei atque pietatis augmentum capere posse; quam facultatem in scriptis habeant. Qui autem absque tali facultate ea legere seu habere praesumpserint, nisi prius Bibliis ordinario redditis, peccatorum absolutionem percipere non possunt. Bibliopola.e vero, qui praedictam facultatem non habenti Biblia idiomate vulgari conscripta vendiderint, vel alio quovis modo concesserint, librorum pretium, in usus pios ab episcopo convertendum, amittant, aliisque poenis pro delicti qualitate eiusdem episcopi arbitrio subiaceant. Regulares vero nonnisi facultate a praelatis suis habita ea legere aut emere possunt. [Google] (In Smets, p. 224.) In addition, the note of Clement VIII: Animadvertendum est circa supra scriptam quartam regulam Indicis fel. rec. Pii papae IV, nullam per hanc impressionem et editionem de novo tribui facultatem episcopis, vel inquisitoribus aut regularium superioribus, concedendi licentiam emendi, legendi
417 ><w:t xml:space="preserve">The Holy Scriptures. [English ed. ~ 345]
The relationship of the original text to the translations. Of course, the basic text has canonical authority also over the translations. The translations have authority only because and insofar as they reproduce the basic text. All translations have to put up with the fact that they are always examined anew to see whether they agree with the basic text. The fact that the Papal Church declared the Vulgate to be canonical belongs to the papal anti-Christian violence. However, the distance between the Scripture in the basic text and the Scripture in the translations should not be unduly increased. There are erroneous and dangerous addresses about this, especially in our time. As is well known, recent theologians fight against the inspiration of Scripture with an argument that goes like this: "Supposing the Scriptures to be entirely the inspired Word of God, this would be of no use to the Church, because the Church,
aut retinendi Biblia vulgari lingua edita; cum hactenus mandato et usu sanctae Romanae et universalis Inquisitionis sublata eis fuerit facultas concedendi huiusmodi licentias legendi vel retinendi Biblia vulgaria, aut alias Sacrae Scripturae tam Novi, quam Veteris Testamenti partes, quavis vulgari lingua editas, ac insuper summaria et compendia etiam historica eorundem Bibliorum seu librorum Sacrae Scripturae, quocumque vulgari idiomate conscripta; quod quidem inviolate servandum est. [Google] (Observatio circa Quartam Regulam. Cf. Index etc. Coloniae sumpt. B. Gualtheri 1602.) And even earlier Gregory VII to Duke Wratislaw of Bohemia, who had asked for divine service, thus also for Bible use, in the vernacular: Quia vero Nobilitas tua postulavit, quod secundum Sclavonicam linguam apud vos divinum celebrari annueremus officium, scias, nos huic petitioni tuae nequaquam posse favere. Ex hoc nempe saepe volventibus liquet, non immerito Sacram Scripturam omnipotenti Deo placuisse quibusdam locis esse occultam, ne, si ad liquidum cunctis pateret, forte vilesceret et subiaceret despectui aut, prave intellecta a mediocribus, in errorem in erroreret. Neque enim ad excusationem, iuvat, quod quidam religiosi viri hoc, quod simpliciter populus quaerit, patienter tulerunt, seu incorrectum dimiserunt; cum primitiva ecclesia multa dissimulaverit, quae a sanctis patribus, postmodum firmata Christianitate et religione crescente, subtili examinatione correcta sunt. Unde ne id fiat, quod a vestris imprudenter exposcitur, auctoritate b. Petri inhibemus, teque ad honorem omnipotentis Dei huic vanae temeritati viribus totis resistere praecipimus. [Google] (Mansi XX, 296. Gieseler, Kirchengesch. II, 1, p. 257.) Cf. Der Lutheraner 29, 73-90 the very thorough article written by Walther: "The Anti-Christian Papal Prohibition of Reading the Holy Scriptures in the Mother Tongue." In addition, Günther, Symbolik 4, p. 112, on the papal condemnation of Bible societies.
1144) Trident, sessio IV, decretum de editione etc.. Smets, p. 15.
418 ><w:t xml:space="preserve">The Holy Scriptures. [English ed. ~ 346]
except for a small minority of its members, can use the Scriptures only through the medium of translations, and translations are to be regarded only as human understandings and expositions of the Scriptures. The argument is that, apart from a small minority of its members, Scripture can be used only through the medium of translations, and that translations are to be regarded only as human understandings and expositions of Scripture. With this argument Dr. Briggs also sought at the time to confuse the Presbyterian Commission of Inquiry.1145) Henry E. Jacobs also expressed himself in this way: "It is only the Scriptures as written in the original languages that are inspired. Even the best translation is only a human explanation or interpretation of the inspired words, however well the inspired thought may be conveyed in other language."1146) These words could be understood as if Bible translators were not allowed to call an English or German Bible God's Word, but had to offer it as a human conception of the Word of God. Against this it must be stated: Admittedly, even the best Bible translators are not inspired like the infallible apostles and prophets, and therefore their translations are and remain under the control of the original text and to that extent norma normata. This has been stressed to Rome also by our dogmatists. On the other hand, it must not be forgotten: What is the Word of God in Greek is also the Word of God in German or English, insofar as the German or English text is a true translation of the Greek text. We must keep in mind here the nature of Holy Scriptures. The language of Scripture is so simple, especially in the sedes doctrinae, that any translation that deserves the name of a translation at all must reproduce the basic text. Whoever understands the Greek of the New Testament on the one hand, and on the other hand, is proficient in the language into which he wants to translate, must make a special effort if he wants to deliver a translation that does not reproduce the basic text. For example, if we take the basic text of John 3:16 and the German or English or Latin translation side by side, we cannot escape the perception that the translations reflect the basic text and that we should not say of the translated passage that it is not the inspired Word of God, but only "a human explanation or interpretation" of the inspired text. John 3:16: Οντως ήγάπησεν δ ϑεδς τον κόσμον, ώστε τον νΐόν αντον τον μονογενή εδωκεν, ἵνα πας δ πιστενων εις αντον μή άπόληται,
1145) Cf. Dr. S. A. Farrand, The Other Side, pp. 17 sqq.
1146) Elements of Religion, 1898, p. 31 sq.
419 ><w:t xml:space="preserve">The Holy Scriptures. [English ed. ~ 346-347]
αλλ' εχγι ζωήν αιώνιον; "God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life"; "God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life"; "Sic Deus dilexit mundum, ut Filium suum unigenitum daret, ut omnis, qui credit in eum, non pereat, sed habeat vitam aeternam" (Vulgate, ed. van Ess). To the objection that in such clear passages as Jn. 3:16 the translator cannot go astray, we answer with the greatest theologians of all times (Augustine, Luther, Chemnitz, Gerhard, etc.) that the whole Christian doctrine is revealed in such passages of Scripture that do not need any exposition, but to which access stands open to the learned and the unlearned alike, and in which therefore the translator cannot go astray, unless he has undertaken a deviation from the original. We stand before the fact that among the generally known translations of the Bible there is not a single one in which the Christian doctrine is not expressed in all parts and the errors opposed to it are rejected. This is also true with regard to the Vulgate of the Roman Church. The ipsa conteret caput tuum of the Vulgate, Gen. 3:15, is rejected by the correct translation of the many passages in which Christ is taught as the only deliverer from the guilt of sin and death, 1 Tim. 2:5-6: Unus enim Deus, unus et Mediator Dei et hominum, homo Christus Iesus, qui dedit redemptionem semetipsum pro omnibus, and Gal. 3:16: Abrahae dictae sunt promissiones et semini eius. Non dicit: "Et seminibus", quasi in multis, sed quasi in uno: "Et semini tuo", qui est Christus. The Vulgate also clearly expresses the justification by faith alone, without works of the law; Rom. 3:28: Arbitramur enim iustificari hominem per fidem, sine operibus legis and Gal. 2:16: Scientes autem, quod non iustificatur homo ex operibus legis, nisi per fidem Iesu Christi. In its official confession, in the Tridentinum, the Roman Church curses indeed in several canons justification by faith, without works of the law; but it curses the doctrine which is also clearly taught in its official translation of the Bible, the Vulgate. Whoever, in a disputation with papists disputandi causa, agrees to the contract that the Vulgate shall be taken as a basis, still retains a weapon in his hand with which he can victoriously overcome the opponent. The same is true in
420 ><w:t xml:space="preserve">The Holy Scriptures. [English ed. ~ 347-348]
with reference to a dispute with Reformed on the basis of the English Bible translation (Authorized Version) [i.e. KJV]. Although the Reformed sects that walk in Zwingli's and Calvin's footsteps teach an immediate efficacy of the Holy Spirit without and alongside the means of grace, "efficacious grace acts immediately," the English Bible translation Rom. 10:17: "So, then, faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God," and 1 Pet. 1:23: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever," and in reference to baptism Tit. 3:5: "According to His mercy He saved us by the washing of regeneration." The Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Communion is also clearly expressed in the English translation, Matt. 26:26-28: "Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My body. And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is My blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." Likewise in the parallels in Mark, Luke and Paul. The Reformed sects have separated themselves from the Lutheran Church and still keep themselves separated from it by rejecting doctrines which are unmistakably expressed in their own translation of the Bible. Thus, we would like to say, the Holy Scriptures defend themselves against false translations by their clear and simple expression. It is by divine institution a light which cannot easily be extinguished even by translation. We find confirmed what Luther says of the Scriptures, "There is no clearer book written on earth than the Holy Scriptures." 1147) We should not say, therefore, that even the best translations are merely a human conception or view of God's Word. No, in so far as the translations are really translations — and right translations are especially difficult to avoid in the sedes doctrinae — in so far they are also God's Word itself. Walther therefore correctly says:1148) "Even he who is ignorant of the basic languages can nevertheless be divinely certain that his German Bible is the Word of God, because he receives the testimony of the Holy Spirit through it." As the Scriptures in
1147) St. L. V, 334.
1148) Synodal Report of the Northern District 1867, p. 34.
421 ><w:t xml:space="preserve">The Holy Scriptures. [English ed. ~ 348-349]
the original text prove themselves to be the Word of God, so this is also done by a translation, provided it is a correct translation. Nor is there any lack of Scriptural proof of the fact that the Holy Scriptures do not lose the character of the infallible Word of God through translation. After all, according to Scripture, the infallible Word of the apostles and prophets is both the foundation of faith for all Christians in all places and among all peoples and tongues and languages until the Last Day, and the rule and guideline by which all Christians are to judge right and wrong doctrines. Since the great majority of Christians have the written Word of the apostles and prophets only in translations, it is beyond doubt that the Holy Scriptures need not lose the character of the infallible Word of God through translations. God's preserving hand is clearly evident not only with respect to the basic text, but also with respect to the translations. Just as we have a fixed Word of God in the basic text in spite of the variae lectiones, so we also have a fixed Word of God in the generally known translations, in spite of the fact that no Bible translation exists in which individual translation errors do not occur, and every Bible translation must allow itself to be tested again and again according to the basic text.
Since calls for new translations of the Bible have again been made recently, let us be permitted a twofold remark concerning Bible translations: 1. Just as all theologians who deny the vicarious satisfaction and inspiration of Scripture are excluded by divine order from the teaching office in the Christian Church, so such "theologians" may also be convinced that they have no calling to translate the Holy Scriptures. 2 We will have to be satisfied also in the future with Bible translations that do not place a false doctrine in passages that are difficult to translate, but offer a translation that is "analogous to the faith". What is to be understood by analogia fidei or regula fidei is to be explained in more detail under the section "Scripture and Exegesis". With regard to such translations, it may then turn out, as Luther puts it, at most that the translator had right thoughts in the wrong place. Such translations do no harm and will not be excluded in the future. That this does not do the slightest harm to the clarity of Scripture has already been explained in the section on the clarity of Scripture.
422 ><w:t xml:space="preserve">The Holy Scriptures. [English ed. ~ 349-350]