Take a running jump, Holy Joes, humbugs!

In a previous discussion (elsewhere... not on this blog) we examined the changes in vocabulary resulting from usage of new technologies. This discussion prompted lots of debate over the direction of the English language... raising the alarm in some that perhaps our traditional vocabulary is dying off and it is being replaced by "tech-speak"... language that is geared towards efficiency. (I'm generalizing here...)

Does the "old" vocabulary of the English language already have it's foot out the door? What are the implications of this?

A related issue came to mind during our discussion, about a radical new translation that makes the Bible acessible to the unchurched. The ONE translation, hailed as "a new, fresh and adventurous" take on the early Christian scriptures, claims to tackle the problem of what Christianity would look like, what Christianity would sound like, if we really tried to screen out the stale, the technical, the unconsciously exclusive words and policies, and to hear for the first time what the Christian Scriptures were saying.


Excerpts about the One Translation from Ekklesia website


The translation is pioneering in its accessibility, and changes the original Greek and Hebrew nomenclature into modern nicknames. St Peter becomes “Rocky”, Mary Magdalen becomes “Maggie”, Aaron becomes “Ron”, Andronicus becomes “Andy” and Barabbas becomes “Barry”.

In other passages the translator John Henson, a retired Baptist minister, renders “demon possession” as “mental illness” and “Son of Man”, the phrase used frequently to refer to Jesus, as “the Complete Person”.

Parables become “riddles” and to baptise, to “dip” in water. Salvation becomes “healing” or “completeness” and Heaven becomes “the world beyond time and space.”


DIPPING INTO A NEW TRANSLATION (as reported in the Times)

Mark 1:4

Authorised version: “John did baptise in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.”


New: “John, nicknamed ‘The Dipper’, was ‘The Voice’. He was in the desert, inviting people to be dipped, to show they were determined to change their ways and wanted to be forgiven.”


Mark 1:10-11

Authorised version: “And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him. And there came a voice from the heaven saying, Thou are my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”


New: As he was climbing up the bank again, the sun shone through a gap in the clouds. At the same time a pigeon flew down and perched on him. Jesus took this as a sign that God’s spirit was with him. A voice from overhead was heard saying, ‘That’s my boy! You’re doing fine!’ ”

Matthew 23:25

Authorised version: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!”

New version: “Take a running jump, Holy Joes, humbugs!

Matthew 26:69-70

Authorised version: “Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, ‘Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee.’ But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest”.


New: Meanwhile Rocky was still sitting in the courtyard. A woman came up to him and said: “Haven’t I seen you with Jesus, the hero from Galilee?” Rocky shook his head and said: “I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about!”

----

Another excerpt...

In his foreward to the new version of the New Testament, which also includes the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, Dr. Williams describes it as a work of "extraordinary power" because it is "so close to the prose and poetry of ordinary life." He writes: "Instead of being taken into a specialized religious frame of reference - as happens with even the most conscientious formal modern translations - and being given a gospel addressed to specialised concerns... we have here a vehicle for thinking and worshipping that is fully earthed, recognisably about our humanity."

----

It's a very thought provoking issue. How often do we assume a different frame of reference when we engage in different forms of communication?

Are we out to eliminate metadiscourse?