Perrydox.com is devoted to the pursuit of truth, whether plain or paradoxical, whether simple or sublime, or simply absurd yet absolute.
Matthew 1:1 – NASB vs. HCSB vs. ESV
Matthew 1:1 NASB The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham:
Matthew 1:1 HCSB The historical record of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham:
Matthew 1:1 ESV The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
I will admit that much about the HCSB confuses me in how they translate Matthew 1:1. The version makes a big deal of translating Christos as Messiah at times.
“The Holman CSB translate the Greek word Christos (“anointed one”) as either ‘Christ’ or ‘Messiah’ based upon its use in different NT contexts. When the NT emphasizes Christos asa name of our Lord or has a Gentile context, ‘Christ’ is used (Eph.1:1 “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus…”). Where the NT Christos has a Jewish context, the title ‘Messiah’ is used (Eph.1:12 “…we who had already put our hop in the Messiah”). (Introduction to the HCSB)
First, I am confused, because if there was ever a time to translate Christos as Messiah, it would be at the beginning of the genealogy of Jesus written for the Jews.
Second, while at first I liked this translating policy of the HCSB, I have since changed my mind. For example, the inspired writers could have used another Greek word instead of Christos. They could have used, Messias (Jn.1:41; 4:25). By switching back and forth between Messiah and Christ, the reader can get confused.
Sometimes transliterated words, such as “Christos” becoming “Christ,” delays and disrupts understanding. In English, we understand what “anoint” means and it immediately prompts the mind to ask, “Anointed by who?” “Anointed by what?” “Why anointed?” Therefore I prefer “Anointed.” I would even prefer “Anointed” over “Anointed One” because of my preference to keep the translation as simple as possible – one Greek word to one English word. I guess the only downside would be the response, which I would assume would be negative. On the other hand though, it would be a nice complement to Yahweh being the translation in the Old Testament, setting the HCSB apart from the crowd, and helping give claim to a more literal translation. Plus, “Jesus Anointed” is regal and priestly.
Another difference between the HCSB and the other two that I do not prefer is the use of “historical” instead of “genealogical.” While all genealogies are histories, not all histories are genealogies. Here the more optimal reading is not specific enough.
One thing about the HCSB translation I do like in this verse is that they capitalized “Son” when referring to both “Son of David” and “Son of Abraham.” This emphasizes that Matthew is saying Jesus is the Son of both, not that Jesus is the Son of David, and David is the son of Abraham.
I completely agree with you about Mat. 1:1 and the HCSB’s crazy idea to NOT render “Messiah” here. If you’re going to use “Messiah” this would be THE place to do it!
I’ve also been wrestling with the “Messiah” translation a bit. What should they use, do you think? Christ? Anointed One?
Sometimes transliterated words, such as “Christos” becoming “Christ,” delays and disrupts understanding. In English, we understand what “anoint” means and it immediately prompts the mind to ask, “Anointed by who?” “Anointed by what?” “Why anointed?” Therefore I prefer “Anointed.” I would even prefer “Anointed” over “Anointed One” because of my preference to keep the translation as simple as possible – one Greek word to one English word. I guess the only downside would be the response, which I would assume would be negative. On the other hand though, it would be a nice complement to Yahweh being the translation in the Old Testament, setting the HCSB apart from the crowd, and helping give claim to a more literal translation. Plus, “Jesus Anointed” is regal and priestly.
Will, do you know what plans the HCSB has for translating Christos? By the way, thanks for asking my views on this.
[…] Question: When to translate, or transliterate? Posted on January 4, 2011 by T.C. R This question is the result of an exchange between Will Lee and I over at Will’s Anwoth blog, which actually got started here. […]