At times, reading the English translations of the sacred texts of my tradition, I get the impression there is a translators’ conspiracy aimed at protecting a particular interpretation of the text.
In Luke 17:21 Jesus is reported to have said in the New Revised Standard Version,
“The kingdom of God is not coming with things that can be observed; nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ for, in fact, the kingdom of God is entos humon.” (Luke 17:21)
I looked at twenty-five translations of this verse. Thirteen of these translations translated entos humon as “among you,” or “in the midst of you”. Twelve translations used the phrase “within you”.
There is a significant difference between having Jesus say, “The kingdom of God is “among you,” and “The kingdom of God is within you.”
“Among you” seems to contradict everything that has preceded the statement which occurs in the context of a conversation with the Pharisees (Luke 17:20) who are looking for some assurance about “when the kingdom of God” is coming. They are anticipating a visible, tangible kingdom, one they will be able to recognize and probably manage within the parameters of their religious system.
Jesus has gone to great pains to underline his conviction that the “kingdom of God” is a hidden invisible reality. It is not coming “with things that can be observed.” When the kingdom of God comes, you will not be able to say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ because it is “within you”.
The translation “within you,” accords much better with the context of this statement than the translation “among you” which suggests a visible recognizable manifestation within a community of people.
I was reminded of the Luke 17:21 translation choice by Rabbi Barak Cohen’s recent post on the Times Colonist “Spiritually Speaking” blog. http://blogs.timescolonist.com/2012/02/29/spiritual-relevance/
Rabbi Cohen draws attention to Exodus 25:8 where God is reported to have told Moses to instruct the people to,
make me a sanctuary, so that I may dwell among them. (Exodus 25:8)
The Rabbi says,
Now, as often is the case, the English translation here misses something quite crucial. The last Hebrew word is literally read “in them,” not among them. (emphasis added) But what can this mean? Are we to understand that we were commanded to build a physical structure for G-d’s Presence in order that G-d dwell not within its physical dimensions, but rather inside me? The answer is a resounding YES!
Why would so many translators choose to use “among them” to speak of the presence of God, when “in them” is a perfectly legitimate translation?
Perhaps a God who dwells “in” people is too threatening. People are going to be difficult to control if they genuinely come to believe that the God they worship does not dwell in the structures and forms of religion but in the heart of the religious practitioner.
Yet at the core of both Christian and Jewish tradition, is the awareness that God does not dwell primarily in structures or forms, but in people.
Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands; as the prophet says (Isaiah 66:1-2),
“Heaven is my throne,
and the earth is my footstool.
What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord,
or what is the place of my rest?
Did not my hand make all these things?” (Acts 7:48-50)
If, as the Rabbi suggests, God in fact lives “inside me”, then my voice has the potential to bear equal authority to any figure in the religious hierarchy. If God dwells in every individual, religious officials are going to need to listen attentively to those individuals, respecting their voices as potentially speaking the Word of God every bit as much as the voice from the pulpit.
A God who lives inside every individual introduces the potential for a kind of egalitarian spiritual anarchy. This may feel exciting and powerful, but it can also be troubling to those who perceive their job as the maintenance of order. But, it is my hunch that God is willing to risk a little mess in the interests of the beauty of seeing the Spirit manifest equally in every human being.
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 2, 2012 at 9:07 am
joan
Translation as conspiracy has such a damaging impact on interpretation. As the musician understands, every interpreter offers her own particular understanding of the printed score. This is what compels the listener to discover new and life-giving nuances in the music. Spiritual freedom is essential for this kind of offering. The essence of the composer’s intention is lost when music is programmed apart from the spirituality of the person playing or directing the score. Yet this is often how music has been taught. So too for the learned behaviour in establishment religion. The person in the pulpit is the authority and the listeners are programmed to agree because they have been taught not to enter into this realm. And, in my humble estimation, God laughs. Thanks for always meeting others where they are and not where you think they should be. This invites the manifestation of that beauty of Spirit which can only truly come from within. Christopher, your blog is a gift of grace.
March 2, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Christopher Page
Joan,
Thank you for this lovely parallel. The music analogy is perfect!
March 2, 2012 at 3:14 pm
Frank
Thank you for that insight, Christopher.
Does not Paul also capture that meaning in 1 Cor. 6, 19-20 (NIV version)
“19. Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20. you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.”
March 2, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Christopher Page
indeed!… all the more reason to wonder why translators would choose “among”
March 4, 2012 at 7:07 am
Translations continued… | Victoria Times Colonist
[…] comment on my previous post I thought I would put in my two cents. You can read his entire post here, but in short, Christopher writes […]
March 4, 2012 at 7:48 am
Christopher Page
for Rabbi Cohen’s response see:
http://blogs.timescolonist.com/2012/03/03/translations-continued/