再思《聖經》「概念合一」語法的翻譯

Rethinking Bible Translations Using “Conceptual Unity” Syntax

新約《聖經》有許多「概念合一」的語句，其中τοῦθεοῦ（神）καὶ（與）σωτῆρος（救主）是一個對基督論而言重要的詞組，但《欽定本》和《美國標準本》皆未顧及這特定語法，是待《英國修訂版》和《新標準修訂版》修訂後才表達出「概念合一」。《和合本》和《現代中文譯本》也未顧及這特定語法，而《思高本》、《聖經恢復本》和《聖經新漢語譯本》的翻譯才表達「概念合一」。另一個重要詞組是ὁθεὸς（神）καὶ（與）πατὴρ（父），英語和西班牙語譯本皆譯出καί，且多位西方神學家指稱，「主耶穌基督的神與父」是神的「新約頭銜」和「正式慣用語」，取代「亞伯拉罕的神、以撒的神、雅各的神」這舊約頭銜；但大多數漢語譯本不譯連詞καί，只譯為「父神」，未表達「概念合一」，且大多數漢語註釋書也就未提及這「新約頭銜」及其詮釋。兩種的翻譯與詮釋各因英漢語法傳統而有其合理性，但以全球對話視角觀之，其間的歧異是不容忽視的。 There is an exegetical form of syntax in the New Testament that expresses “conceptual unity”. The passage τοῦθεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος is christologically significant and fits the requirements of “Sharp’s rule”, whereas the King James Version and American Standard Version did not adopt Sharp’s rule. The English Revised Version and New Revised Standard Version, however, were revised precisely in order to express this “conceptual unity”. Another important passage, ὁθεὸς καὶ πατὴρ, is a literal rendering of “the God and Father”. Many Western theologians have claimed that “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” is the “New Testament title” and the “solemn formula” of God, which they felt needed to replace God’s Old Testament title “the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”. The majority of Chinese Bible translations rendering Fu Shen 父神 as “God the Father” did not express this “conceptual unity”. Furthermore, the majority of Chinese theologians never even mentioned this New Testament title with its various interpretations. Such differences may make mutual understanding in global dialogues between and among Christians much more difficult. Therefore, a rethinking of Bible translations using “conceptual unity” syntax may be called for.

There is an exegetical form of syntax in the New Testament that expresses “conceptual unity”. The passage τοῦθεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος is christologically significant and fits the requirements of “Sharp’s rule”, whereas the King James Version and American Standard Version did not adopt Sharp’s rule. The English Revised Version and New Revised Standard Version, however, were revised precisely in order to express this “conceptual unity”. Another important passage, ὁθεὸς καὶ πατὴρ, is a literal rendering of “the God and Father”. Many Western theologians have claimed that “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” is the “New Testament title” and the “solemn formula” of God, which they felt needed to replace God’s Old Testament title “the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”. The majority of Chinese Bible translations rendering Fu Shen 父神 as “God the Father” did not express this “conceptual unity”. Furthermore, the majority of Chinese theologians never even mentioned this New Testament title with its various interpretations. Such differences may make mutual understanding in global dialogues between and among Christians much more difficult. Therefore, a rethinking of Bible translations using “conceptual unity” syntax may be called for.