Letter To The Editor

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Pneuma 30 (2008) 193-194

Letter to the Editor

Dear Pneuma,

I am a graduate student from Taiwan, who has just ﬁnished my M.A. thesis and passed my oral defense. A large portion of my thesis talks about Robert Menzies’ contribution to the Pentecostal Spirit-Baptism doctrine. Recently, his research interest has turned to contextual and indigenous studies concerning the Pentecostal movement in China. This turn is due, ﬁrstly, to his work in Kumming, China. Secondly, it is also a continuation of his earlier Lucan pneumatological studies, that is, he found common points between Luke-Acts and Pentecostalism.

His essay “Anti-charismatic bias in the Chinese Union Version of Bible” in PNEUMA is another signiﬁcant masterpiece on the Chinese Pentecostal Movement. In this insightful essay, Menzies especially pointed out the problematic translation of prophecy as xianzhi jiang- dao (preaching prophetically) in Chinese Union Version of Bible. In consequence, Chinese church leaders often use this translation found in 1 Cor. 14:1 to persuade church members to seek the gift of jiangdao (preaching) rather than seeking the gift of speaking in tongues. As Menzies showed, in terms of the context, prophecy should not be viewed as a preaching or a sermon in the contemporary protestant church, rather, it should be viewed as a sort of spon- taneous, Spirit-inspired message. This kind of Reformed “eisegesis” is inadequate.

I would like to point out, however, that other Chinese Versions also imply this kind of anti-charismatic bias, and, in my view, in a way more serious than the Union Version. I will take xinyi ben (New Chinese Version) and xiandai zhongwen i ben (Toady’s Chinese Ver- sion) as examples. It is unlikely that the translators of the Union Version are reacting to the Pentecostal movement by translating prophecy as xianzhi jiandao. Yet, this is very possible in the newer versions. The NCV translators totally eliminated the word xianzhi from the terms xianzhi jiangdao (preaching prophetically) used in the Union Version and retains only jiangdao (preaching)! Furthermore, if we examine the translators list of NCV, we will ﬁnd out that some of them are well-know opponents of Pentecostal and Charismatic move- ments. I think it is reasonable that they might have translated with anti-charismatic pre- understanding. As for TCV, prophecy in 1 Cor. 11-14 was translated with xianjiang shangdi de xin xi (preaching God’s message). The translators totally deleted the word xian zhi as CNV ’s translator did. T ough I ﬁnd no translator of this version who is particularly anti- charismatic, the translation of the term for prophecy still reveals a Reformed bias.

Besides, Mandarin versions, dialect versions also reﬂect this kind of bias. My mother tongue is Hokkien (a kind of dialect derived from southern Fujian Province, China, also

1

194

Letter to the Editor / Pneuma 30 (2008) 193-194

known as Amoy, Minanese and Taiwanese). In Taiwan most Hokkien speaking Christians read Amoy Romanized Bible, which was translated by a British missionary T omas Barclay, or another newer version Âng-phê Sèng-keng. Prophecy in the former are usually translated with chhàm-gú (prophesy), however, in 1Cor.14:1, 3, 4, 5, 24, 29, 31, 39, this version says chòe sian ti lâi thôan tō or chòe sian ti thôan tō (preaching prophetically), and in 11: 4-5, it says thôan tō (preaching); In the letter, prophecy is translated with as thôan-ta t Siōng-chú ê chí-ì (preaching the Lord’s will).

To sum up, besides Union Version, there are still other Chinese Bible versions that imply the same anti-charismatic bias that Menzies has noted. Furthermore, since these later ver- sions are typically translated and issued after the outset of a contemporary Pentecostal Movement, this kind of translation may be reasonably thought of as an intended reaction to Pentecostalism. I think that these newer versions should be criticized more than that of Union Version. The Pentecostal/Charismatic movement has been a global as well as ecu- menical force in the Christian tradition. Chinese Bible scholars and translators should not neglect it by these kinds of “eisegesis.” As far as I know, the Chinese Bible International will publish a whole new version of the Mandarin Bible, the Xin Hanyu iben (New Han Ver- sion), which is now in the process of formation. I hope this new version will avoid such faulty translations of key biblical terms.

Yours, Sincerely Joshua Hsien-Chin, Yeh Taiwan

2