|
The Importance of Project Jagerna
Problems with Existing Nepali Bible Translations
The most popular Nepali version of the Scriptures is connected with the United Bible Societies—an ecumenical organization that works closely with the Roman Catholic Church and regularly utilizes liberal, humanistic, and apostate translators. Though common, this translation is relatively expensive (especially for Nepalis living in rural villages) and difficult to obtain in vast quantities for distribution purposes. With regard to the text itself, it is little more than a questionable rendering of modern English versions (e.g. NIV, NASB, et. al.)—the same versions that extricate complete verses, complicate passages, diminish key Scriptural doctrines in scores of places, liberally utilize the dubious technique of dynamic equivalence, and abound with private interpretation. Because the NIV and other such versions have served as the foundation for this standard Nepali Bible (We will henceforth refer to this translation as the NBS), the problems of these English translations and their underlying Greek/Hebrew textual bases (i.e. critical eclectic editions—such as that put out by the ecumenical United Bible Societies—which ridiculously claim to reproduce the "original " text, are collated by unbelieving skeptics and apostates, and bear historical affiliation with Roman Catholicism and scribal corruption) have been thrust upon the Nepali people as their only real option.
There are also many glaring blunders unique to the NBS. Consider a few examples:
(1). The same Nepali word used for "rock" in Matthew 16:18 is used in John 1:42 in reference to Peter, thereby very “popishly” equating the apostle to the foundation of the New Testament Church.
(2). The Nepali word used for "judgment" in places like Hebrews 9:27 is a very human term that connotes debate and the possibility of appeal. At the Judgment of God, there is not debate, and there certainly is no appeal.
(3). The word used for "Scripture" literally means "religious books" and does not even come close to connoting the holy words of God. Therefore, usage of this term implies that the writings of false religions are valuable.
(4). The Nepali term used for "evil spirit" or "demon" is the term for "ghost" (i.e. the spirit of someone who is dead).
(5). The connection between Jesus' proclamation of Himself in John 8:9 as "I AM" and the name of God found in Exodus 3:14 is completely lost in the translation.
(6). Hindi words that are not typically understood by Nepalis are found in scores of places. John 9:34 and 10:34 contain just two of many examples.
(7). Translational and grammatical inconsistencies abound. An example of the former can be found in comparing Leviticus 23:34 with 23:42,43, while an example of the latter is seen in John 3:15-16.
(8). The word used for "miracles" literally means "symbol" or “sign” and does not necessarily connote a supernatural occurrence. This is especially problematic in the context of Jesus' earthly ministry.
(9). Translations of "blasphemy" or "blaspheme" inherently connote a Hindu concept, thereby implying that it is actually possible to blaspheme a false idol.
(10). The word used for "fornication" only references adultery. Such does not even come close to capturing the true meaning of passages like I Corinthians 6:18. Fornication includes all sexual sin.
(11). The subtle reference to Christ’s deity in John 7:34 is missing due to incorrect translation.
There is another Nepali translation that was and continues to be a worthy attempt to translate the textual tradition of the King James Bible into Nepali, and those involved have done noble work with their limited resources (We will refer to this translation as the DRJ). However, this work began in India more than twenty years ago and still remains incomplete. Presently, only the New Testament, Psalms, and Proverbs are available in print. Furthermore, this project was begun before the Nepali language had been fully developed and/or simplified into its present written form. Thus, there are many instances where Hindi terminology is used so as to preserve the correct meaning of various passages. As a result, the DRJ, in numerous instances, does not reflect the common Nepali tongue. Add to this countless instances of slang terminology, grammatical complexities, over-literal translations of the King James text that are meaningless in Nepali, and unusual vocabulary/dialect (as opposed to that which is more commonly understood by the people of Nepal), and what you have is a Bible translation that is very difficult for the average Nepali to comprehend, thus feeding the unfortunate Nicolaitan mentality (see Revelation 2:15) that already festers in Nepali "churchianity." Granted, the DRJ does not share many of the textual problems found in the aforementioned NBS, but the linguistic problems are numerous; these can and should be remedied.
Consider some problematic instances found particularly in the Gospel of John:
(1). In the Gospel of John alone, there are at least 938 problems that need to be resolved. About 68% of these relate to grammar, syntax, spelling, and word order. Close to 20% of these are translational problems. 10% represent awkward vocabulary, and the remaining 2% involve adding explanatory footnotes for linguistic understanding.
(2). The translation of "born again" in John 3:3,7 utilizes a confusing linguistic form that implies process (as opposed to the instantaneous regeneration wrought by the Holy Spirit by grace through faith). The same is found in the NBS and seems inexcusable when one considers how easily this can be translated into Nepali.
(3). John 4:6 connotes that Jesus sat in the well as opposed to on the well.
(4). John 9:31 and 10:8 are missing the noun modifiers for two possessive adjectives.
(5). The DRJ frequently confuses "for" and "because" as in John 1:17, 3:16-18, and 16:3.
(6). Questionable grammatical inconsistency abounds (e.g. John 3:18; 7:17; 8:41-44; 18:17,25,39; 19:24; and 21:7).
(7). Private interpretation as opposed to faithful translation appears. An example of this can be found in John 1:26,31,33 where John’s baptism is described as “in water” (an interpretive reference to baptism by immersion) as opposed to “with water” (the correct translation). Though the Scriptures teach that baptism by immersion is the proper reflection of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, this teaching is not found in these verses. And, man, regardless of how good his intentions might be, has no business changing the text to suit his theology (whether or not the theology is biblically sound).
(8). Illogical and nonsensical translation is appears in places like John 1:19; 3:18; 10:13; 11:3; and 13:3,11,16,27.
(9). John 10:30 utilizes a weak word that detracts from Christ's deity.
(10). Numbers are typically spelled out in the DRJ, but in John 12:1 and 19:24, the symbol is used—one of many examples of inconsistency.
(11). In John 12:16 and 18:15-16, a verb is used in the active voice when it should be passive.
(12). In several instances, the DRJ has Jesus addressing human beings with a high, honorific form of address that is normally reserved for addressing God in the Nepali language. The theological implications of this are especially dangerous in John 2:10 where Jesus is addressing Mary, his mother. Other examples can be found in 8:10; 11:43; 20:13-15; and 21:15-17.
(13). Interrogatives are used when the passage calls for demonstratives (e.g. John 9:30, 12:42).
(14). Incorrect verb tenses are rendered (e.g. John 11:13, 16; 12:9).
(15). Punctuation errors are frequent (e.g. John 11:7).
(16). Examples of poor translation can be found in John 3:16, 20-21; 4:22; 5:22; 6:19; 8:41; 10:17-18; 12:21,26,42; 13:2,11,19; and 18:39.
(17). Hindi words abound (e.g. John 1:20; 12:32; 13:38; 18:25,27; 19:39; 20:5-7; and 21:15).
(18). The use of spoken slang (as opposed to grammatically correct written forms) are plentiful (e.g. John 4:43; 7:14; 8:9; 11:44; 12:13,16,19; 13:18,19,39; 14:29; 15:26; 18:35; 19:5; 20:3,11; 21:7).
(19). Examples of typographical errors can be found in John 8:9,59.
(20). Time references that refer to an hour of the Jewish day are incorrectly translated “o’clock” (e.g. John 1:39; 4:6,52; 19:14).
(21). John 6 alone contains at least 40 grammatical/syntax problems, 24 translational errors, and 6 instances of peculiar vocabulary.
Apart from issues of translation, the DRJ (much like the NBS) is also expensive and extremely difficult to obtain outside of Kathmandu. Simply put, it is impractical for the Nepali people. Thus, a fresh attempt to produce an accurate translation of the Authorized King James Bible into the common tongue of the Nepali people, an attempt that seeks to fully and finally remedy the problems of the incomplete DRJ, is desperately needed. 
Cost and Availability of Existing Nepali Translations
The cost of existing Nepali Bibles and their limited number makes it difficult for local churches, Nepali Christian laborers, and/or foreign missionaries to do large-scale Bible distributions. There are sizeable areas of Nepal and pockets of Nepali people outside Nepal's borders where the Gospel of Jesus Christ remains relatively unknown, so widespread distribution of the Word of God is greatly needed. Also related to this problem is the fact that many Nepali Christians (especially those in the villages) do not own a personal copy of the Scriptures.
The Need for Reformation in Nepali Churches
In many Nepali churches, unbiblical traditions have assumed precedence over Scriptural truth, false doctrine runs wild, and church leaders are known for dictatorial dominance over their flocks (in direct disobedience to I Peter 5:3). With regard to the latter, the average Christian will not evangelize and/or seek to plant new churches because he has been led to believe by his “clergy” that he is not qualified to do so. There is a “churchianity” that festers in Nepal, and reformation is desperately needed. Ultimately, this is a result of biblical ignorance amongst average Nepali Christians. Many do not own their own personal copy of the Bible, so these are apt to be easily deceived by false teachers and false traditions. Unbiblical traditions and false doctrines in the churches must be battled with the pure Word of God. True reformation can only come when the laity are able to personally compare what they have been taught with the very words of Scripture. It behooves us to mass produce an accurate, readable, and pure translation of the Holy Scriptures into Nepali and to do everything in our power to get this into the hands of every Nepali Christian. The printing and mass distribution of the pure Scriptures brought reformation to Roman Catholic-dominated Europe in the Dark Ages. We believe that the same can happen in Nepal.
»Return to Project Jagerna Main Page
|
