Category: Bible

It is a known fact, at least in the United States, that many members of the Christian faith are thought to “hate” or have a “phobia” concerning homosexuals. It is also understood by some that God hates members of the LGBTQ society as well. Some claim that the Bible teaches hatred of homosexuals and that Christians should not treat them like people. The Bible has only a few instances that address homosexuality directly but has many passages that can be interpreted as supporting, or as I argue, unsupporting of the claim that God hates members of the LGBTQ community.

The first reference to homosexuality in the Bible is in Genesis 9 after Noah and his sons exit the ark. It is written that Noah plants a vineyard and makes wine which he becomes drunk upon. He lays naked in his tent and is found by his son Ham. “Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard. He drank some of the wine and became drunk, and he lay uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside.”(NRSV Gen 9:21-22) The interpretation of this passage found by many scholars is that Ham raped his father Noah while he was passed out drunk in the tent. Once Noah wakes, he curses Ham’s son Canaan and tells him that his son will be a slave to his brothers. In Genesis, seeing someone in their nakedness is addressed relative to Noah and Ham but later in the book of Leviticus as a broad view specifically in terms of law. Leviticus talks about the idiom of seeing someone’s nakedness, someone who is blood related to the other person, as meaning that the two had sex. This is described to be an insestual disgrace that is in need of being punished. Although Leviticus talks about incestual actions in a sexual manner, it doesn’t clearly talk about incestual activity between a person and their parents. That being said, Leviticus serves as a form of insight into how people have viewed incest but not specifically sex between children and their parents. Also, Leviticus shows an interpretation of the phrase “seeing someone in their nakedness” as perhaps used in Genesis 9. Leviticus says, “If a man takes his sister, a daughter of his father or a daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace, and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people; he has uncovered his sister’s nakedness, he shall be subject to punishment.”(Lev 20:17) Assuming that this interpretation of Genesis 9:21-22 is true, meaning that Noah had been raped by Ham, it may not be concluded that Canaan was punished due to Ham’s homosexual activity. It is unclear whether he is punished because of incest, rape, or sex out of the bond of marriage.

Later in the book of Genesis, there is another story that may be referred to as an example of homosexuality in the Bible. This story is Sodom and Gomorrah found in Genesis 19. Robert Buxbaum talks about the common interpretation of this passage in his article “Journal of Religion and Health”. He talks about how it has been understood that God punished the people of Sodom and Gomorrah for their homosexual actions. “In most instances, those who stood in condemnation of homosexuality called upon the story of Sodom and Gomorrah to prove that God Himself made his judgement clear.”(Buxbaum) Later he talks about how the true judgement of God is unclear. Many believe that in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah God’s wrath upon the sinful is shown, specifically homosexuals. In Genesis 19, two angels of the Lord are sent to Sodom and their goal is to find at least ten righteous people living there. If they do so, the city of Sodom will be spared from total annihilation. The two angels arrive in Sodom and meet Lot who welcomes and sort of demands them to stay at his house. Some of the inhabitants of the city go to Lot’s house and demand that the get to “know” the angels. “and they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know them.”(Gen 19:5) This term of “knowing someone” when used in this context is often interpreted as engagement of sexual actions. If this verse is used to say that these men wanted to have sex with the angels of the Lord, then this must mean that the men of Sodom that approached Lot wanted to engage in homosexual actions. What is clear is that Lot meets the angels with righteous hospitality while some of the inhabitants of Sodom mentioned do not.

In addition, the book of Jude addresses Sodom and Gomorrah and says that the cities have been destroyed due to sexual immorality and unnatural lust. “Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”(Jude 1:7) In this passage, the demise of Sodom and Gomorrah, and surrounding cities, is not directly attributed to homosexuality. While homosexuality may be linked to both sexual immorality and unnatural lust, the book of Jude does not say specifically that homosexuality was the cause of the cities destruction. Therefore the use of these verses acting as proof that God punished Sodom and Gomorrah purely for their homosexual activites is incorrect. D. S. Bailey writes specifically about this in his book Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition. He writes, “The story does not in the least demand the assumption that the sin of Sodom was sexual, let alone homosexual-indeed, there is no evidence to show that vice of the latter kind was prevalent there”(D. S. Bailey). Bailey later states in his book that the reason for the link between Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction to the practice of homosexuality may have been due to misinterpretation to Genesis 19.

Another passage that is thought to address homosexual behavior is in Romans 1 verses 26 and 27. This is in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans that Paul and his secretary Tertius wrote. “For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.”(Romans 1:26-27) Many have used and will use this passage to support the claim that the Bible teaches homosexual activity as a sin. While the Bible does teach that homosexuality is a sin, this passage does not offer evidence of this. Many scholars believe that this passage instead talks directly about idolatry and lust. Both of which are listed in the Ten Commandments in Exodus.

One scholar who talks specifically about this interpretation of this passage is James Brownson. He writes in his book Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships that the meaning of “men committed shameless acts with men” is serving someone other than God. “ the central problem with lust in Romans 1 is that it is an expression of idolatry in a specific sense: lust involves serving one’s own self-seeking desires rather than worshiping the one true God.”(Brownson) If this interpretation of Romans 1:26-27 should be taken, this means that the passage has nothing to do with homosexual actions or sexual actions in general. Instead it is meant to show that anyone who practices excessive lust and idolatry will be met with the punishment due to their deeds. Brownson also says that there was excessive lust within the Roman court. This is perhaps the reason why this verse was included instead of addressing homosexuality. Another scholar to comment on this passage is Steve Chalke. He says that “Idolatry, promiscuity and shrine prostitution are what Paul is addressing” instead of homosexual actions.

Although there are teachings in the Bible that are used to show that homosexuality is not supported, there are many passages that are misinterpreted and understood to have a meaning that was most likely not the writers’. After looking at a few of these passages, it may be concluded that the Bible should be thoroughly read in context and should not be looked at verse by verse unless knowledge of the context is possessed. The passages viewed earlier in this text serve as examples of when translation and reading without context can create false support for one’s claims. The Bible does in some instances talk about homosexual actions as wrong but of course this is an interpretation of a select translation. God is not portrayed as hating those who are homosexual in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament although passages in the Bible may be interpreted as God showing hatred to homosexuals.

Bibliography

1. Buxaum, Robert E. “Journal of Religion and Health.” Homosexuality and Love, vol. 6, Jan. 1967, pp. 1–16.
2. Bailey, Derrick S., Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition. London and New York, Longmans Green.
3. Brownson, J. Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships. Eerdmans, 2013.
4. “BibleGateway.” New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) – Version Information – BibleGateway.com, www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-Revised-Standard-Version-NRSV-Bible/.

The approach folks ultimately read gayness, whether or not in faith, politics or fashionable culture, is all determined by ancient or dynamic points of read. This essay can discuss primarily liberal and conservative Christian interpretations of the Bible, together with several verses that will support or condemn gayness. it’ll conjointly discuss the policy-making and laws against twosome and therefore the social policy within the homosexual community. this is often all concerning read points and it’s several conflicting views and arguments.

Conservative views area unit typically terribly ancient and interpret most or all Bible passages concerning, or allegedly involving gayness as inculpative. They interpret them as associate abomination which it’s scorned by God. Some contemplate it associate “ordinary” sin; one which will simply be forgiven. alternative Christians say it’s a sin and you’re damned for eternity if you’re homosexual. They believe it denies you passage to heaven. They contemplate any homosexual relationship, lifespan or non-committed relationship, one to be damned.

Liberal viewpoints area unit sometimes a lot of dynamic and interpret the Bible in many various ways that. several liberal Christians ignore country translations of the Bible, the King James Version. Most liberal Christians sit down with Greek and Hebrew versions of the Bible. they’re sometimes those United Nations agency interpret Bible verses totally different from Christians and generally it’s within the support of gayness. Liberal Christians area unit typically those United Nations agency believe gayness may be a traditional sin; one which will be forgiven like several alternative sin, repenting.

First, several things within the Bible aren’t clear concerning gayness within the Bible. several believe a sod, may be a homosexual within the Bible, that is why some verses area unitn’t clear and a few verses are taken totally different by the person. several verses appear to support the term sod as being a homosexual and alternative verses deny a sod being a homosexual. It may conjointly mean a subject of the Biblical city of Sodom, one in all the 2 cities, the opposite being Gomorrah, that was destroyed by God. Sodom, though was wicked and acknowledged for sexual deviation.

Many Christians have picked out “clobber” passages or verses within the Bible that area unit presupposed to doubtless condemn gayness. However, these fool-proof “clobber” passages are opposed, like Book of Leviticus 20:13, “If a person conjointly make love humankind, as he lieth with a lady each of them have committed associate abomination: they shall certainly be place to death; their blood shall be place upon them.” several conservative Christians interpret this as damnatory gayness indefinitely; several liberal Christians claim it condemns gay ritual sex in an exceedingly temple and males having sex in an exceedingly womans bed. Another verse, Book of Leviticus 18:22, “Thou shalt not make love humankind, like womankind: it’s an abomination.” Again, conservative Christians take this is often as inculpative proof however progressive Christians take it as, again, a verse inculpative gay ritual sex in an exceedingly Pagan temple or men having sex in an exceeding woman’s bed.

In total, there area unit six “condemning” clobber passages, they are: Genesis nineteen, Book of Leviticus 18:22, Book of Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, one Corinthians 6:9-10, one Timothy 1:9-10, Jude 1:7. These area units the foremost notable of all Bible passages purportedly concerning gayness. There are several alternative minor passages that aren’t clear on what they mean or if they’re even concerning gayness. However, either side of the idealistic, Christian, spectrum have developed theories on what the Bible means that. Conservatives believe, altogether religions that follow the word of the Bible- Christianity, the Baha’i religion, Islam and Judaism- that gayness is wrong and within the finish, a homosexual can find himself in Hell, not Heaven. Liberals believe the Bible is silent on same-sex behavior. They believe God accepts all manner of individuals, notwithstanding sexual orientation which as long as the relationship is accordant and affectionate, it’s to be accepted. However, Liberals do believe the Bible condemns the following: male rape of alternative men, men participating in gay sex in Pagan temples or having sex in an exceedingly woman’s bed, men sexually abusing kids and therefore the kids they abuse and any manner of individuals participating in sex activity.

Homosexuality isn’t solely a priority in faith, however within the political world, modern-day and in history. gayness has forever been burdened in thought, success politics. it’s been tested that gayness was gift in the Hellenic language and Roman cultures. it’s even tested that several nice ancient philosophers like, Aristotle, Socrates and Plato materialized in homosexual behavior and even ancient “superstars” with an enormous influence couldn’t generalize gayness within the ancient world. The oppression continuing unmatched till the primary gay rights organization was started in Germany. The gay rights movement unfold to alternative countries, together with the us. The Society for Human Rights was started within the North American nation, the primary gay rights organization within the country. though the society failed to last for a really while, just about 9 months, it paved the approach for several alternative organizations.

Homosexuality went through once warfare II. several gay bars opened in major cities across the us. In 1951 the Mattachine Society was started which helped pave the approach even a lot of. Still, however, gays, lesbians and homosexuals wherever burdened by fashionable culture. Police would typically raid gay bars for no reason and sometimes a fight would begin between police and gays. In 1969 a fair known as the Stonewall Riots materialized. Police raided a gay bar in Greenwich Village, New York; this point, the victims fought back, throwing brewage cans, chairs and alternative things at cops. Since then, there has been an enormous spark gay rights movements. several legal cases have taken place together with Bowers vs. Hardwick within which the court-dominated gays aren’t protected underneath the Fourteenth Amendment of the North American nation constitution. several argue that these area unit violations of the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment of the constitution.

Since 1938, Superman has been one of the most well-known characters in the world. Anywhere you go, there is a good chance you will see some sort of merchandise or advertisement for Superman. Superman’s origin begins with him being sent to earth by his parents, away from a planet that is facing its doom. He grows up with his adoptive family and uses his powers for good to help the people of earth from evil.

Moses is one of the most recognizable characters in The New Testament. His devout devotion to following God is comparable to no other character and he is seen as a model for following God. His ability to perform miracles and save others is undeniable through the many passages in Exodus.

From the last two paragraphs, I’m hoping you can see what I’m hinting at. Superman is the modern-day Moses, well at least the closest thing we’ll get to a modern-day Moses. Through the next few pages, I will list a few reasons as to why this is true Included in this paper will also be a few other ways the old testament is hinted at through the Superman franchise.

The origin stories for both Moses and Superman are almost eerily similar. Moses’s birth mother could no longer hide Moses after 3 months and decided to send him down the river in a papyrus basket. He was eventually found further down the river by the daughter of the pharaoh. She took him in and raised him as her son. Similarly, Kal-El (Clark Kent’s Kryptonian name), was sent to earth by spaceship by his parents who saved him from their planet that was soon to be destroyed by its sun. He was adopted by the Kent’s and grew up on the planet earth.

Both Moses and Superman are people who help those in need by performing superhuman deeds. Moses performed many miracles and insane acts of power during Exodus. During their exodus from Egypt, Moses sends the 10 plagues, parts the Red Sea, and strikes a rock to bring forth water to his people, all with the powers given to him by God. Likewise, Clark Kent saves people from many things; car crashes, evil villains, and even de-railed trains. His powers are spectacular, and to normal humans, they are impossible. The powers of Moses and Superman can both be seen as if they were given from a higher power due to the fact that no normal human would be able to have them.

Even though Clark Kent is a perfect rendition of the modern-day Moses, there are a few other ways the Old Testament has influenced the franchise. Superman was created in the late 1930’s by Jerry Seigel and Joe Shuster. These men were both Jewish, and it seemed to influence their new comic character.

When a normal person looks at the Superman logo, it has no real meaning other than Superman himself, but to a more knowledgeable eye, there is much more. When compared to the Hebrew alphabet, there is a noticeable similarity between the Superman logo and the Hebrew letter for L, also known as lamedh. This presents the idea that the logo could possibly have more than just one meaning.

A second reason to bring up the background of the creators is to address Clark Kent’s birth name, Kal-El. The connection can immediately be seen by anyone who has any knowledge of the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible. The name Kal-El has the word El in it, which in Hebrew, means God. With more research into his full name, it can be seen that the full name of Kal-El actually means “voice of God” in Hebrew.

Even when some don’t understand, this paper shows that Superman is very heavily influenced by the Hebrew Bible. The creators perfectly incorporated both big and small elements of the Hebrew Bible, as to make the story interesting and new yet familiar in a way the reader might not be able to place at first.

Ray Bradbury creates a hedonistic society in his novel Fahrenheit 451. His characters are careless, easily entertained, and concerned with nothing more than leisure; anything that might lead to thought or discussion is not only banned, but completely illegal. Because of this, organized religion is molded into something that the ‘family’ can use for entertainment without fear of offensive feelings. Bradbury’s frequent allusion to the Christian Bible and use of religious imagery shows the importance that the author places on the ideas consistent with the teachings of organized religion.

The story centers around Guy Montag, a fireman who doesn’t put out fires but rather starts them with the purpose of destroying books. In one instance of this book burning, Montag finds and keeps a couple books, one being the Christian Bible. Bradbury makes it clear that society is insistent against free thought of religion by placing Montag on a subway, Bible in hand, and has him attempt to memorize a passage. He reads only a few words, but the whole passage reads “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own” (Bradbury, 79). It’s funny that Bradbury picks this particular passage, he is telling Montag to not be worried, that it will all be right in the end, for do the flowers of the field worry about who shall clothe them? No, they simply live. As he is attempting memorization, he is repeatedly interrupted by a commercial for a dental product. An inner struggle ensues between the verse and the commercial in Montag’s mind, turning from one to the other. Bradbury gives us a glimpse through Montag’s struggle at the battle being fought in society. The beating down of individual thought left open a void that is filled with mindless entertainment and frivolous pass times. The captain of the Firemen himself said “With school turning out more runners, jumpers, racers, tinkerers, grabbers, snatchers, fliers, and swimmers instead of examiners, critics, knowers, and imaginative creators, the word `intellectual,’ of course, became the swear word it deserved to be” (Bradbury, 58). There are few left who remember what religion was truly about, but they are exiles who live on the fringe of the city. In a society where Bibles are burned and morals are not set steadfast in a belief-system to keep them accountable, Bradbury demonstrates the danger of not having a system to guide ones actions. This of course, results in moral decay and the pit of violence that many will fall into. Clarisse has this to say about her generation “They…go to bed or head for a Fun Park to bully people around, break windowpanes in the Window Smasher place or wreck cars in the Car Wrecker place…I’m afraid of children my own age. They kill each other” (Bradbury, 30).

We find an unlikely Christ-figure in young Clarisse McClellan. A bright spot in this gray world, Clarisse shows Montag all that the world has to offer outside of burning things. She shows him the joy of the little things like smelling the flowers along the path, and all that books can do for one who dares to read them. When she shows him the joy of the rain, Montag is so overcome with the simplicity of it that he has an almost out of body experience. Water is used to signify purity and salvation in the Christian religion, and when Montag takes in the rain he opens his mind to new ideas and new thoughts. Just as in the Christian faith, the water has washed him clean and he now begins a new life. When she disappeared it left a hole in his life, although it wasn’t immediately noticed; this parallels how Jesus’ disciples were left after his ascension. Her death propelled him to seek the truth, ‘woke him up’ in a sense. He never forgot her, she was everywhere “As many times as he went out of the house…Clarisse was there somewhere it the world…three or four times he found a bouquet of flowers on his porch, or a handful of chestnuts in a little sack…Every day Clarisse walked him to the corner” (Bradbury, 28). Because of her, Montag pursues a literary adventure which brings him to Faber who in turn points him to the exiled professors outside of the city. Because of this Montag is out of danger when the enemy completely decimates the city. Clarisse, no matter how inadvertently, saved Montag’s life.

Who then is the Satan figure? Is it Captain Beatty, the man who directly opposes Montag? “A book is a loaded gun in the house next door. Burn it. Take the shot from the weapon. Breach man’s mind. Who knows who might be the target of the well-read man? Me? I won’t stomach them for a minute” (Bradbury, 58) he says. Is the idea of Satan shown in the machine used to pump Mildred’s stomach? Bradbury says “…slid down your stomach like a black cobra…it fed in silence with an occasional sound of inner suffocation and blind searching…It had an Eye…He saw but did not see what the Eye saw” (Bradbury, 14). It is after this that she becomes hollow and vacant, as if all life and vitality was taken from her. Perhaps the Satan figure is not a figure at all, but more of a feeling. Many of the characters in Fahrenheit 45I are without substance, easily swayed from one ideal to another. Without a grounded set of ideals, like one will find in organized religion, it would be easy to be sucked of life and filled with idol thoughts and actions.

Bradbury frequently alludes to the Christian Bible, and his use of religious imagery shows the importance that he places on the ideas consistent with the teachings of organized religion. “Christ is one of the ‘family’ now. I often wonder if God recognizes his own son the way we’ve dressed him up, or is it dressed him down? He’s regular peppermint stick now, all sugar crystal and saccharine – when he isn’t making veiled references to certain commercial products that ever worshiper absolutely needs” (Bradbury, 81). Within this book, Bradbury almost weeps at the way Christ has been perverted; twisted and made into a celebrity icon who is only useful for product ads. Bradbury himself was a religious man, although he was not a professing Christian. He recognizes the good that religion brings to the world, the steadfast morals it provides and the support it gives when one is searching for answers. With the world increasingly becoming offended by things like religious concepts, is Bradbury warning us of our future? It would seem as if this is true, and so one has to wonder: are we prepared for this?

Introduction

An in-depth consideration of Bible Translation processes offers useful points of reflection for translators across a variety of specializations. Such work brings to light the essentialism of cultural and artistic content held within original texts. By understanding the history of bible translation, challenges and approaches taken by bible translators, language experts can benefit. Scholars and professionals reflect upon the usefulness of sense-for-sense translation compared to literal translation and a number of techniques used to navigate the lack of relevant vocabulary within a language. Eugene Nida, a dominant scholar in contemporary translation studies played a lead role in the development of translation approaches. Toward a Science of Translating, which was published by Nida in 1964 has been referred to by some as the bible of translation (Wilt22). Despite Nida’s orientation towards language in religious context, it’s concepts have provided useful frames of reference for translators in general (Wilt 22). Nida co-authored The Theory and Practice of Translation with Charles Taber which outlined ‘new attitudes’ as approaches to bible translation (1969:3-9). This work identifies a number of key principles shared by translation scholars today including the concept that “each language has its own genius” and that in order to translate effectively, “one must respect the genius of each language” (qtd in Wilt 22). Said ideas have provided a foundation for the current understanding of bible translation. Taking into account the broad relevance of these principles, I will synthesize a number of scholarly works related to Bible Translation in order to provide a general overview of their most prominent themes.

Body of the paper

William Tyndale, is the first known scholar to translate the Latin bible into English. Leading up to the 16th century, the bible was completely inaccessible to lay people. This required the consultation of clergymen to understand the sacred texts. Although bible translation today does not carry the same risk and controversy as it did during the Reformation period, scholars may be interested in the history of bible translation, challenges faced by translators, and the approaches adopted to navigate them. Bible translation is unique as it carries cultural significance. The content of the sacred text having had a profound impact on historical events, societal norms, and the everyday lives of many religiously-inclined individuals, warrants thorough consideration. Reproduction of its meaning requires a profound understanding of the implications of language in both the source and target.

Bible translation takes on various forms including interlingual and intralingual and intersemiotic translation. Efforts have been made to translate the New and Old Testament from the original Greek and Hebrew languages into other target languages, including formerly unwritten ones. Intralingual translation work has built upon the aim of accessibility by providing the bible in registers of language more understandable and commonly spoken by average people. Intersemiotic translation, while most neglected among the three forms of bible translation has been carried out by a few organizations, namely into American Sign Language.

Translators across all genres face the challenge of reconstructing meaning through entirely different sets of linguistic codes. The German word, “Waldeinsamkeit” has been referred to by many across a number of linguistic sites as “untranslatable”. Russian linguist and translation expert, Roman Jakobson found “the dogma of untranslatability” to be unfounded (Jakobson). In On Linguistic Aspects of Translation Jakobson maintains that “all cognitive experience and its classification is conveyable in any language” (Jakobson 234). Although languages often do not share perfect one-to-one relationships, their facilitation still is possible. Although no single word exists to convey the thought behind the German word Waldeinsamkeit, it may yield the English translation “The feeling of solitude and connectedness to nature when being alone in the woods.”[footnoteRef:0] It is possible for translators to overcome the lack of correspondence between such words and phrases by focusing on meaning. According to Nida and Taber, it is possible to translate any utterance unless the form is essential to its meaning. In fact, they argue that form must be changed to preserve the content of the message (1969: 3-9). Within the discipline of translation however, there is no overall consensus as to which approach is preferable. Some bible translators and organizations argue that word for word or literal translation upholds the original use of language. Brunn proposes a balanced view of form and meaning, arguing that they are inseparable in every language. Therefore, fidelity to both these aspects are essential in bible translation. “Each form is worthless without its meaning, and meaning can be communicated only by some kind of form”, Brunn explained (38). It is not possible to completely mirror the form of the original text. In fact, Brunn argued that translation intrinsically requires a change in form(38). In many cases, translators may completely abandon the literal use of words, in order to preserve its meaning. Brunn provided examples of such changes through the substitution of the English word “heart” for the Hebrew word “kidneys” to express deep feelings or intentions (47). Such a change reflects the need for translators to consider the cultural implications of their choices. [0: ]

Distinct features of language make it difficult and sometimes impossible to preserve the artistic or cultural content of an utterance. According to Jakobson, “poetry by definition is untranslatable (Jakobson 238).” Linguistic components such as syntax, morphology, and isochrony are a few factors which work together to produce an artistic effect. As it is impossible to entirely duplicate such elements into another language, creative transposition, which is defined as a recreation of poetic form, is the only route. Robert Alter argues that the rhythmic characteristic of the Hebrew bible has largely been abandoned by modern English translators, citing Everett Fox, Buber and Rosenzweig’s American emulator as exceptions (24). In The Art of Bible Translation Alter argues that poetic and narrative texts can be translated in some, but not all cases:

This artfulness, which cannot be separated from the religious meanings of the texts, sometimes can be conveyed effectively in English; sometimes an English solution can be found that to a degree intimates the stylistic strengths of the original, though imperfectly; and sometimes, alas, the translator must throw up his hands in despair because there seems no workable English equivalent for the stylistic effects of the Hebrew (25- 26)

The organizational aspect of translation is also worthy of consideration. The bible, being the most widely translated book in the world, has over 670 complete translations, as well as a number of partial translations. The accessibility of the bible across languages is the common goal of most translation teams. But some organizations particularly support and facilitate the translation of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures into less commonly spoken languages. Scholars have found that such translations present unique challenges not experienced by translators of common languages. Citing the New International Version as a point of comparison, Nico Daams distinguishes between minority and majority language groups in the process of delivering accurate, natural, and clear translations. The translation body of the NIV benefited from adequate funding which afforded them highly trained language experts and bible scholars, with the best original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic texts (288).

Fragments of the New Testament, Old Testament, or single books are available in at least 3,000 languages. A number of worldwide organizations dedicate their efforts to increasing accessibility of the Christian scriptures. One of the most well known bible translation organisations, Wycliffe, operates with the mission to spread their message to those who have not been reached due to language barriers. Since being founded in 1942, Wycliffe has played an important role in bible translation worldwide (Hong 21). The organization has since grown to have more than 3,600 members in more than 2,200 countries (Hong 34). According to Joseph Hong, the organization’s outreach is increased by its’ ethnic diversity. Hong argues that a number of mandates found throughout the bible call for christian solidarity which supersedes ethnic and cultural differences (Hong 44). Recognition of this unifying principle is said to contribute to the success of Wycliffe as a world leading bible translation organization.

Jehovah’s Witnesses, have undertaken the project of translating the bible and bible literature into as many languages as possible. The first edition of The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures became available in English in 1950[footnoteRef:1]. Jehovah’s Witnesses prioritized the rendering of the Divine name “Jehovah” found in the original Greek and Hebrew texts, which has been omitted from other translations. Since 1961, bible translation committees have continued to produce translations in over 120 languages. February 20th of 2020, they announced the world’s first complete American Sign Language bible, which has been distributed progressively since 2004. [1: ]

Each target language into which the bible is translated poses unique challenges. Linguistic relativity or the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis maintains that an individual’s perception of the world and interpretation of events is informed by one’s native language. In particular languages, a lack of adequate vocabulary, contextual differences, and connotations may pose challenges to bible translators. According to Monica Romano’s essay Terminological issues in Bible translation, it has been found that many principles and concepts found in the Christian bible are either nonexistent or opposed to “Chinese culture and religious-philosophical tradition”. Two approaches are taken to approximate biblical language in Chinese: “borrowing indigenous religious-philosophical terms” which [are] familiar to the Chinese” and “using phonetic transcriptions or neologisms” (85) For example, early missionaries in China struggled to most effectively translate ‘God’. Initially, a phonetic transcription of the Latin Deus was used. Jesuits later decided to transpose the term into familiar language, using the Chinese words for ‘heaven, supreme god, and ruler’. Some were opposed to this choice, arguing that such language use is incompatible with Christianity. Such negotiations have continued concerning a number of terms including the Tetragrammaton (JHVH), Holy Spirit, and Jesus Christ.

Bible translation involves a series of drafting, consultation, and reviewal. Katharine Barnwell found that while the order of events varies, each must take place to produce a translation. Before the second or final draft is completed, the copy must be reviewed by native speakers to test the naturalness of the production. This process though is not trouble-free. According to Stafaniw, the involved members of the translation process are each deeply invested in their work. Disagreements that arise may not necessarily be rooted in dogma, but differing ideas surrounding the sanctity of the bible, translation practices, and the limits of bible translation. Consultants and translation teams may take a variety of routes when resolving disagreements which Stafaniw categorized as “reacting to the conflict” or “resolving the conflict”. This study found that establishing mutual trust and respect is crucial in forming a successful bible translation team.

Ni Wayan Swarrniti identified 11 translation techniques by means of a content analysis of the Gospel book, Mark: Transference, Cultural Equivalent, Functional Equivalent, Descriptive Equivalent, Synonymy, Shifts or Transpositions, Modulation, Compensation, Paraphrase, Couplets, and Notes (189). Transference is described as the process of transferring a word from the source language into the target language. This, being a common understanding of the practice translation, it is noteworthy that it only constituted 8% of the translation (Swarniti 189). On the other hand, shifting or transposition is shown to be a well-favored approach to biblical utterances .The process involves a change in grammatical form between the source and target language. The findings concerning transposition were ultimately divided into three kinds of transposition “singular to plural changing, structure changing, and class of word changing”(192), Swarniti concluded that 21% of the data was found to be shifted or transposed. Such findings illustrate the complexity of the translation of cultural content (187). It is made clear through this content analysis that a holistic approach would be inadequate in rendering an effective translation.

Among religious scholars, there is no consensus as to whether or not accurate bible translation is possible. Naomi Tadmor in the Social and Cultural Translation of the Hebrew Bible in Early Modern England examines the cultural implications of translating the Old Testament. This chapter details the limitations found in early English translations of the Hebrew bible. The sanctity of the bible was believed to call warrant word-for-word translation, emphasizing order and structure rather than sense. Christo Lombaard compares bible translation to a game of hide and seek, affirming that translation offers only some meaning offered by the original text rather than all. In this way, translators play the role of narrators; balancing an interplay between content and form. “With religious texts, such as the Bible, the problem is compounded by a complex matrix of attitudes and expectations on the part of the intended readers and, though differently, on the part of the translators”(Lombaard 5). A lack of context from the societies in which religious texts are written presents bible translators with a complex challenge. The instability of meaning, creates uncertainty in the process, due to the traditional implications of language, which somehow can be lost in time.

Translators take advantage of a number of reference tools, such as study notes, in order to approximate the Greek and Hebrew utterances found in the bible. Ernst Wendlands reflects upon this in “Theologizing” in Bible Translation with Special Reference to Study Notes in Chichewa. As previously outlined, bible translation is complicated by the number of idiosyncrasies involved with the transfer of rich meaning including the “historical, sociocultural, linguistic, literary, and ecological” contexts in which it was produced (Wendland 317). Wendland concurs with previous bible translation scholarship that it is not possible to fully convey its theological meaning as it was originally intended. This is especially true within the context of the Chichewa language. Wendland’s preparation of the Buku Loyera version of the Chichewa bible led him to one main conclusion concerning the translation effort in this particular language. Bible translation can be summarised as the task of “re-representing” the content through a “functional equivalent” (318). Such an endeavor required special focus on the intended audience of the translation, by considering the cultural context in which the project was situated. In overcoming linguistic interference, footnotes are oftentimes insufficient in preventing confusion and misunderstandings (322). Study notes on the other hand, provide in-depth explanations of translation choices including the historical or cultural context that the utterance seeks to describe. Although the transfer of such content between languages is by no means perfect, study notes allow translators to approximate meaning in a transparent manner.

Consideration of the studies and reflections above provide an overview of the common issues faced by bible translators, ongoing scholarly debates surrounding biblical translation, and a look into the production process. Such an overview demonstrates the creative nature of bible translation as well as the implications of word choice. Such insight may be useful to translators across a wide range of genres. By analyzing the challenges associated with one most unique and complicated texts, translators can borrow such tactics in their translation endeavors.

References

1. Alter, Robert. The Art of Bible Translation. Princeton University Press, 2019. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvc77mt7. Accessed 28 Mar. 2020.
2. Barnwell, K.. An introductory course for mother-tongue translators (1st ed.). Jos, Benue-Plateau State Nigeria: Institute of Linguistics. 1975
3. Brunn, Dave. One Bible, Many Versions : Are All Translations Created Equal? . InterVarsity Press, 2013.
4. Daams, Nico. “Quality Bible Translation in Minority Languages: Can It Be Done?” The Bible Translator, vol. 66, no. 3, Dec. 2015, pp. 287–297, doi:10.1177/2051677015608613.
5. Griffith, Sidney H. The Bible in Arabic: The Scriptures of the ‘People of the Book’ in the
6. Language of Islam, Princeton University Press, 2013, pp. 1–6. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt28550z.5. Accessed 30 Jan. 2020.
7. Hong, Hyunmin, and Samuel H. Larsen. “Enriched by Diversity: The Transformation of Wycliffe Bible Translators USA into a Multiethnic Organization.” ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2010. Web.
8. Jakobson, Roman. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” On Translation, edited by Reuben A. Brower, Harvard University Press, 1959, pp.232-239.
9. Lombaard, C. “Hide and Seek. Aspects of the Dynamics of Bible Translation.” Acta Theologica, vol. 29, University of the Free State Faculty of Theology, Jan. 2009, pp. 1–15, http://search.proquest.com/docview/2183696955/.
10. Nida, Eugene A, and Charles R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: Published for the United Bible Societies by E.J. Brill, 1982. Print.
11. Nida, Eugene A. Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: Brill, 1964. Print.
12. Romano, Monica. “The Reception of Christianity in China: Terminological Issues in Bible Translation.” Talking Literature: Essays on Chinese and Biblical Writings and Their Interaction, edited by Raoul David Findeisen and Martin Slobodník, 1st ed., Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden, 2013, pp. 85–100. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvc16rxs.12. Accessed 28 Mar. 2020.
13. Stefaniw, Roman W. Negotiating Bible Translation: Text, Teams, and Conflict, Biola University
14. Swarniti, N. W. “The Translation Procedures of Bible Translation”. RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa, vol 5 no.2, 2019 pp.187-196, http://dx.doi.org/10.22225/jr.5.2.1277.187-196
15. Tadmor, Naomi. “The Social and Cultural Translation of the Hebrew Bible in Early Modern
16. England: Reflections, Working Principles, and Examples.” Early Modern Cultures of Translation, edited by Karen Newman and Jane Tylus, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015 188. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt169zt50.11. Accessed 30 Jan. 2020.
17. Wendland, Ernst R. “‘Theologizing’ in Bible Translation with Special Reference to Study Notes in Chichewa.” The Bible Translator 53.3 (2002): 316–330. Web.
18. Wilt, Timothy. Bible Translation : Frames of Reference, Routledge, 2002. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uncc-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1666906.

As time went by, and the world moved on from the Classical Age into the Roman Age, fewer Christians understood Greek, and so the Church had to find a way to cater for its audience. The solution was for the Bible to be translated into Latin. St Jerome, known as the father of translation, was the one to translate the Bible into Latin, his version being known as the Vulgate. His view on translating literally or translating the meaning of the text varied. He believed in sense for sense translation of a papal letter, but also voiced his belief in a literal translation of Scripture, as he claimed that “the very order of the words is a mystery.”

In spite of this, he acknowledged how the Gospels offered free renderings of the Hebrew Bible which differed from the Septuagint, and so concluded that “in Scripture, one must consider not the words but the sense.” His slogan, so to speak, became “non verbum e verbo, sed sensum exprimere de sensu” (Derrida 370). Venuti goes on to point out that Jerome’s favouring of a free translation also implies a certain over-translation at times. He gives the contrasting example of Matthew’s verse with prophetic undertones, “Out of Egypt I have called my son,” which refers to the holy family’s flight from Herod, and the same verse in the Hebrew text: “When Israel was a child I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” According to Venuti, Jerome’s Vulgate applies some Christianity to Judaic themes (“Foundational Statements” 15). His views and favouring of the free translation were strongly respected throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

The first translation of the complete Bible into English was done by theologian John Wycliffe in the 14th century. He believed in dominion by grace, which for him meant that each man should be granted direct access to the Bible, hence his mission to translate it fully between 1380 and 1384, and into the vernacular, the language spoken by the people. Wycliffe followed Jerome’s beliefs and in the prologue to the 1395 Bible translation said that the best translation is from Latin straight into English, about which Venuti said that “the avoidance of word-for-word translation was a proselytizing move designed to increase access to the sacred text” (“Foundational Statements” 16). Biblical translation also played a part in popularising vernaculars, and at times, just like language is, the Bible was ironically used as a divide. There was a time when the Church did not allow for the Bible to be translated into European vernaculars, as a means of holding the power. This helped to divide further the Protestants and the Catholics, as the Protestants were against priests and the clergy and believed in direct communication with God. Nonetheless, Wycliffe and his circle of followers were considered heretical for advocating for translations into the vernacular.

The Wycliffite was revised by John Purvey in 1408, at which point 150 copies in manuscript form existed. In the 16th century, William Tyndale did the first translation in print, and translated parts of the Old Testament from Hebrew and the New Testament from Greek. He was considered as a heretic in a time when people who were found in the unlicensed possession of an English Bible were given the death penalty, and so, he was eventually burned at the stake. Steiner claims that he was “the greatest of English Bible translators” (365). In the early 16th century, vernacular translations of the Bible were prohibited in England, about which Alister McGrath commented, “What would happen if an English translation of the Bible were to be produced abroad, and smuggled into England?” He said that the English shut this translation down as they were threatened by the development of the printing technology in Europe, and saw this production of the Bible as a business venture (22-23). By 1611, there were more than 50 English Bibles, of which Steiner recounts that in art, the text most successfully domesticated is the King James Bible in English (365). Martin Luther was a protagonist in vernacular version of the Bible ordeal, as in the 1500s, he chose to translate the Bible into High German, the dialect he was most familiar with, spoken “by the mother in the home, the children on the street, the common man in the marketplace” (Luther 189). This was in line with Erasmus’ plea for Christian people to read the Bible in their vernacular (François “Erasmus’s Revision” 72).

Erasmus’ major contribution to the advancement of the Reformation was his publication in 1516 of a Greek-Latin parallel New Testament which became foundational to much of the translation work of the reformers. The status of the Bible in Germany, following Luther’s translation, changed the status of the dialect by elevating it to the standard form of the German language. In doing this, he also applied Jerome’s sense for sense strategy, subtly revising the Biblical text. According to Antoine Berman, “Luther attempted to do two things: translate into German that a priori can only be local, his own German, Hochdeutsch, but at the same time elevate, by the very process of translation, this local German to the status of a common German, a lingua franca” (46-7).

Throughout Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez symbolizes Santiago Nasar as a Christlike figure by utilizing numerous parallels with the physical and moral characteristics of Jesus Christ. While the shared themes of fate, sin, and honor are chronicled within both Marquez’s novel and The Bible, Marquez underlies his narrative with subliminal allusions between Santiago and Jesus Christ to provide commentary on cultural traditions and social order in Latin-American and Biblical societies.

In his writing, Marquez draws upon these cultural traditions like honor, that were destroyed during the lives of Santiago and Christ, but redeemed through their respective sacrifices. Through this use of religious subtext, Gabriel García Márquez portrays the sacrifice of Santiago as a Christlike figure to prevent the destruction of order within his community. By utilizing biblical allusions through character names and Santiago’s portrayal, Marquez is able to further delineate the community’s link to Christian literature, culminating in Nasar’s murder. Firstly, this is denoted by Santiago’s own name, which is much akin to that of Jesus Christ. Translated from Ladino, the Sephardic-Spanish language, Santiago means Saint, which suggests sanctity and purity.

Correspondingly, Nasar is derived from Nazareth, most commonly used in the title Jesus of Nazareth. The culmination of these names contrast substantially with the guilt of his community and “their own crime,” (Garcia Marquez, 118) resulting in Santiago’s death. Comparatively, Santiago’s community members are characterized as having similar names to those in biblical literature as well. Clotilde Armenta, for example, can be translated to St. Clothilde, while Pablo and Pedro Vicario are analogous to the conflict-ridden Peter and Paul. Likewise, their father Poncio Vicario can be compared to Pontius Pilate, who allowed for the crucifixion of Jesus, as he took no action to prevent his sons from murdering Nasar due to marital expectations in Catholicism. With these numerous parallels, Gabriel Garcia Marquez directly compares the innocence of Santiago with the sanctity of Jesus, as well as the community’s sins with the historic social woes of Judea. Acting through sacrifice, Jesus and Santiago restore social order by dying for the honor of those who are guilty; their respective societies.

By examining Santiago and his community through both their personal identity and through the lens of Christianity, the Christlike aspect of Nasar’s fate is further cemented to prevent the destruction of social order. Moreover, throughout the novel, Marquez poses the question of whether or not the actions of society can overshadow the actions of an individual, which leads to Santiago inadvertently dying for the sins of his community. As seen through the Christian religion, the figure of Jesus died for the sins of his people, but to Pontius Pilate, who ordered him killed, it was a matter of honor. Despite reportedly finding “no basis for a charge against this man.” (The Bible, Luke 23:4) Pontius Pilate fell to the pressure of those who expected him to take Christ’s life due to social order. Comparably, Santiago’s characterization of being a sacrificial lamb “in white linen” (Garcia Marquez, 3) falls to his Latin community’s moral obsession with “a matter of honor,” to cite Pablo Vicario, that existed “before God and before men.” (Garcia Marquez, 49) This theme of moral submission is common within the social order of both Pilate’s regime and Santiago’s community, and helps Marquez argue that the desires and cultural traditions of societies can squander any individual moral virtue. This similarity creates an even stronger link between these two men through the redemption of sin in their deaths as they both act as foils to their community’s guilt and sin. While Santiago and Jesus themselves had not committed any substantiated crimes, they are the ones that receive the blame and punishment through their respective sacrifices in dying for the sins of other.

Within the text of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the actions surrounding the death of Jesus Christ are replicated to portray the of Santiago’s murder and establish the importance of fate in social order. “On the day they were going to kill him,” (Garcia Marquez, 1), as the first line of the novel claims, fate is symbolized as fact; it is unchangeable due to unmovable cultural forces in Santiago’s world, like restoration of honor, and the inability of his community to act. Similarly, the fate of Jesus Christ had been foretold by Old Testament writings, and was seen as an immovable force, as mentioned with “He would suffer execution but without the breaking of any of His bones.” (The Bible, Psalms 34:20) In Chronicle of a Death Foretold, it was the sins of his community acting as an ulterior force that brought about Santiago’s fate. From Father Amador, who “thought it had all been a fib” (Garcia Marquez, 35) to Mayor Don Lázaro Aponte, who believed Santiago “wasn’t in any danger anymore” (Garcia Marquez, 36), the foretold chain of guilt continues throughout the social order, far beyond Bayardo San Roman, Pablo and Pedro Vicario, and Angela, who sinfully blames Santiago; engulfing Santiago’s whole community.

Marquez utilizes this irony of the community playing god, as they bring divine will into their own judgement by deciding who is punished and who is not. It is not only the community, however, that reflects his fate. Even further evident is Santiago’s choice to put on “a shirt and pants of white linen” (Garcia Marquez, 5), which Marquez utilizes with dual implications. Firstly, it shows an unquestionable resemblance to Jesus Christ, foreshadowing that he would be ‘sacrificed.’ Particularly with Santiago’s choice of white, representing purity and innocence, Marquez provides foreshadowing imagery of a “lamb being led to slaughter,”(The Bible, Acts 8:32) an allusion to New Testament scripture. Secondly, the white linen alludes to historical Christian burial tradition in which the deceased are wrapped in a white linen shroud to represent what Jesus had worn during his crucifixion. Gabriel Garcia Marquez employs this knowledge to characterize Nasar as if he were already dead, symbolizing that his fate had already been prophesied, and that he will die a symbolic death.

Similarly, as Marquez describes near the conclusion of the novel, Santiago is stabbed through his hand before the knives of Pedro and Pablo Vicario, actually reach his body. The knife is described as going through the palm of his right hand and then sank into his side” (Garcia Marquez, 117). This way of death is comparable to that of Jesus Christ, in that his hands and feet were nailed to the cross. This was referred to as the bleeding of hands in The Bible. Biblically, this cause of death is later supported by Santiago’s autopsy when Father Amador reports that “it looked like a stigma of the crucified Christ.” (Garcia Marquez, 75) Marquez uses these biblical descriptions help symbolize the societal magnitude of Santiago’s death, as he dies an innocent man for the sinful actions of his own community. Santiago’s fate restores honor to the Vicario twins, therefore preventing the destruction of the community’s social order.

Throughout the novel, Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s utilization of religious subtext helps portray Santiago as a Christlike figure whose sacrifice prevents the destruction of order within his community. With this, Marquez draws numerous parallels between Santiago Nasar and Jesus Christ to symbolize their sacrifices’ significance in restoring social order and taking ownership of their societies’ guilt and sin. Ultimately, the Chronicle of a Death Foretold serves as a literary testament to how the sacrifice of Christlike figures serve as universal commentary on the themes of fate, sin, honor, and the actions of society.

The books read in Search are historical texts that laid the foundation for societies, ancient and modern. The western philosophy of society is illustrated throughout the texts. The common themes that link them shows the moral compass that was valued, then and now. Western tradition is sewn deeply into the texts of the Search course to guide one according to the norms of the time. Whether it is to be honorable, loyal, or any other moral characteristics of ancient western culture, these texts laid the tiles for the path toward knowing ethics of “the west”. Our society today is deeply founded in western philosophy. Through our laws, our religions, and what is believed as right and wrong, it is clear that those principles were made and preserved by western texts like The Bible, The Odyssey, and even as far back as The Epic of Gilgamesh. As all of these texts are intertwined to show western tradition, the Search course rightfully can be represented as a study of western religion and philosophy.

The first text read in Search, The Epic of Gilgamesh, is the oldest epic poem, predating Homer by many centuries. The story was preserved on tablets that date back to approximately 2700 BC. The Epic of Gilgamesh shows the origin of epic poetry; it sets the foundation for the Greek and Roman texts to come. Though it is placed in Sumerian Uruk, modern day Iraq, it would still be considered a western text because of the influence it has on later western text. The concepts of friendship and the fear of death that play out throughout The Epic of Gilgamesh are themes found throughout the texts after. For example, in the Hebrew Bible, it states that “Very truly, I tell you, whoever keeps my word will never see death” (John 8:51). The Bible is referencing death in this passage as escapable if you follow God. The fear of death is shown best when Gilgamesh’s friend Enkidu dies, and he searches for the source of immortality (Tablet VIII). His friend, Enkidu, leads to great mourning for him but overall, he is faced with the inevitable fact that everyone’s lives come to an end. Enkidu was a destined friend of Gilgamesh, made to help Gilgamesh grow as a person and a king. The theme of friendship and how it betters one another is frequent throughout different texts as well. In the Aeneid, Nisus and Euryalus are a pair of friends and lovers who briefly are shown as an example for their amour pious, a love that shows to be one of Aeneas’s own distinguishing virtues throughout the book. The Western tradition begins with The Epic of Gilgamesh, illustrated for years to come through the texts of later ancient societies.

The Odyssey is western epic poem written in Greece and attributed to Homer in 675-725 BCE. The Odyssey covers themes of loyalty, honor, and hospitality, showing the model for the society of Greek culture. Loyalty is a highly important characteristic valued by ancient Greek society. Throughout The Odyssey, the men travelling with him were tested in loyalty alongside Odysseus’s wife, who remained loyal to Odysseus, although he was absent. In the Qur’an, the theme of loyalty, is shown as honorable and faithful. For example, in book 2, it states, “Do you not see those who claim to believe in what has been sent down to you, and in what was sent down before you, yet still want to turn to unjust tyrants for judgement, although they have been ordered to reject them?” (2.12). The Qur’an is explaining how people will talk about God and believing in him while not truly being loyal to him in the face of authority on earth. The Bible also talks about being loyal to him and not to false idols in the ten commandments found by Moses (Exodus 20:1). The theme of loyalty throughout these texts are representing the important characteristics to western tradition. Being loyal leads to honor for oneself that is also valued throughout history.

Honor is valued throughout multiple western texts and showed as a moral character to be treasured. In the Odyssey, honor and glory was valued as a trademark of a good person of society. For instance, when Odysseus binds the cyclops Polyphemus in order to avenge the deaths of six crew members: the violence is an act of honor because vengeance is customary and just (9.210-230). Honor for a greater cause is valued throughout western texts. In Saint Augustine’s confessions, he says ‘Wondrous depth of Thy words! whose surface, behold! is before us, inviting to little ones. Yet are they a wondrous depth, O my God, a wondrous depth! It is awful to look therein, an awfulness of honor and a trembling of love.’ (12.14.17). He is referring to himself and the society as a whole as a dishonor for their sins. He is seeing how people have colluded honor to fit their own schemes rather than the plan of God. Honor for oneself had evolved to being kind to one another and to be hospitable.

Hospitality was shown numerous times throughout the Odyssey as honoring one another by inviting strangers into their home. Telemachus inviting Athena, in disguise as a stranger, into their home, despite the ruckus of the suitors who pervert the tradition of hospitality (1.120-130), shows the value and importance of hospitality to someone in ancient Greek culture. Hospitality and kindness for one another is represented throughout all the texts studied in search. The action of hospitality towards others is also illustrated throughout the Qur’an, as the prophet Muhammad reminds the Islamic people of the high status of one who treats guests well by stating “Behold, they entered his presence and said: ‘Peace!’ He said: ‘Peace!’ Then he turned quickly to his household, brought out a roasted fattened calf, and placed it before them. He said: ‘Will you not eat?’ (51: 24-27). Honoring one another by showing kindness and hospitality is a virtue valued amongst the Islamic texts while also being illustrated as a vital virtue. In The Bible, for example, “At that hour of the night, the jailer took them and washed their wounds; the immediately he and all his household were baptized. The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God—he and his whole household.” (Acts 16:33-34). Holding the Western Tradition dear, these texts perpetrate it through these writings to preserve and continue to tradition to come.

The Bible is a religious western text read throughout both semesters of Search. The Bible is a collection of works that date from 1200 BC to the first century AD. The Bible is an important text of western culture because of the influence it has had in history and society today. The followers of the Bible are Christians and Jewish. Each book of the bible leads with a distinct theme to teach through parables and story. The major themes that relay back to the constructs of western tradition are forgiveness and mercy towards one another.

According to The Bible, having grace and forgiveness for one another is an invaluable principle to grasp. Because of the story of Jesus and his sacrifice on the cross, the book of Luke states plainly, “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.’ (Luke 6:37). To walk under the practice of the New Testament Bible, one needed to follow the virtues presented as characteristic of Jesus. Forgiveness for one another is also held to a high status in the Qur’an: “Show forgiveness, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the ignorant.” (7.199). The sympathy and forgiveness throughout western religious texts are to be shown as virtues of God, in which one would want to follow. Forgiveness is a fundamental principle of western philosophy and religion. In Dante’s Inferno, to reach the reader and show of Dante’s character as an honorable character, Dante considers the quality of compassion—defined as having pity for another man’s suffering—an essential human trait (Canto 5). Sometimes Dante’s compassion for the sinners’ plights reaches such a depth that Dante himself seems to suffer with them. However, as he continues going to lower and lower circles, he is seen to become compassionless and lacking mercy or forgiveness to those in hell. He lacks sympathy for those in hell less and less because they didn’t get forgiveness from God. The theme of forgiveness and sympathy towards one another are depicted as a valuable principle of being human. Forgiveness is to have mercy on someone, to not hold someone back because of past mistakes.

Mercy is spoken about throughout The Bible to be given to one another as it has been given by God to the world. The book of Luke states to “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.” Mercy is a value of the Qur’an, which states “No one despairs of God’s soothing mercy except those who have no faith.” (12:87). Mercy as morality in western religion is to lead people to follow in the footstep of God and not be hateful or vengeful towards one another. Because of the brutality and merciless Roman empire at the time, a new idea of being merciful to one another changed the social norm of Roman culture.

Throughout all these texts, the underlying themes embedded into the western traditions have been engraved in time to be remembered as a moral code for people today. As all these texts are from, geographically, the same western Indo-European area, they show more of their western culture through the values and morals they hold. Western philosophy and religion can show where civilization began and adapted as a society we know today. The influential texts being referred to as “the west” is valid while still being revered as vital and influential to this day. The Bible, Qur’an, Epic of Gilgamesh, The Odyssey and so forth, represent the progression of western society as they moved towards slowly changing the societal norms and how far they had come. As the themes demonstrated throughout these texts are intertwined with one another, they are undoubtedly what founded the moral code and status quo of ancient civilization and society of today.

Published in 1954, Lord of the Flies by William Golding is a classic novel that talks about the conflict between the human impulse towards savagery and the rules of civilization. It is an allegorical tale where Golding explains the brutality of World War II, as it delivers a message about real-world issues and incidents from the war to help people understand the importance of laws and rules. Golding uses biblical allusion to portray the character of a boy named Simon, the pig’s head and the island through the conflicts and events shown in the novel.

The crash site, the island, is the main allusion in this novel, portraying as the garden of Eden from the book of Genesis. Its scenery, abundant fruit and idyllic weather, are keen similarities between the two paradises, that is, before the boys arrive and destroy it. For example, the author alludes the boys to the biblical characters of Adam and Eve. They represent the innocence that people are born into, much like they both are at the time of their creation: “Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame” (Genesis 2:25). Similarly, Ralph’s first act on the island is to remove his clothes and swim in the water, a gesture that recalls the nudity and the act of baptism. Later on, the boys too begin to wear less clothing and eventually go around naked. Another example shows how the boys are present around fruits and nature: “Flower and fruit grew together on the same tree and everywhere was the scent of ripeness and the blooming of a million bees at pasture” (Golding 57) as well as Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. This comparison is highly similar because the island and the garden once started as a paradise, however, it is ruined as Adam, Eve and the boys pursued their savagery and temptation instincts. On the other hand, the beast in both of these stories resemble Satan as it temps both characters from the stories to rebel. Adam and Eve encountered their beast, the snake, in the garden, in attempting to make them eat an apple from the forbidden tree. The boys imagined they saw a “snake-thing” (Golding 73-80) in the forest which made them fear and worship the beast without knowing what it really is. These examples show how similar Golding tries to express that a craving for temptation as well as an unhealthy fear drive this world, is a better understanding of how humanity is similar to the time of God’s creation. In the end, it drives the characters more to the brink of destruction and violence.

In addition to rebelling from their innocent selves, the pig’s head shows a major understanding of the danger of evil within the boys that propels them deeply into a state of savagery and violence, as well as Adam and Eve from God. By eating the apple from the forbidden tree, Adam and Eve disobeyed God’s only rule because of their careless and tempted actions “…So the Lord God banished them from the Garden of Eden..” (Genesis 2:15-17). Similar to this example, one of the boys named Jack is tempted by the desperation of the pig’s meat which symbolizes the forbidden fruit in Lord of the Flies. Here, Golding makes an affirmation of their step into savagery. Corrupted by fear because of the ‘beast’, their perception of it turn out to be more irrational and does what it wants “This head is for the beast. It’s a gift.” (Golding 151). Golding uses this to emphasize the importance of their blindness into temptation, to grow awareness to the world of bad people. Continuing, the beast, who is the Lord of the Flies, is shown as Beelzebub, who is Satan in Hebrew, a similar character to the snake in the book of Genesis. As the Lord of the Flies supposedly talks to Simon, we see that the beast is declaring his intention to destroy all that is good on the island, thus learning the beast’s attempt on tempting Simon to join Jack’s tribe. Simon gradually realizes that there is evil within everyone “You knew, didn’t you? I’m part of you?” (Golding 158) but as he tries to confront the boys with his discoveries, he died because of misunderstandings, a lead to his relations with Jesus. Golding shows the beast as an act of temptation through the characters in the novel, an act in which humans can not differentiate from.

Finally, one of the main characters in the story, Simon, is viewed as a Christ figure. He is spiritual, compassionate, non-violent, and in harmony with the natural world as Jesus did. Both characters are disregarded and not accepted by society. Some may say that his confrontation with the Lord of the Flies resembles Christ’s conversation with the devil during his forty days in the desert, where he tries persuading Simon into having fun by sinning, Satan does the same thing to Jesus by giving him his needs in an act of temptation. Both characters, challenged by evil, overcame it. In addition, readers noted the resemblances of their deaths. During Simon’s death, he was killed as a misunderstanding “the clouds opened and let down the rain like a waterfall” (Golding 153) – an emphasis to the power of evil. Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was killed for his beliefs “there was darkness over the whole land” (Mark 15:33), to relieve the burden of his people’s sins. Golding reveals the similarities in one another to show that they are not different, and that their characters play a big role in their stories. Furthermore, in relation to God, “Simon found for them the fruit they could not reach.” (Golding 56), Simon feeds the littluns fruit, just as Jesus fed the multitudes in the New Testament “Jesus feeds the five thousand” (Matthew 14:13-21). Additionally, the comparison between Simon and Jesus’ secret places are somewhat similar. Simon goes to his secret place in the forest as Jesus goes to the garden to pray. All in all, Golding makes a connection with Jesus to Simon to show their aspects of qualities, action, and death. These characters bring a light to their stories by keeping their beast at bay that resides in the depths people’s heart.

In conclusion, Lord of the Flies by William Golding has shown that all people are inherently evil, and that laws are a need to keep an ordered and civilised society. Their savageness and violence brings a world of destruction, a comparison of why Golding sends a message about war. This idea is worth learning about because it brings a reminder that rules, though sometimes frustrating, are truly necessary to prevent anarchy. Though the similarities of biblical allusions helps the understandings of the novel, to better understand the wildness in someone’s heart.

Universal Truths

What does universal truth mean? By definition, it is defined as a statement that corresponds to reality regardless of time and space. The phrase “One man’s junk is another man’s treasure” is one example of a universal truth. Many times, this statement is used to refer to the relationship between lovers, but in actuality, it can apply to any relationship. Simply put, what one person does not appreciate, another person may find to be extremely valuable. It is my goal to examine both The Hebrew Bible, the story of Job, as well as The Epic of Gilgamesh, and provide examples of some universal truths displayed in each story.

The first body of work I would like to discuss can be found in the Hebrew Bible. In the book of Job, Job was described as an upright man who did his best to live a life that was pleasing in the eyesight of God. Because of this, he received all of his riches, in wealth, health, and love, by default, with little to no effort being made to obtain those things. The phrases “easy come, easy go” and “bad things happen to good people” would best describe what happened to Job during his lifetime. He lost all of his riches, quickly, for nothing being done wrong on his end.

In the Epic of Gilgamesh, we are introduced to a king who does not have the reputation of being a good leader. He was an arrogant man who was disrespectful to the Gods, the people he ruled were unhappy, and he was also a serial rapist. He considered himself to be a man who could not be defeated by anyone or anything, including death. It was said that he met a man, by the name of Enkidu, who equally matched his level of strength, and they would soon go on to become good friends. After defeating and killing Humbaba, a giant monster, and Gilgamesh denying Ishtar, the goddess of love, his love, Enkidu became ill and died. His death frightened the mortal side of Gilgamesh and caused him to go on a quest in hopes of gaining immortality. Ultimately, he failed and he came to the realization that he too would soon perish. In my opinion, the phrases “you reap what you sow” and “death is inevitable” are both very fitting when it comes to the story of Gilgamesh. He was a lousy king who did a lot of bad things and in the end, he suffered because of it even though he initially thought that he could not be defeated, he soon found out that even he was not exempt from death.

When discussing universal truths, some of the lessons learned in early literature still remain true today. In both stories, we are giving many examples of how some of the quotes and phrases we use today were derived from earlier works of literature. From the book of Job, we learned that even though you try to do right by yourself and others that does not mean that you will go through life never experiencing a loss of some sort. In the Epic of Gilgamesh, we learned that whatever you put out is what you will receive and regardless of who you are, we all are subject to death.

Works Cited

1. “One Man’s Trash Is Another Man’s Treasure.” The Free Dictionary, Farlex, idioms.thefreedictionary.com/one man’s trash is another man’s treasure.
2. “Meaning of Easy Come, Easy Go in English.” Cambridge Dictionary, dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/easy-come-easy-go.
3. “You Reap What You Sow.” Stylized | Definition from the Visual Topic | Visual, www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/you-reap-what-you-sow.
4. “Death: A Special Report on the Inevitable.” New Scientist, New Scientist, www.newscientist.com/round-up/death-special-issue/.