The New Testament

Rating:
Summary: Newer Testament
Review: Another translation of the New Testament? Why? Don't we have enough Bibles already? I would not have paid any more attention this book, except that I noted Lattimore's other works.

Lattimore's background was interesting primarily because he had a reputation as a translator of Greek classics. He has translated most the major Greek works, from Homer to anonymous Greek tragic poems - a quick search of Amazon's store will show.

His approach to translating was to remain faithful to the original Greek as possible. Unburdened by dogmatic concerns, he is able to focus on the text itself. For those of us unschooled in ancient Greek, this is an unequalled opportunity to get closer to the writers.

Reading this translation was a very different experience from other translations. For one thing, the text is not printed with chapters and verse numbers - it flows as normal prose. Punctuation is kept to the minimum (in keeping with the ancient texts), so there is none of the "red-letter" versions of the Gospel that are popular among those who feel that Jesus's words are of greater importance than the rest of inspired Scripture.

The writings are now made alive with Lattimore's fresh perspective. I read Paul's letter to the Phillipians and felt the warmth and closeness that the Apostle had towards this community. I found myself reading the letters as a whole, instead of reading them in parts. Traditional bibles are designed almost as reference material, neatly indexed and divided to facilitate skimming and readings of short verses.

This translation is an excellent complement to the Bible.

Rating:
Summary: A Translation Worthy of Its Subject
Review: Greek of the Hellenistic period is notoriously tricky to translate. First there is the matter of distance in time. Many of the idioms have lost their meaning, words have been recorded in the lexicon as having a variety of and often conflicting definitions, and the simple (or not so simple) matter of the differences between a pre-industrialized Mediterranean society and a post-industrial western one all can put seemingly unassailable walls between the scholar and his text. Yet despite all these obstacles, Professor Lattimore has provided the world with one of the finest English translations of the New Testament ever produced.

To say that Professor Lattimore's skill in translating both ancient and Hellenistic Greek is outstanding is to understate the matter. His ability is now legendary. Readers of his translations of Homer, Aeskylus, Euripides, and many others have long hailed them as the superlative editions of the works. We can all thank God that he saw fit to apply his talent to this, the most famous of all the Hellenistic Greek documents.

Doing away with the numbering system and printing the individual books in paragraph form is something someone should have done long ago. The text can now be read as it would have been recited long ago - cleanly and without the distraction of meaningless numbers (they were added centuries after the texts were written).

The texts themselves are splendid. Professor Lattimore took the time to convey the flavor of each one to the reader through subtle changes in style and word choice that most often accurately reflect the original Greek. For example, the stilted and simple language of the Gospel of Mark versus the more refined style of the Gospel of Luke is well established in the English translations. What's more, Professor Lattimore offers notes to the reader explaining why he chose one word or phrase over another. That is a sign of true scholarship rarely, if ever, seen in commercial translations of this text. The only regret that can be stated is that he did not team up with a noted anthropologist of the period, such as Richard Rohrbaugh or Jerome Neyrey, to put the final touches to the cultural subtleties so often lost in translations.

The only detraction from the work is the cover. The Andres Serrano photo on the cloth bound edition is unfortunate. North Point tried to depict the suffering and death of Jesus of Nazareth but ended up simply being gratuitous. It will likely put off many readers who will pass by the book simply because the cover photo is so repulsive. This is a shame. Thankfully, North Point thought the better of using the same photo on the paper bound edition.

Without a doubt, this edition of the New Testament is superior to all the well known editions, from the KJV to the NRSV. It makes such partisan tracts, such as The Book (perhaps the worst, I hesitate to write translation as I think it to be more a conglomeration of various other translations which were then simplified for a fourth grade reading level, edition of the New Testament ever produced) look like the intellectual laughingstocks that they are. I would hope more clergy, both Catholic and Protestant, would read Professor Lattimore's translation and also encourage their congregations to do so. It brings a collection of stories too often obscured by time, distance, and dogma much closer to intelligibility.

Rating:
Summary: Good News? Excuuuse me ...
Review: In Acts 5:1-11, there is a chilling scene. With his gang of devoted thugs (the Òyoung men,Ó) a cult-leader, Peter, enforces his rule of terror over a new sect. 2 members hold back on their contributions and get the treatment for backsliding. They ÒmysteriouslyÓ die. Even Luke canÕt completely obscure the horror the sectarians must have felt after the incident. Not surprisingly, when the movement began to expand, ÒPeterÓ completely disappears from sight. Perhaps he really went on mission to the Parthian capital Babylon. The epistles under PeterÕs name say nothing else. One thing we know for sure: there is not a shred of credible evidence, that Peter had ever arrived in Rome. So Mt. 16:16 is a rather shaky rock at the ChurchÕs foundation. As it is the New Testament is a selection of documents from a much larger pool of testimonies and reflects the debate between Jews, Gentile proselytes and heretics from the Jewish law. The inclusion of the very early letters of James and Hebrews in the canon documents more or less faithfully both sides of the issue, but it was PaulÕs campaign against the observance of the law that eventually carried the debate and directed Church policies of the future. Add to this the New TestamentÕs marked anti-intellectual bias and we understand how anti-Semitism and the persecution of heresies, of learning, science and art, could have become the main occupation of the Church. Some passages are of revolting nastiness: see for example Lk. 19:27. This is neither an isolated slip nor out of context. In fact the context does absolutely nothing to salvage the tenor of this message and corresponds well with Mt. 10:34-37, Lk. 12:49-53, and with entire sections, especially the fundamentalistÕs favorite read: ÒRevelations.Ó Repeatedly we read the invocation that the ÒLordÓ should come real soon and make an end to this world right now. ÒI am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?Ò The gospels of course are anything but history. For instance they give us the story of a Roman trial, but present it as if conducted as a black mass Ð everything in the protocol is turned into the opposite, like a Satanic message: (1) A defendant with a long-standing warrant on his head pleads guilty on all charges, but the judge finds "no guilt;" (2) a ÒmultitudeÓ accuses the defendant, but the legal system does not provide for a collective body of prosecutors (and the author of Acts 24 knows it.) (3) The judge completely forgets his function to "sit" trial and goes out of his way (and his chambers!) to run the errands of his bailiffs. (4) He even solicits the verdict with the mob. (5) Then he immediately repudiates his own decision. But washing his hands was meaningful only for a reader who knows Jewish lore. One should keep in mind that the most popular and least expensive form of entertainment in those days had been to attend trials, even make an extra buck as a barrister's hired claque. So otherwise illiterate people, without actually knowing the law, had a fair grasp on the proceedings. The ancient reader knew how it was done and so did the authors of the gospels. But whatever their reason, they concocted a story far removed from any known fact: a story that required a wise fairy tale judge, who was completely out of character with the historical Pilate and whose efforts for human justice were doomed to fail in a fallen world. The theory that the gospel's tried to hoodwink Roman authorities is nonsense because even the Gospel-Pilate conducts his duties in a fashion which a Roman reader would find offensive. Scholarly consent uses to delegate John to a later date than the synoptic gospels. But the only evidence for this is based on theological content which depends on doctrine rather than history. However on the question when the kingdom will come, a non-canonical gospel that must be considered as at least contemporaneous to the synoptic gospels has this to say: "It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, 'Look, here!' or 'Look, there!' Rather, the Father's kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don't see it." (Gospel of Thomas 113.) This is pure John, if we can trust BultmannÕs interpretation, and it proclaims the invisible empire as already arrived, with no Eucharist and no idea of a ÒsecondÓ coming. According to the scholars this could be the last ditch attempt to explain that the predictions of a near parusia (Mk. 9:1, Mt. 16:28, 1 Cor. 15:50) had failed to be fulfilled (which alone could settle the whole issue whether to accept such faith. ÒLet no man deceive himself.Ó 1 Cor. 3:18) But it could just as well be the proclamationÕs earliest form, and Paul (1 Cor. 11:27) and the synoptic gospels introduced the Eucharist and the notion of a second coming to mollify the general disappointment over an obviously unchanged world. A final observation. Gospels, apostolic letters and Apocalypse seem to agree upon a fallen cosmos, ruled by "The Lord of this World." (Occupied territory, so to speak, and every hair is counted.) Who exactly this source of evil might be depends on personal conviction: Palestinian nationalists would accuse occupying Rome, (RevelationsÕ seven-headed dragon symbolized the Roman emperors from Augustus to Domitian,) orthodox Jews think of the Prince of Darkness, Gnostics would indict the creator of the world himself. This, at the time, was a widely shared perception among Gentiles and Jews. Only towards the medieval ages the emphasis shifted from the existential predicament to the individualÕs moral choices. So the only way out appeared to be an act of divine grace and open perhaps only to a select minority. All of which amounts to the usual hate message of hysterically religious but very common fanatics Ð with ÒloveÓ and ÒcharityÓ as the candy wrapper. Excellent translation, but not my favorite read.

Rating:
Summary: The best translation of the New Testament by an individual.
Review: Lattimore is generally regarded by classicists as one of the greatest translators of Greek this century. His translations of Homer, the Greek Tragedies, and countless other classics have won him this reputation. Lattimore is not a biblical scholar and so he comes to the text without many of the prejudices and biases apparent in so many English translations. In addition, the translation is literal because Lattimore believes that form and meaning are closely related. He even tries as far as it is possible to convey some of the form of the Greek in the English style he uses.

At the end of the day the most important thing in a translation is the strength of its scholarship. For those who have studied Greek, it is scary how often Lattimore gets it right. For the most part, Bible translations today are rated according to their number of sales. Hence the NIV is thought of as a great translation. Lattimore may not be the kind of translation you find in the pockets of devout Christians, but for overall reliability and fidelity to the writers of the NT, I give it 10/10.

Rating:
Summary: The Word Made Fresh
Review: Lattimore quite simply and directly removes the polish of committees and redactors in his stunning translation of the New Testament. Rather than making sure the language is stately and in keeping with other translations from the Greek all the way back to Jerome and his Vulgate, he makes the restoration of the voices -- and thus the points being made -- of the NT authors his objective. When the Markan author gets tangled up in the Greek, Lattimore doesn't try to hide that...when Paul is agitated over a point with his addressees, Lattimore's rendition of his letters allows that agitation to come through without politesse.
The result is a version of the New Testament that breathes and lives. Matters of content or specific-word-translation are not vastly different from some other 20th-century "new versions" or from the source material: what is radical is that he strives -- and succeeds -- to let the authors say what they actually said instead of "a version by a committee who wish Mark's Greek had been better".

Additionally, the format eliminates internal verse-numbering, etc. So the reader can simply read -- and is less likely to succumb to the urge to proof-text. Lattimore's splendid translation is more about passages in context -- when the verse/chapter divisions are removed, one finds flowing prose in which the author's messages are crystal clear.

For study purposes I use several different Biblical translations, but the one that travels with me on my 3-hrs.-in-each-direction daily commute and which I use for devotional reading is Lattimore's. It is the one that lives.

Rating:
Summary: Smell the Ink in Your Nostrils
Review: Lattimore's translation of the N.T. seems so new it's like it just came off the presses. It's so fresh you can smell the ink in your nostrils. It's so vibrant you can easily forget it's the N.T. and then forget to put it down. It's so gripping that instead of dreading the daily dose of a couple of verses, you look forward to overloading on your next fix. At least I do, and that's after reading countless translations, studying all sorts of helpful guide books, and knowing the Sunday School stories front to back.

But Lattimore's translation is different. He's a Greek translator not a theologian, concerned not so much with making the text say something in English, as with letting it live. And stripped of adornment, the Word is pulse-pounding, heart-racing, blood- pumping alive. "Wait a minute," someone may say, "Are we talking about the Bible?" Yes, we are. But reading Lattimore's version, one sees why people think the story is so exciting.

The genius of this book is in what it leaves out. So not the stately King James. Nor the Not-so-New International Version. No chapter or verse numbers. The four Gospels sound like stories, and the letters of St. Paul read like letters. Lattimore's other genius is his uncanny ear; he often uses simpler words than other translations, but sometimes he chooses bigger ones. Some parts flow together connecting half-remembered tales into a larger narrative, but others are told at a breathless pace: "we did this, and then we did that and then this happened, and then some other thing occured." This is exactly how someone, face to face, would relay a story.

In the preface Lattimore modestly says, "I was struck by the natural ease with which Revelation turned itself into English." I am struck with how he turned it into great reading.

Rating:
Summary: A Step In The Direction
Review: Richmond Lattimore's translation of the New Testament is a valuable addition to a thinking person's library. It gave me a much better sense of the styles of the various authors, and perhaps, even of their personalities. In many ways it is fresher and more readable than the church-approved translations, while at the same time being pretty literal. That being said, however, it's not quite as fresh as all that. Even though, for instance, Lattimore's avowed goal was to let the Greek style dictate the English style, Mark's use of the historical present in telling his stories is nowhere in evidence. In other words, despite the fact that Mark wrote in a narrative style which resembles that used in my old neighborhood ("And he says to me...", or "Then he goes...") for some mysterious reason, Lattimore, like virtually all other Bible translators, wants us to read Mark as a more elegant writer than he actually was. Why? In the arena of vocabulary, too, Lattimore makes a number of capitulations to tradition which are far from fresh. A prime example is the word 'ekklesia', which Lattimore, like every standard version, translates by the exclusively Christian term 'church', even though 'ekklesia' was a generic term for any group of people meeting/assembling for any purpose, sacred or secular, public or private, lawful or unlawful. Why use a misleading term like 'church' which suggests an institution and organization which was not yet contemplated in the first century? Similar theologically and culturally anachronistic views are reflected in other word choices, and even in capitalization practices, which again, were not thought of at the time the NT was written. I still am looking forward to the day that a translation allows the Biblical text to speak its own language, without pushing agendas not actually present in the text!

Rating:
Summary: Magnificent
Review: Richmond Lattimore's translation style has always sought to achieve the literal sense and actual grammatical constructions of the original. While this translation does not have the poetic force of the King James Version, it is very readable and provides highly illuminating word choices for those that are reading the New Testament closely. Readers who are sensitive to these issues, or who have children, should be aware that the photograph on the dust cover is a close up of a dead man's face, photographed in the morgue. You may be better off discarding the dust cover.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent translation
Review: This is a highly readable "direct from the source" translation of the Greek NT by a greek language scholar. It is in the form of a novel with headings at the top that provide the chapter and verse markings rather than in columns, a refreshing difference. The translation is very up-to-date, meaning in St. Mathew's gospel "virgin" has been translated as "maiden" (you KNOW what I'm referring to). There are other deliberate word choices in other places as well. While he uses the word "synagogue" as the term for a jewish congregation, he does not use it in the infamous Revelations 2:13 and 3:13 "synagogue of satan" but translates it as "congregation of satan". Obviously, this makes it less offensive but are these changes being true to the often NT source document, the Septuagint or the Greek NT? He does not say in his introduction but does add he has put some phrases into contemporary idioms while maintaining closely to the original greek style of each individual contributor of the NT.

IF you must read the NT, this one will be a good one for you. Lattimore's translation is a lively curious read. Though the above examples are just a few noticable individual lines, the style of this translation reads like a novel, not a religous text per se. If you have difficulty with the typical dry biblical prose of the NT, this translation will work for you. I can now say that I've read the entire NT and can make my own judgement on it. I've compared other bibles to this one (RSV and KJ) and it is a true translation.

This is off topic but while the presentation of Jesus' moral teachings can at times be inspiring, the NT's villianization of the Jews greatly undermines its moral theology. Since Jews are such a minority anyway who notices? After all wasn't Jesus and his diciples Jewish and Jesus just as critical as past prophets? I find basic principles of Judaism sometimes misrepresented in the NT - things that cannot be explained as "this is what J. was 2000 years ago" or "translation of Jews REALLY should be JUDeans" etc. which is quite unfortunate. If you haven't picked up a bible since you were in sunday school, this translation is good start.




Rating:
Summary: A welcome foil to the other versions out there
Review: Tp read Lattimore's translation is to experience the shock of a familiar work made new, and newly enigmatic. One of the other reviewers used the word "sparse" to characterize the language, and I'd be hard-pressed to come up with a more apt word. The highlight of the book would have to the Gospel of Mark: Lattimore does full justice to this Jesus: sublime, disturbing, and endlessly charismatic.