In 382 AD, Christian Church father Jerome (347-420) began translating books of the Bible into the more commonly used Latin[1] of his day. Unfortunately, he made several mistakes.
Jerome translated “repent” into “do penance.” This error resulted in the requirement for repentant sinners to perform external deeds as a way of earning or sealing the forgiveness of specific sins.[2]
He also mistranslated the gender-case in the first biblical prophecy (Genesis 3:15b) from “he” to “she” making it sound as though Mary the mother of Jesus would be the one to bruise the head of the serpent. This error resulted in the Church venerating Mary into a saint worthy of worship and the target of prayers.
These and other errors were magnified over the centuries and continued in the Church. During the 16th century, Martin Luther and others worked on new translations of the Bible using original texts. They discovered the errors that were made and the resulting false doctrines they had spawned[3] which helped to bolster the Reformation.
In the essay “Be Zealous and Repent“ I noted an example of a false interpretation of the middle English word “scrip” used in the King James Version of the Bible. While technically not a mistranslation, the consequence is similar as the word is not commonly used in modern English, therefore the Church[4] sometimes interprets the word as “script” (which is out of context with the passage) creating an erroneous understanding. English dictionaries confirm the word “scrip” to mean a “satchel” or “bag,” reliable modern English translations indeed use the word “bag“.
This mistranslation-like error is sometimes used to support an interpretation that strictly requires unprepared extemporaneous or spontaneous preaching,[5] even though during the Finnish Lutheran history of the Church[4] Lars Levi Laestadius (1800-1861) himself prepared all his sermons and wrote sermon-maps and scripts to be used by lay preachers during the revival movement in Lapland during the 19th century.[6]
These examples portend the necessity to use Scripture that has been diligently translated into the modern vernacular for both accuracy and accessibility by God’s children. Is it wise to ignore these examples and lose the pure doctrine through poor translations and false interpretations? What should be done to correct and avoid false doctrines spawned by such errors? Please reply with your suggestions.
[1] This work became known as the “Vulgate“.
[2] The Catholic priest specified what deeds needed to accompany the confession of sin, such as crawling up steps, reciting a hundred hail Mary’s, feeding the poor, giving money to the church, etc. Many deeds (when completed) needed to be reconfirmed with the priest to verify the penance was indeed paid in full and forgiveness had therefore been acquired.
[3] The Roman Catholic Church acknowledged these translation errors during the Council of Trent (1545-1563) but chose to keep the false doctrines that had developed with the false notion that church “tradition” was just as authoritative as Scripture.
[4] Finnish Independent Apostolic Lutheran Congregations (I.A.L.C.)
[5] The history of precisely when the Church[4] began to require the unprepared extemporaneous preaching style is vague. The time-frame is likely sometime after 1872 (when the first Finnish Lutheran churches in America were established) and before the splits of 1940 (Koskela/Pollarites) or 1962 (Aunesites/Reedites).
[6] Lohi, Seppo (2019). Christianity of the Heart: Lars Levi Laestadius and the beginning phases of the Laestadian Revival. Loretto, Minnesota: Published by the Laestadian Lutheran Church (279 N. Medina Street Suite 150, Loretto, MN 55357). ISBN: 978-1-7328008-2-3 160, 181, 182, 301, et al.