Some friends called me recently asking if I would make a video, reading 1 Corinthians 13 as I did in their wedding 50 years ago this month. I need to say these are still really close friends and they blessed me wonderfully with the request.
And since, at their request I think, I read it in the Living Bible at their wedding, I thought it appropriate to use that translation. And I noticed something that delighted me in the text. Verse 3 uses the phrase, “If I were burned alive.” “If I were,” is in the subjunctive mood! “If I were you,” used to be a common expression. But it has been replaced by the indicative, “If I was you.” Which is a mistake that gives me the heebie-jeebies when I hear or read it. I looked this verse up in each of the 59 English translations on Bible Gateway. And no other translation used “were” here. Even the Mounce Reverse Interlinear used the indicative although the Greek uses the subjunctive. To be fair, the Douay-Rheims American Edition, translated in 1899, uses the subjunctive, “If I should,” but not “If I were.”
I was once confronted by a school teacher in my church because, in exaggeration and jest I said in the pulpit, that the corruption of the English language was “demonic.” I had to admit to him that I don't believe it is necessarily demonic, and that I had made an inappropriate statement. But it was hard for me to concede, because I hate the weakening of our language.
Calling corrupted language demonic may be bad theology. But as writers we need to maintain a balance against verbal barbarism. The primary question has to be, “What most clearly or forcefully expresses what I need to say.” But as a particular expression becomes antiquated, it will make us sound effete to our readers. Offended readers will not understand, even if what we write is clearer and better.
I am reading Making Sense of God, by Tim Keller. In one of the chapters he quotes Elizabeth Anscombe saying moderns should never use the word “ought”. That in itself is funny. She clearly says it is a moral imperative not to use moral imperatives. But she, or Alasdair MacIntyre who furthered her work, said you can say a watch is a bad watch because we know its purpose. If it doesn't keep proper time, it does not fulfill its purpose. You can't say it is a bad watch because you hate watches. And you can't say it is bad because it didn't hit the cat you threw it at. Their point was that without God, in whom they didn't believe, there is no purpose for our lives.
But we have purpose in spades. Purpose is the foundation of Christian writing. That is our strength. Even when we are not necessarily writing something Christian, our lives and writing are permeated with purpose. And that purpose makes clear communication essential.
http://theanchorofthesoul.blogspot.com/
http://watchinginprayer.blogspot.com/
http://thinkinginthespirit.blogspot.com/
http://writingprayerfully.blogspot.com/
Website
http://daveswatch.com/
YouTube
https://goo.gl/PyzU
