Why did the Geneva Bible start using the word "Pastor"?

[Omegaman 3.0]

 

 

Question: "What is the Geneva Bible?"

Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/Geneva-Bible.html#ixzz3eBjk7Mub

 

 

Not that that is the topic, but that is a pretty good answer to a question not asked!

[carlos123]

a flower by any other name . . . .

I like the word....

It is tantamount to asking why someone would chose to use the word car, instead of the word automobile. Does it matter, if it means the same thing?

I would not accept the title 'reverend', ...priest, ...vicar, ..

On the one hand you say one word or another doesn't matter but then you bring up a number of words that you would not feel comfortable using for a church leader because of implied meanings associated with those words.

You clearly show by your post the IMPORTANCE of words and their associated meanings.

As a word "Pastor" has an associated meaning. In the minds of most today it refers to a POSITION of church leadership.

The underlying Greek word rendered Pastors in Ephesians 4:11 has no such POSITIONAL significance.

Rather it refers to GIFTING and is not POSITIONAL in meaning at all.

Anyone can have a GIFT and can exercise that GIFT.

In today's church practice only ONE person can have the POSITION of Pastor.

BIG, BIG DIFFERENCE.

To render the Greek word as "Pastor", given its clear POSITIONAL meaning in the minds of most is to do an injustice to what Paul meant to say about the GIFT of shepherding.

Words and their implied meaning have GREAT significance!

What I am trying to ascertain is WHY the Geneva Bible chose to carry over a Latin word (presumably from the Latin Vulgate), which likely had an implied if not explicit POSITIONAL meaning back then as well, into that English bible.

Why didn't they stick with the more accurate rendering of "shepherds"? A word which more clearly carries the GIFTING emphasis of the underlying Greek.

Carlos

[carlos123]

@bopeep

Just so you know (I gave up trying to work with your quote...this forum software is a pain to use under Android)...I think your quote on what the Geneva Bible was is absolutely appropriate for the topic of this thread.

The material you quoted gives us very useful info regarding the times when it was written and who were some of the men who might have had a great influence on this translation.

Carlos

[carlos123]

I think the simplest reason is they thought that was the most accurate.

I think it really is that simple. With every translation they really do try to be as faithful as possible.

The ideal is of course to make the best translation possible but I think it is bit naive to believe that ungodly, selfish, and other fleshly motives and viewpoints never enter into in to render words in a way that may at times not reflect the meaning of the underlying Greek.

For example many people do not realize that a number of words in the King James Bible (such as bishop, church, etc.) were rendered as such, not because these words best represented the meaning of the underlying Greek but rather because King James insisted that words that had been in use and that dealt with hirearcheal offices or described the Church of England be left unchanged.

As such the King James translators could not have translated the Greek otherwise in the case of these words.

With respect to "Pastors" in the Geneva Bible I suspect that John Calvin, who was very influential over its production and who had an overly exalted view of church leadership as against lay people, influenced the translation to discard "shepherds" and replace it with "Pastors".

Possibly because the word "shepherds" was too general and did not accurately reflect or sufficiently distinguish between lay people and ministers in line with the exalted view of church leadership that he had.

Carlos

[carlos123]

Why did the Geneva Bible begin using the word "Pastors"?

There is no logical, linguistic, scriptural, or other reason to justify this rendering.

And you're basing this on your 30 years of linguistic,etymological research and your advanced degree in biblical translation and linguistics and extensive expertise in the thousands of biblical manuscripts from Greek and Latin?

By all means Shiloh if you know of any reason at all as to WHY they chose to drop the rendering of the underlying Greek as "shepherds" and started using "Pastors" I am all ears to hear it.

Otherwise my words to the affect that I personally know of no linguistic, scriptural, or other reason for why they did so stand, as yet, unchallenged and unrefuted.

Carlos

[Floatingaxe]

What reason would there be to refute the use of "pastor" over "shepherd", when they are interchangeable?

[Guest shiloh357]

Carlos, the word pastor and shepherd mean the exact same thing.   There is no linguistic crisis, here.   One word is English the other is based in French.   There is absolutely no problem and nothing good is served by trying to manufacture a problem that doesn't exist.

[carlos123]

There is absolutely no problem and nothing good is served by trying to manufacture a problem that doesn't exist.

If you think nothing good can come out of discussing this issue I guess I am somewhat perplexed as to why you are participating in this thread Shiloh.

If you don't like what I wanted to discuss or think it can serve no purpose by all means you are free to not participate in this discussion at all. I mean why in the world would you participate in a discussion you view as utterly useless?

Carlos

[Omegaman 3.0]

I have certainly have not said that words are not important, words do mean things.

 

I am curious why though, you find this one word to be such a big deal, that it is somehow suspect, that one cannot substitute a synonym. The word(s) in church usage, both denote a person whose charge it is, to take care of and lead others, leading them safely to drink and water, of course we mean this as a metaphor.

 

You said, Carlos:

 

 

For example many people do not realize that a number of words in the King James Bible (such as bishop, church, etc.) were rendered as such, not because these words best represented the meaning of the underlying Greek but rather because King James insisted that words that had been in use and that dealt with hirearcheal offices or described the Church of England be left unchanged.

 

As such the King James translators could not have translated the Greek otherwise in the case of these words.

 

With respect to "Pastors" in the Geneva Bible I suspect that John Calvin, who was very influential over its production and who had an overly exalted view of church leadership as against lay people, influenced the translation to discard "shepherds" and replace it with "Pastors".

 

Possibly because the word "shepherds" was too general and did not accurately reflect or sufficiently distinguish between lay people and ministers in line with the exalted view of church leadership that he had.

 

Clearly, you are not ignorant of the history of the church during and around the time of the Reformation.What I find odd then, is that you seem to assume that "pastor" at the time of the Geneva Bible, would somehow make a larger distinguishment between laity and leadership. You have not shown that to be the case however, you just seem to assume it to be so.

 

In modern usage, we know that a pastor is associated with leadership in a church, fair enough but was that the case then? How would we know that?

You have pointed out that the heritage of the reformation, as opposed to the RCC before it and the Church of England at the time, were about establishing a hierarchy, yet it was the reformation, that sought to dispel centralized authority and assert the sainthood and priesthood of all believers.

 

Additionally, regardless of the word "pastor", the word "shepherd" certainly implies leadership and superiority. Is not a shepherd (human) in charge of the sheep (dumb animals). Seems to me that you are confused and grasping at straws, trying to create a controversy that need not exist, and perhaps justifying people breaking away from putting themselves under the oversight of Godly, qualified leaders.

 

Where do you get the idea that John Calvin "had an overly exalted view of church leadership as against lay people". My view of Calvin is not entirely positive, nor is my view of Luther. However, I do not remember reading of them, or from them that they were big on church hierarchy, perhaps you can enlighten me there.

 

Perhaps, most curious, is that you concern yourself with a version of the Bible, that most people have never read, if they have heard of it at all.

 

 . . . and for heaven's sake why, would you choose to speculate on the motives of someone in the past, who cannot defend themselves, and cast negative implications by asking a question no one can know, unless you know of something where the translator spoke to why he did this, you are basically in effect, gossiping and slandering the dead!

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

Deleted