Translate

Thursday, October 24, 2024

Robbers of churches

“For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of churches, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess.” (KJV)

Verse 37: The men brought into the theatre, Gaius and Aristarchus – the townclerk advised – were not guilty of any assault against religion or blasphemy against Diana.

“For ye have brought hyther these me whiche are nether robbers of churches nor yet despisers of youre goddes.” (Tyndale)

The King James translation “robbers of churches” is often criticized in modern times. 20th century translations such as the New American Standard, New International Version, and others, give an idea in the range of “robbers of temples” for ιεροσυλους.  Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew, Taverner, the Great Bible, and the Bishop’s Bible all have “robbers of churches” (or churchrobbers). Wycliffe has “sacrilegers” and Geneva has “commit sacrilege.” If Acts 19:37 must be translated “temple-robbers” (as many moderns suggest) then no English Bible from Wycliffe in 1382 to King James in 1611 got it right!

The King James translation of II Maccabees 4:42 indicates that “robbers of churches” (1) was not used in the sense of a New Testament church, (2) was not an error, and (3) was a name current (in 1611) to describe someone who stole from a temple – that is, “churchrobbers” and “templerobbers” are synonymous terms, and those who robbed temples were considered to have committed sacrilege. Note in verse 39 that “sacrileges had been committed” by Lysimachus and “many vessels of gold” had been carried away.

Thus many of them they wounded, and some they struck to the ground, and all of them they forced to flee: but as for the churchrobber himself [Lysimachus, rlv], him they killed beside the treasury.[i]



[i] Lysimachus had carried away vessels of gold from the temple (cf. 4:39-42). Serving as deputy priest at Jerusalem, he robbed the temple and caused an insurrection. He was called a “churchrobber” and was killed “beside the treasury.” Though the translators did not consider the books of Maccabees – or any of the Apocrypha – to be inspired scripture, their translation choices there may sometimes help shed light on their translation choices and word usage in the inspired Old and New Testaments.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Good observations. Thanks.

E. T. Chapman