Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 172:687 (Jul 2015)
Article: Translating “Son Of God” For Muslim Contexts, Part 1: Tensions And The Witness Of Scripture
Author: J. Scott Horrell

BSac 172:687 (July-September 2015) p. 268

Translating “Son Of God” For Muslim Contexts, Part 1:
Tensions And The Witness Of Scripture

J. Scott Horrell

J. Scott Horrell is professor of Theological Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, and adjunct professor at the Jordan Evangelical Theological Seminary and Seminario Teológico Centroamericano in Guatemala.

Abstract

Those who translate the Bible into Muslim-culture languages must wrestle with the phrase “Son of God,” given that a literal translation may have non-biblical implications in the target language. This two-part article argues that Muslim-culture Bible translations must make the deity of Christ unambiguously clear. After introducing background issues, Part 1 makes the exegetical argument that “Son of God” in the New Testament reveals eternal divine relationships that cannot be captured by nonliteral translations. At the same time, the article asks whether concerns raised by Muslim-idiom translation linguists call for exceptions in certain cultural-linguistic situations.

Significant controversy has stirred recently regarding translation of familial terms for God into Muslim idioms, most pointedly, regarding the Christological phrase “Son of God.” Several events highlight its importance: (1) a Christianity Today cover story1 with follow up articles reflecting a growing body of other writings; (2) Bridging the Divide symposiums at Houghton

BSac 172:687 (July-September 2015) p. 269

College (2011-2014);2 (3) denominational concern about perceived lack of fidelity to Scripture in certain recent translations; (4) a March 2012 appeal by the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL) International and the Wycliffe Global Alliance to the World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) for evaluation of their translation policies for divine familial terms; and (5) the WEA independent committee’s response (April 2013) with ensuing adjustments by Wycliffe and SIL to conform to the recommendations.3 The fairly tense differences between opposing voices are partially eased by a sense of progress as translators and biblical-theological scholars seek to ensure accurate communication of God’s Word.4

Questions revolve around how best to translate biblical terms such as “father,” “son,” and “sons of God” (i.e., believers) when a target language may not have words that communicate the meanings intended in Scripture—particularly if the target audience is Muslim. In the process, one mus...