Willis Barnstone, an Indiana Universitycomparative literature professor, comes to the Bible as a pro-Gnostic,philo-Semitic poet. In his The RestoredNew Testament: A New Translation with Commentary, Including the Gnostic GospelsThomas, Mary, and Judas (W.W. Norton), this leads him to:
• Footnote and frame his new translation withcomments favorable to Gnosticism
• Seek the Jewish context of the New Testamentby restoring the Hebrew or Aramaic names to places and persons (as much asthese can be ascertained)
• Compose the English with a sense for thecadencethe poetryof the original texts
He understands that the role played by theGnostics, and even their identity, will always remain controversial. History,especially ancient history, will always keep its secrets. As for restoring theoriginal Hebrew names, Barnstone overstates the necessity by claiming that allprevious translators were guilty of “an eager over naturalization of theimmigrant Semites into Anglo-Saxon characters, making Jerusalem Jews namedElisheva or Kefa into local friends called Elizabeth or Peter.” True, in sometimes and places many Christians didn’t understand the Jewishness of the gospelsetting, but Barnstone should be reminded of the strenuous efforts byanti-Semites in the 19th and early 20th centuries toconcoct an Aryan family tree for Jesus, denying the generally acceptedknowledge of Jesus’ Jewish heritage. In any event, ignorance of the Jewish identityof key biblical figures is hardly a problem nowadays beyond crank sectarianswho are unlikely to be swayed by restoring the name of Jesus to Yeshua and Jerusalem toYerushalayim. Barnstone’s exercise is interesting and informative butaccomplishes less than he intended.
The translation itself is fascinating to read,occasionally revealing truths hidden behind the thicket of too familiarlanguage from four centuries of English translations. But in contrast to theteam efforts that began with the King James Version, The New Testament Restored is largely a one-man show. Inundertaking the monumental task of exploring the ancient texts, Barnstoneshould have had at least a few native guides at his side. One of them mighthave warned of the danger of colloquialism when he described Herod as being“outfoxed” by the Magi, whom he repeatedly identifies, between commas, as“astrologer priests from the east.” That is indeed what the wise men were, asfundamentalist Christians should be remindedbut in a footnote, not the textitself. Also, there is the awkward business of calling John the Baptist Yohananthe Dipper. Rather than inadvertently turning him into a comical soundingcharacter, Barnstone might have chosen Yohanan the Immerser, since one of hisfootnotes defines baptist as Greek for “one who dips, washes, or immerses.”Aside from sounding better, immersion is a more accurate description of thebaptisms John performed in the river Jordan.
Ultimately, Barnstone’s commentaries, rivalingin length the texts he translated, are the book’s most important point ofinterest. His own writing is scholarly, accessible and generally careful todistinguish various perspectives (including his own) from the evanescent factsbeing perceived. Occasionally, he slips. Barnstone’s sarcasm about thecanonization of Pontius Pilate by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church was not, as hestates, for “his honorable role in ordering the execution of the Messiah,” butfor ruing his part in Christ’s death.
With many quibbles aside, The Restored New Testament is a fascinating work that should beconsidered by anyone interested in the origins of the three monotheisms thathave dominated much of the world over the past 2,000 years.
