background image
7
person himself, I assume)--which would be an accurate translation of the Hebrew with
regard to voice in English. It would be even more accurate to say, "A person can test his
reputation." However, if "reputation" means the character of a person, that is, the essence of
the person himself, then it is saying that a man can be tested (passive) with regard to his
character, but it doesn't say by what or whom he is tested.
NIV (1978): The crucible for silver and the furnace for gold, but man is
tested by the praise he receives.
The NIV interpreted the voice as passive and the genitive as objective.
CEV (1995): Gold and silver are tested in a red-hot furnace, but we are
tested by praise.
The CEV also translates with the passive voice, and in the interest of being gender neutral it
uses the first person plural instead of the third person masculine singular.
NET Bible (2001): As the crucible is for silver and the furnace is for gold, so a
person is proved by the praise he receives.
The NET Bible uses the passive voice and interprets the genitive as objective. A footnote on
"is proved" only states that it is supplied text, implied by the context. It does not explain the
passive voice or mention the possibility of an active verb. A footnote on "he receives"
discusses the possibility of the subjective genitive but ultimately dismisses it at less likely.
16
HCSB (2004): Silver is [tested] in a crucible, gold in a smelter, and a man, by
the praise he receives.
The Holman CSB uses the passive voice and interprets the genitive as objective.
Critique:
I noted above that there seems to be confusion between the idiomatic and the literal
sense of
ypl
in the LXX. The construction is translated twice. dia» represents the idiomatic
sense, "through," "according to," "in proportion to"; and sto/matoß represents the literal
"mouth." It was only by adopting the idiomatic sense that the translator was able to render it
with a passive verb, but it was only by adopting the literal sense that the translator was able
to refer to the mouth of the praisers. A translation should adopt either the literal or the
idiomatic--not both.
The idiomatic sense, if translated accurately, does not result in a coherent proverb.
Two English versions translate the idiomatic sense accurately:
NJB: A furnace for silver, a foundry for gold: a person is worth what his
reputation is worth.
NWT: The refining pot is for silver, and the furnace is for gold; and an
individual is according to his praise.
In these there is a disconnection between the first two clauses and the third clause. The first
two clauses imply that a crucible has some kind of purpose or effect on precious metals; it
does not speak of proportions. The third clause says that there's a proportional relationship
between a person and his praise or reputation; it does not imply any purpose or effect.
16
Of these versions, this is the only one that supplies "proved" rather than "tested." This decision is probably not informed
by 17:3, where the NET Bible has "refine" and "test" in parallel: "The crucible is for refining silver and the furnace
for gold, likewise the Lord tests hearts." A footnote says, "the test ... is designed to improve the value of the one
being tested. Evil and folly will be removed when such testing takes place." So it appears that the function in view is
refining through the removal of dross. In 27:21 the footnote says, "The crucible and the furnace are used to refine and
thus reveal the pure metals. The analogy is that praise will reveal the person because others will examine and evaluate
in order to make the public acclamation. ... public praise is usually a good measure of the qualities and contributions
of a person." The focus here is more on the result than the process or function of the crucible.