Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Bookmark and Share

« Extracurricular Activities — November 8, 2013 | Main | My Advice to Students — Bill Mounce Says, "Don't Let Yourself Be Swallowed Up By the Academy" »


At this point a someone trained in translation in the tradition of Wycliffe Bible Translators would ask the question: what means are there in the target language for expressing the solemnity of the following speech and which would be best for this context?

Keeping the phrase in the text as the ESV, NASB, & KJV do doesn't contribute anything more than leaving it out if the phrase doesn't mean anything to the English audience reading it.

Mike - you state that 'keeping the phrase in' is the same as removing it since it you claim it doesn't mean anything to an English audience. 1) If you believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, then you keep it intact because that's how He gave it. 2) If the phrase is there, then it is available to contribute as we study the passage. If you remove it, there's nothing to study and it definitely will never convey meaning.

One of my seminary professors argued for dynamic equivalence translations using this very phrase as his evidence. He said that it was redundant and didn't belong in English translations. Thanks for your analysis.

These expressions are semitisms. One of the signs that Eusebius was correct in his report of Papias' statement that the original gospel was written in Hebrew. While studying at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem we studied the various proofs that the spoken language of Judea at the time of Jesus was Hebrew and not Aramaic as has been thought for the past few centuries in New Testament scholarship. There are many such semitisms in the New Testament that can not be explained away as Septigentualisms. I encourage anyone interested to see the scholarship of the Jerusalem School for Synoptic Studies online at www.Jerusalemperspective.com

Docetism was a common problem faced by the early Church. Matthew bears witness that Jesus was human in that "He opened His mouth". A phantom could have spoke but would not have a mouth in the human sense of the word. So a verse like this (and many others)helps refute false doctrines of gnostics, for example.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Koinoniablog.net Analytics

  • :