Koinonia

Where Did v 4 Go in John 5:4? (Monday with Mounce - Repost)

My wife Robin came home from a Christian speakers conference yesterday and told me about a discussion they had. John 5 was the passage under discussion, and when they arrived at v 4, to their surprise it wasn’t there. I guess it caused quite a stir. Someone found it in the NASB, but nowhere else. (I guess no one had the KJV).

This happens in several occasions in the Bible. There are even verse references “missing” in the KJV. What is going on? Well, either someone left the verse out, or somewhere along the line someone added a verse in. But who ever assigned the verse references, he had v 4.

This is a pretty big issue, and a simple blog can’t do it justice. It can also degenerate into a pretty ugly discussion; many of the people involved in the discussion don’t know much Greek (if any), and in the worst case scenarios the discussion is reduced to a matter of salvation. “If you don’t believe what I believe about the text of the Bible, you aren’t a Christian.” Let’s see if we can steer clear of this type of ungodliness.

This is the basic question of the Greek text, and the technical name for it is “text criticism.” (I am going to stick with the Greek Testament, not the Hebrew.) Here is the basic reconstruction.

Choosing a Translation - Andy Naselli

Yesterday Greek scholar Andy Naselli shared a post on choosing Bible Translations. In it he weighs a number of resources which seek to help readers pick a version of the Scriptures, and ends up favoring one in particular.

“...one book stands out as the best all-around resource on Bible translation that I’m aware of:

Gordon D. Fee and Mark L. Strauss. How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding and Using Bible Versions. 

It has at least seven strengths:

1. It’s accurate. It’s sufficiently nuanced, and it’s linguistically informed. (The authors have written on Bible translation and worked on Bible translations—most recently the updated NIV as members of the prestigious CBT.)
2. It’s clear. It’s easy to understand.
3. It’s accessible. A seventh-grader could easily understand it (as Bruce Waltke notes below).
4. It’s concise. It’s not wordy, and it’s short—only 170 pages. And it has many logical headings (see the outline below).
5. It’s fair. It courteously explains different views without mocking them or their opponents.
6. It’s thoughtful. Its tone is appropriately sober without being alarmist.
7. It’s practical. It’s filled with common-sense observations and applications.”

You can read the rest of this post here.

Bible Gateway Redux

For years our friends at Bible Gateway have provided one of the most widely used Biblical resources on the net, and now it’s even better.

The newly reformatted website features a more intuitive interface, easy comparisons of Bible translations, additional social networking features, new devotional content, and much more. 

You can read what others are saying about Bible Gateway here, and watch a video from  General Manager Rachel Barach below, but the best way to take advantage of the update is certainly to head over and check out Bible Gateway for yourself!

Seek Righteousness; Find Righteousness - Prov 21:21 (Monday with Mounce 107)

We read Prov 21:21 this morning in church. “Whoever pursues righteousness (צדק) and love finds life, prosperity (צדק) and honor (NIV).” Two things should jump out at you.

1. How do you hear the word “prosperity”? I only hear it in financial terms, and with the benefits of wealth such as independence and power. I understand that wealth can be a sign of God’s blessing, but I also understand that much of the Bible is clear about the extreme dangers of wealth. “Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you” (James 5:1, ESV).

2. The second problem comes when you look at most other translations; the same Hebrew word lies behind the NIV’s “righteousness” and “prosperity.”

• ”Whoever pursues righteousness and kindness will find life, righteousness, and honor” (ESV).
• ”The one who pursues righteousness and faithful love will find life, righteousness, and honor” (HCSB).”
• ”Whoever pursues righteousness and unfailing love will find life, righteousness, and honor” (NLT).”

Only the NET has the same type of variation as the NIV. “The one who pursues righteousness and love finds life, bounty, and honor.” So what is going on?

Anacoluthon and Using Greek Tools - Eph 2:1 (Monday with Mounce 105)

Eph 2:1-3 is a great example of anacoluthon, and seeing this explains some of questions raised about the translation of ὄντας.

“Anacoluthon” is a technical term for a change in syntax. To my 9th grade English teacher, it would just be a grammatical error.

We see it develop in Ephesians 1. “And you, being (ὄντας) dead in your trespasses and sins ….” The problem, of course, is that Paul never completes his thought. Before he talks about what God has done for us, he wants to clarify and emphasize the lostness of our natural position. And so he continues with a series of dependent constructions: “sins … in which you walked”; “sons of disobedience … among whom we once lived.”

In other words, he never gets to the main verb. So technically, there is a dash after verse 3, and Paul starts over again. “But God … made us alive together with Christ.” Interestingly, the first six words in v 1 are identical to the first six words in v 5 other than Paul has shifted from “you (ὑμᾶς) to ”us” (ἡμᾶς).

So how do we translate the participle ὄντας?

Is the Sword the Spirit? - Eph 6:17 (Monday with Mounce 103)

In Eph 6:14-17 we have a series of genitives. We are to take up:

- the breastplate of righteousness (τὸν θώρακα τῆς δικαιοσύνης),

- the shield of faith (τὸν θυρεὸν τῆς πίστεως),

- the helmet of salvation (τὴν περικεφαλαίον τοῦ σωτηρίου),

- and the sword of the Spirit (ρὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος).

The question was asked, can the last genitive be appositional, which would mean that the Sword is the Spirit, and it is the Holy Spirit that we are to take up in battle. If not, then the idea is that the sword is supplied or empowered by the Spirit.

Whenever you have a string of modifiers like, I think the default position is to see them as the same type of grammatical construction. It appears that the writer is on a kind of a roll, and is thinking in parallel structures.

So could it be the breastplate, which is our righteousness in Christ, the shield, which is faith, the helmet, which is our salvation (or, the hope of our future, full salvation), and the sword, which is the Spirit? Sure. This is a standard well-attested use of the genitive. But there are a couple problems.

Was Jesus’ Burial Cloth Folded or Rolled? - John 20:7 (Monday with Mounce 101)

Having heard the the resurrection story today at church, I reminded of the translation issues in this verse. Peter ran into the tomb and saw “the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen” (NIV 2011). 

This is a change from the NIV 1984. “The burial cloth that had been around Jesus’ head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen.”

The ESV has the cloth “folded up” (also HCSB, NLT).  The RSV has “rolled up” (also NRSV, NASB, NET). 

There are differences of where the cloth was. Most translations have it in a separate place by itself (i.e., not with the other grave clothes, see NASB, ESV, RSV, NRSV, NIV, NET, NLT). Some commentaries talk about the face cloth being separate from the other linens the same distance as the head is from the chest, but all the Greek says is χωρὶς … εἰς ἕνα τόπον “apart … in one place.”

ἐντετυλιγμένον generally means to wrap something around an object (BDAG), such as linens wrapped around  dead body (Lk 23:53; Mt 27:59). But BDAG give a second meaning of “fold up of a σουδάριον. (Jn 20:7). These are the only three uses of ἐντυλίσσω in the New Testament.

This illustrates one of the challenges of translation. When a word occurs rarely, it is hard to be precise in its meaning. It is a compound word of ἐν and τυλίσσω, and the later means “to twist up, to bend.” That doesn’t help much.

In What Sense Do I Still Live? - Gal 2:20 (Monday with Mounce 100)

There are some fascinating differences in translation between the KJV and other versions on Galatians 2:20.

First of all, the versification of the Textus Receptus that I have in Accordance lists Χριστῷ συνεσταυραύρωμαι as part of v 19, and yet the KJV translates it as part of v 20. The NRSV and HCSB (also TEV, NJB) are the only translations I checked that keep “I have been crucified with Christ” in v 19; the rest put it with v 20. Even the NKJV moves it to v 20.

Secondly, the KJV is unique in using the English present tense to to translate the perfect συνεσταυραύρωμαι. Is this wrong? Careful.

Humility is a good thing in critiquing translations. Rarely (if ever) do translations simply do something without a reason. Can you think of why the KJV translators did what they did? (The answer has nothing to do with changes in English.)

Is the Marriage Bed Undefiled? - Heb 13:4 (Monday with Mounce 98)

Predicate adjectives can be a bit tricky to translate. Since there is no verb, you have to supply one that is consistent with the verse and the immediate context. But that is a matter of exegesis and hence personal interpretation.

Take for example Heb 13:4. Word for word it says, “Held in honor the marriage among all, and the (marriage) bed undefiled. The verse concludes that those who do not obey this teaching will be judged by God.

The author uses predicate adjectives. τίμος ὁ γάμος. ἡ κοίτη ἀμίαντος. τίμος and ἀμίαντος are not preceded by the article, they are therefore in the predicate position, and the verbs have to be supplied. But what verb?

Interestingly, v 5 also uses a predicate adjective construction. “Keep your life free from love of money” (᾽Αφιλάργυρος ὁ τρόπος). So whatever we do in v 4 needs to be done here.

Most translations see the implied verb as imperatival. This is certainly justified from the imperatives that surround these two verse. “Let brotherly love continue” (v 1). “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers” (v 2). “Remember those who are in prison” (v 3). “Remember your leaders” (v 7).

The ESV sees an imperatival relationship, as do most translations. “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled.” The KJV is alone is seeing an indicative verb implied. “Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled.”

And The Winners Are...?

Congrats to Rey Reynoso and Hannah Abbott who each won a copy of How To Choose A Translation For All Its Worth! You will both be contacted soon to arrange shipment of your copy.

It was quite interesting to see the variety of translations used by the readership here. I even learned a new one, the Chinese Union Version, which I’m pretty sure doesn’t show up in Fee and Strauss’ book. 

Our thanks go out to everyone who participated in this weeks giveaway. If you are interested in picking up How To Choose A Translation For All Its Worth you can find it here or at your favorite bookstore.

"For the third time in these How to...for All Its Worth books, Gordon Fee has teamed up this time with Mark Strauss to produce another winner. It's a great read, filled with good illustrations from the numerous English translations from the past and the present, and written in an engaging way... Fee and Strauss have upheld both values while fairly evaluating the large number of English translations that have been given as a gift to the body of Christ." — Walter C. Kaiser