#bibletranslations | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

Visit Blog

Explore Tumblr blogs with no restrictions, modern design and the best experience.

Fun Fact

Tumblr’s reach among the 26-to-35-year-olds in the US is 11%.

eli-kittim · 1 year

Text

How Should We Translate John 1.1: “the Word was God,” or “God was the Word”❓

By (native Greek speaker) Eli Kittim 🎓

John 1.1:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς

τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

John 1.1 is often broken down into 3 phrases:

Phrase 1: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος

Phrase 2: καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν

Phrase 3: καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

From the outset, before they even consider the process of biblical interpretation and exegesis, textual critics and Greek scholars set out to produce a faithful *translation* of the original Greek New Testament. Bear in mind that the processes of translation and interpretation are not the same. We expect the translation committees to translate (not to interpret) the text!

Therefore, a literal and accurate translation of the Greek language should correctly translate the last phrase of Jn 1.1 as “God was the word.” In other words, the third phrase of Jn 1.1 (καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος) should be translated exactly as it was written in the original Greek (for emphasis), not rearranged and reassembled (in the target language) as we would wish it would be. In the original Greek, the text doesn’t actually say that “the Word was God,” as most modern translations maintain:

That’s an interpretation❗️

Rather, the original Greek New Testament says that “God was the Word”! So, the *interpretative* rearrangement is forcing the critical reader to read it backwards, which neglects the emphasis of the word order in the original Greek. It’s as if we were told to read Hebrew backwards, from left to right. What is more, the third phrase of John 1.1 doesn’t actually say ὁ λόγος ἦν (the word was). It says θεὸς ἦν (God was). If the text wanted to emphasize that “the word was God,” the phrase would have been: καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν θεὸς. It would have been written as follows:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς

τὸν θεόν, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν θεὸς.

But that’s not what it says! To try to manipulate what the original Greek New Testament is actually emphasizing——by rearranging or *reinterpreting* it during the translation process——is equivalent to editing and, therefore, corrupting the “inspired” text.

Admittedly, the third phrase of Jn 1.1 is somewhat of a Gestalt configuration in which different *meanings* can arise depending on the angle from which it is viewed. One could make the *interpretative* argument that the original phrase “God was the Word” might be equivalent to or interchangeable with “the Word was God.” In other words, on an *exegetical* level, one could make the case that the phrase “the Word was God” might be the converse of “God was the Word.” I don’t deny that possibility on grammatical grounds. That is certainly worthy of exegetical consideration. But when we’re initially *translating* the text, we shouldn’t be interested in theories of exegesis. Rather, we should be entirely focused on producing a faithful translation, which precedes interpretation and subsequent theological ramifications.

In *interpreting* the third phrase of Jn 1.1, many textual scholars typically reverse the word-order of the original Greek phrase (via a grammatical rule) so that we’re forced to read the words backwards. According to this rule, we can determine the *subject* of a phrase if a noun falls into one of the following categories: a) if it’s a proper name; b) if it’s preceded by an article; or c) if it’s a personal pronoun. However, in contradistinction to this grammatical rule, θεὸς can actually be the subject that precedes the verb ἦν (here, a form of "to be"), while λόγος can be the predicate nominative. On the other hand, in order to identify θεὸς as the predicate nominative and λόγος as the subject, one has to invoke what is known as the “Subset Proposition" rule, or the "Convertible Proposition" rule. In other words, this alteration involves a complex set of esoteric grammatical assumptions and decisions which essentially turn the text upside down.

By contrast, the straightforward way of reading the text seems to be the smoothest and the most natural. Not to mention that the phrase “God was the Word” is actually a faithful translation, whereas the phrase “the Word was God” is merely an *interpretation.* I’m not arguing that the phrase “the Word was God” is a wrong interpretation. I’m arguing that it’s a wrong translation! In the critical edition, we must always let the reader know what the text ACTUALLY says, not our INTERPRETATION of what we think it might mean. That can go in the commentary section. In translating a text——if the word-order of the original Greek doesn’t make any sense——translators are allowed to rearrange the words in order for it to make sense. But this exception to the rule doesn’t apply here because the original Greek makes perfect sense! Therefore, our decision to abandon our fidelity to the lexical details and grammatical structures of the Greek New Testament makes us no better than the scribes who corrupted it.

Moreover, the decision to change the *meaning* of the text (or to *reinterpret* it) is done for obvious theological reasons. Christian translators have a theological axe to grind. In order to validate and uphold the Trinity, they want to maintain the *distinction* between God the Father (the first person of the Trinity) and the Word of God (the second person of the Trinity). Hence why they deliberately *translate* the last part of Jn 1.1 backwards. Because if they were to translate it as the author intended it, namely, that “God was the word,” it might give the wrong impression that there’s no distinction between the Father and the Word. However, the third phrase of Jn 1.1 is not necessarily making a *modalistic* theological claim that there’s no distinction between the Father and the Word. Rather, since the second phrase (καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν) clearly distinguished the two persons of the Trinity, the third phrase establishes their *ontological* unity by affirming that God was not simply separate from the Word, but that God himself was, in fact, the Word per se! After all, the first and second persons of the Trinity share one homoousion (essence): “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10.30)!

At any rate, this *interpretation* has become so wide spread, to such an extent that it has become a dogmatic and systematic standard, not only overriding or supplanting the original *translation* but also prompting modern translations to follow suit. It’s a case of special pleading where an *interpretation* has supplanted a *translation*!

However, there are many credible Bible translations that *translate* the last phrase of Jn 1.1 as “God was the Word”:

Coverdale Bible of 1535

In the begynnynge was the worde, and the

worde was with God, and God was ye

worde.

Smith's Literal Translation

In the beginning was the Word, and the

Word was with God, and God was the Word.

Literal Emphasis Translation

In the beginning was the Word, and the

Word was with God, and God was the Word.

Catholic Public Domain Version

In the beginning was the Word, and the

Word was with God, and God was the Word.

Lamsa Bible

THE Word was in the beginning, and that

very Word was with God, and God was that

Word.

Aramaic New Covenant: In the beginning

the Word having been and the Word having

been unto God and God having been the

Word.

Concordant Literal New Testament: In the

beginning was the word, and the word was

toward God, and God was the word.

Coptic Version of the New Testament: In

(the) beginning was the Word, and the Word

was with God, and God was the Word.

Great Bible (Cranmer 1539): In the

begynnynge was the worde, and the worde

was wyth God: and God was the worde.

New English Bible: When all things began,

the Word already was. The Word dwelt with

God, and what God was, the Word was.

Revised English Bible: In the beginning the

Word already was. The Word was in God’s

presence, and what God was, the Word

was.

Today’s English New Testament: In the

beginning was the Logos. And the Logos

was with God. And God was the Logos.

The Wyclif Translation (by John Wycliffe): In

the bigynnynge was the word and the word

was at god, and god was the word.

Latin Vulgate: in principio erat Verbum et

Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat

Verbum.

Vulgate translation: in the beginning was

the Word and the Word was with God and

God was the Word.

See also:

Was the Word “God” or “a god” in John 1.1❓

4 notes · View notes

toddlprice · 6 months

Text

Thank you for praying for my recent trip to Serbia. I met with the three Roma Bible translation teams I consult, and a new team starting on a Bible translation for Roma in Albania, and taught them a course on “Biblical Exegesis”. Exegesis is the process of studying and discovering the meaning of a text, in this case the meaning of the original Greek text of the New Testament, and communicating…

View On WordPress

#BibleTranslation #RomaBible #Serbia

2 notes · View notes

lingopvt · 5 months

Text

Best Translation Company in Delhi. Discover unique translation services in Delhi with the best in the business. Lingo Solution Pvt Ltd expert team ensures accurate and reliable translations for all your language needs. Trust Delhi's leading translation company for excellence in linguistic solutions.

#translationservices #englishtranslation #legaltranslation #translationcompany #bibletranslation #booksintranslation #certifiedtranslation #Delhincr #Ahmedabad #chennai #Hyderabad #surat #Kolkata #Gurugram #audiotranslation #Soundengineering #telangana #redchilliesvfx

1 note · View note

walkswithmyfather · 2 years

Text

“For the Lord is good. His unfailing love continues forever, and his faithfulness continues to each generation.” —Psalm 100:5 (NLT)

“When you're not okay, God is still good. God is good even if your heart hurts, even if your whole world seems to be breaking. God's goodness doesn't depend on your situation. You can continue trusting Him despite your circumstance. He is still good even when life is not.”

—Joena San Diego

Amen! 🙌

133 notes · View notes

walkswithmyfather · 2 years

Text

“Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me. “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.” —John 15:4‭-‬5 (NIV)

PRAYER: “Jesus, I need you to stand by me because without you, I cannot stand alone. You are the reason why I am still breathing. Without you, I am nothing. Amen.”

166 notes · View notes

walkswithmyfather · 2 years

Text

“Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live! You can make this choice by loving the Lord your God, obeying him, and committing yourself firmly to him. This is the key to your life. And if you love and obey the Lord, you will live long in the land the Lord swore to give your ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” —Deuteronomy 30:19‭-‬20 (NLT)

#deuteronomy 30:19‭-‬20 #bible #christian blog #god #belief in god #faith in god #choosing god #christianblog #christian life #christians #christianity #bible verses #bible truths #bibletranslations #biblequotes #encouragement #jesus #keep the faith #make him known

150 notes · View notes

walkswithmyfather · 2 years

Text

“Then you will call on Me and you will come and pray to Me, and I will hear [your voice] and I will listen to you. Then [with a deep longing] you will seek Me and require Me [as a vital necessity] and [you will] find Me when you search for Me with all your heart.” —Jeremiah 29:12‭-‬13 (AMP)

68 notes · View notes

walkswithmyfather · 1 year

Text

“I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being.” —Ephesians 3:16 (NIV)

“Good morning! May God be... above you to bless you; below you to support you; before you to guide you; behind you to protect you; beside you to comfort you; and inside you to give you strength and joy.” Amen! 🙏🙌

(Via)

24 notes · View notes

walkswithmyfather · 2 years

Text

“Those who don't love don't know God, for God is love.” —1 John 4:8 (FBV)

“We have experienced and trusted in the love that God has for us. God is love, and those who live in love, live in God, and God lives in them.” —1 John 4:16 (FBV)

“We have come to know [by personal observation and experience], and have believed [with deep, consistent faith] the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides continually in him.” —1 John 4:16 (AMP)

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” —John 3:16 (WEB)

“The Lord appeared to us in the past, saying: “I have loved you with an everlasting love; I have drawn you with unfailing kindness.” —Jeremiah 31:3 (NIV)

“He loved us, not because we were lovable, but because He is love.” —C.S. Lewis

158 notes · View notes

walkswithmyfather · 2 years

Text

PRAYER: “God, thank You for being unstoppable, unchangeable, all-powerful, and incomparable. You alone are worthy of all my praise, honor, and glory! Your love endures forever, and I am forever grateful for who you are. Thank You for making a way for me to know You personally. Nothing compares to You! In Jesus' name, Amen.”

90 notes · View notes

Last Seen Blogs

hoobins

Ultra Mess

williamnash8

The Journaling of Russo 449

retroquarium

retro💿

buckyforbreakfast

& chocolate milk

ryubakudan-blog

題名未設定