I had a great question from a friend last week. Chris asked about the translation of Acts 6:2. The Jewish widows were being given preferential treatment over the Hellenistic widows, and the Apostles say, “It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables” (NIV). Notice how the NIV keeps “ministry” with “the word of God” and not with “wait on tables,” giving the distinct impression that waiting on tables is not a ministry, or one of lesser value.

Just a couple tidbits for you today.

I taught New Testament Survey up in Tacoma at Faith Seminary last week, and we concluded with Revelation. I don’t think that Revelation is necessarily sequential; I think it is more circular and so passages like Revelation 12 are important.

One of the debates in translation work is whether there is meaning in the form of a sentence. If one word is an infinitive, for example, and the next is a participle, does it matter?

Those in the dynamic camp (NIV, NLT) tend towards answering, “No.” The question is how do I express the same meaning regardless of how I say it. So if the meaning of the Greek infinitive is best expressed with an English finite verb, so be it.

This is one of the basic points we try to make in first year Greek, but in the rush to simplify the language sufficiently for a first year student, sometimes the subtly of this point is missed.

Just to be clear, I still believe the augment indicates past time. I haven’t gone over to the other camp on this point. And yet the aorist is so much more than “past time,” and in fact time is significantly secondary to the real gist of the tense. Students need to be reminded of this periodically.

Colossians 2:8 is often misunderstood to say that all philosophy is bad and Christians should not engage in the discipline. It is a little thing in translation, but one word can carry a lot of meaning. The Greek is a tad difficult, so let me start with a slightly more wooden translation.

I received a somewhat distressing Facebook post the other day. On the one hand, you don’t know what a person’s motivations are. I hardly know my own. And you don’t know how a person uses words. But based on the words used, it was distressing to me.

The person wrote, “1 John 3:3 in the NIV 84 and 2011 are very different. The NIV 2011 seems to indicate SANCTIFICATION is a solo event and not a ongoing process. Please correct this.”

Let me deal with the exegesis, and then secondly with how the post effected me.

As we know, Greek sentences can go on and on and on and …. Today’s English requires the sentences to be shorter, and so periodically translators put a period where there is none in Greek (so to speak), and supply a subject for the second part of the sentence.

The problem comes when the two English sentences separate what the Greek apparently wants to keep together. I am thinking of Eph 3:17.

One of the problems of memorizing word glosses in first year Greek is that it is possible to miss the richness of a word’s meaning, especially its breadth of meaning (“semantic range”).

I was looking through the LXX of Psalm 1, mulling over the NIV translation. Psalm 1:1 reads, “Blessed is the one who does not walk in step with the wicked or stand in the way that sinners take (ἐν ὁδῷ ἁμαρτωλῶν οὐκ ἔστη) or sit in the company of mockers.”

In class the other day a student commented that the NIV had dropped out half a verse, Romans 8:2. My immediate reaction was to assume the student was correct, and I checked the textual notes to see the variants in the manuscripts. No, the Greek text was fine.

He was reading the NASB. “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” Pretty much word for word. ὁ γὰρ νόμος τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ζωῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἠλευθέρωσέν σε ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ τοῦ θανάτου.

Someone just sent me the following. “I’m particularly interested in communicating Scripture in terms that the average person on the street can understand. So it bothers me that our translations are stuck on a fossilized word like ‘gospel,’ which means nothing to most people (and even many Christians!). Why not be consistent in translating euangelion as ‘good news.’ That may at least cause people to ask the question, ‘Well, what IS the good news?’ As it is, I believe people hear ‘gospel’ and dismiss it as ‘religious talk.’”

Does Paul really believe that “I have the right to do anything” ( 1 Cor 6:12)? Really? Anything?

Of course not. Paul does not have the right to sin. He doesn’t have the right to walk away from his ministry. So what is happening in v 12? And why does the NASB and KJV write, “All things are lawful for me” when we know they are not?

I was asked a question at SBL by a person whose son is in the military. He said that his son, and many of his military buddies, objected to a specific translation. Seeing as how my son just joined the Marines, I thought I should pay attention to what they were saying.

The offending verse is 2 Tim 2:4. Paul is encouraging Timothy to persevere in his ministry in Ephesus, and in v 3 says, “Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus.” To illustrate the point, Paul lists three different vocations and how perseverance is critical: the soldier, athlete, and farmer.

Having a great time at ETS/SBL in Baltimore. Always fun to see friends and make new ones. Talking with a guy at Accordance, and he had a good question.

In the parable of the two sons we read, “And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ (ἐγώ, κύριε), but did not go” (ESV). “I go,” of course, is not English, but even for the ESV this is a bit extreme (NRSV is the same). This is why you see other translations making it a little smoother, such as “I will, sir” (HCSB, NIV, NET).

Are you familiar with the grammatical category called the “instantaneous imperfect”? To any first year Greek student, this sounds like a contradiction. Isn’t the imperfect always, well, imperfective? Continuous?

Apparently not.

Matthew 5:2 says that Jesus “opened his mouth and taught them, saying” (καὶ ἀνοίξας τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ ἐδίδασκεν αὐτοὺς λέγων). If you were in a sarcastic mood you might respond, “How else would he teach? With a closed mouth?” This is why the NIV skips it entirely: “he began to teach them,” as well as most other translations (HCSB, NRSV, NET, NLT). They see it as unnecessarily redundant. The ESV, NASB, and KJV keep the phrase.

In this day and age, this is obviously a controversial verse, but it is chock full of interesting Greek tidbits, not the least of which is semantic range.

Peter is encouraging Christian wives to respect their husbands, being submissive (ὑποτασσόμεναι, 3:1) to them, and placing an emphasis on internal qualities and not external beauty. The goal is evangelistic; their behavior may win their husbands to the faith.

My pastor preaches out of the NIV 1984, and I tend to follow along in the 2011. Every once in a while I come across a significant change, and at first glance the passage Sunday looked like the NIV 2011 dropped out an entire phrase.

I saw some fascinating translation techniques used with Romans 2:28 and wanted to share them with you. In the process, I realized I had blogged on this passage four years ago, but I think it is still worth mentioning.

I heard my nephew preach this morning on Romans 13. It was fun watching him work to make the main point and not let politics deter people’s thinking. Authority structures are God-given and are to be obeyed — unless they “clearly” contradict God’s moral law.

Davy (he goes by “Dave,” but uncles have special privileges) preaches out of NIV 1984, and I was following in the 2011. V 3 caught my attention.

If ever there were a word that cried out for a word study, it is “to know.” Jesus says, “I am the good shepherd. I know (γινώσκω) my own and they know (γινώσκουσίν) me, just as the Father knows (γινώσκει) me and I know (γινώσκω) the Father”

If these two verses aren’t enough, then John 17:3 cements the deal: “This is  eternal life, that they know (γινώσκωσιν) you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you sent.”

Because English uses the same form, "you," for both singular and plural, it can make exegesis a little complicated at times. In some of these circumstances, you will find your English translation footnoting the fact that the "you" is singular or plural.

The ἐγώ εἰμι sayings in the gospel of John are famous. The phrase occurs 21 times. Jesus says that "I am" the Bread of Life (6:20, 35, 41, 48, 51), the Light of the World (8:12), the Gate (10:7, 9), the Good Shepherd (10:11, 14), the Resurrection and the Life (11:25), the Way (14:6), and the True Vine (15:1, 5).

These are significant in that they are a reflection of the divine name in Exodus 3:14, where the God of the burning bush answers Moses' question about his name. In the LXX we read, Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν, "I am who I am" (ESV).

I will be taking a short break from blogging to enjoy the rest of my summer, and get the new release of BiblicalTraining.org out the door. See you again on September 16.  —Bill

I just came back from a great week at Southern seminary in Louisville. It is the first time in many years I have taught the Pastorals from the Greek, so it was good to get back into the text.

(By the way, the students were great. Thanks guys for such an encouraging week.)

This is one of the more interesting words in Greek, partly because it is so hard to translate.

BDAG says μυριάς can mean, "a group/collective of 10,000, myriad," but it can also mean, "a very large number, not precisely defined, pl. myriads."

It is this second meaning that is most interesting. Basically, it means a "gajillion." Or perhaps a "bajillion." What slang do you use? A gajillion means lots and lots and lots, with no specific number in view.

I found an interesting little example of the synoptic problem and harmonization. In Luke 8:18, Jesus says, "Therefore consider carefully how you listen. Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have ((ὃς ἂν μὴ ἔχῃ)), even what they think they have (ὃ δοκεῖ ἔχειν) will be taken from them" (NIV).

When I first read this, it felt strange. I spend more time in Mark than in Luke, so I checked out Mark 4:25 (also Matt 13:12; 25:29). "Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what they have (καὶ ὃ ἔχει) will be taken from them" (NIV).

The angel tells Zechariah that his son, "is never to take wine (οἶνον) or other fermented drink (σίκερα)" (NIV). On this traditional reading of σίκερα, John was not allowed to drink any alcohlic beverage.

Most translations go this direction: "wine or liquor'" (NASB); "wine or strong drink" (ESV, NRSV, NET, KJV); "wine or other alcoholic drinks" (NLT).

I was asked this today.

[On your Twitter account] it indicates you are working on the NIV. I thought the NIV was complete. ??? I have used the NIV for a long time. A couple years ago I started using the ESV. But now there is a new NIV. But my wife and one of my grown sons are convinced that the new NIV is evil for some reason. Something about watering down the truth, or trying to be politically correct at the expense of the truth. Could you comment on this?

Here is my response.

Remember the adage: "Greek gives us the range of possibilities; context makes the determination."

Maybe "adage" is too strong, since I made it up; but I do say it a lot.

Matthew starts his gospel as such: "This is the genealogya of Jesus the Messiahb the son of David,a the son of Abraham" (NIV). There is a footnote on "genealogy" that says, "Or is an account of the origin."

γένεσις has four basic meanings according to BDAG.