There are some times in which there simply is no good way to translate a verse. No matter how hard you try, there will always be some ambiguity.

I am reading through the NIV looking for what I call “NIVisms,” phrases that stand out as a little unusual. Every translation has them. I suspect that sometimes these NIVisms are the result of hours of debate, and there simply was no easy solution.

Something occurred to me this morning, and I am curious as to what you think about it. It actually has far reaching ramifications.

If you have been following this blog, then you know that I have been thinking about what is a Christian, how do we define it. Specifically, I have been looking for a balance between Jesus’ “Follow me” and the more propositional statements of Paul.

There obviously is no difference between “have” and “have,” except when you speak. “I have a book.” “I have purchased a book.” “I have to read a book.” Unless I am gravely mistaken (and my accident is mid-west), I say the third “have” differently, much closer to “half.”

The first “have” denotes possession. The second “have” is a helping verb. The third “have” denotes obligation or necessity.

Now come to Acts 23:19. The NIV reads, “The commander took the young man by the hand, drew him aside and asked, ‘What is it you want (ὃ ἔχεις) to tell me?’”

I came across Matt 2:8, and it highlights two of the things I have talked about in the past. (Warning: this is a slightly techie Greek blog.)

The first is the force of an aorist adverbial participle followed by an imperative. Herod says, “Go (πορευθέντες) and search diligently (ἐξετάσατε) for the child; and when you have found him, report back (ἀπαγγείλατε) to me, so that (ὅπως) I also may go and worship (προσκυνήσω) him.”

Paul is on his way to Rome, the captain of the ship does not heed his warning, and they are caught in a storm. “When neither sun nor stars appeared for many days, and no small storm continued to rage, all hope of our being saved was at last abandoned” (Acts 27:20).

Apparently several days had past, since the men had gone without food for some time. An angel appeared to Paul, telling him that the ship would be lost but no human life (v 23). Fourteen days into the storm (v 27), they run aground. So much for context.

I was asked about the interchange of tenses in Col 1:21-23. It is part of a much larger theological question that I can’t get into right now, but it is worth looking at the Greek.

Nathaniel declares Jesus that he is the “Son of God, the King of Israel” (Jn 1:49). I wonder if “Son” should not be capitalized. We read it in light of later teaching on the deity of Christ, but Nathaniel obviously equates “Son” and “King.” There is no sense of deity in Nathanael’s declaration, at least on his part.

(I would be curious how many people in our churches know that the Greek text doesn’t use capitalization the way we do, and therefore do not understand that “Son” is interpretive. I will put a poll on Facebook.com/teknia. Please let me know.)

When the demon saw Jesus coming, he cried out, “What have I to do with you, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me!” (v 28). “Jesus asked him, ‘What is your name?’ And he said, ‘Legion.’ (For many demons had entered into him.)” (v 30).

The Greek word is λεγιών, which is a transliteration of the Latin legio, a foreign loan word. It refers to a Roman legion, which consisted of 5,000 – 6,000 soldiers. The word came to be used of a very large number.

A few blogs back I talked about my growing apprehension with connecting may and might by default with the subjunctive. Many of you responded with helpful information. Thanks.

In speaking of the final judgment, Jesus says, “All the nations (τὰ ἔθνη) will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people (αὐτοὺς) one from another (ἀπ᾿ ἀλλήλων) as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.”

Someone asked a while back why the pronoun is masculine (αὐτοὺς) and the antecedent is neuter (ἔθνη)?

This has been an issue for me for several years now. When I was first writing my grammar, I taught the subjunctive as I had been taught. But when I became more involved with formal translation, both the ESV and NIV, I started to have my doubts.

Warning: this blog is more technical than usual.

I came across a great illustration today of the relative significance of aorist adverbial participles and finite verbs in Matt 2:8.

(Boy, that sounds like a yawner. I should come up with a better lead-in. How’s this?)

Is the Great Commission to “Go,” “Make disciples,” or both?

One of the beauties of knowing Greek is that you get to see nuances of meaning that are often lost in translation. It’s not that the translators don’t see the meaning; it’s that they simply cannot bring it over smoothly into English.

A prime example is the many ways Greek can state a prohibition, each with its own nuance in terms of aspect, and sometimes a nuance of strength. There is quite a bit of difference between saying “No” and saying “Absolutely not!”

When we are speaking our native language, we have such an intuitive feel for it that we often leave out words. This certainly is true in English, in Greek, and I would assume in most languages.

Paul writes that For by grace (χάριτι) you have been saved through faith (πίστεως), and this (τοῦτο) is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; it is not of works, so that no one may boast (Eph 2:8-9).

Someone asked me a while back about the “perfect” οἷδα and whether its tense helps us understand what Jesus is saying in Mark 13:32-33.

“But of that day or hour no one knows (οἷδεν), neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Watch out, be alert, for you do not know (οἷδατε) when the time will come.” (By the way, from now on unless I say, I am by default quoting the translation dad and I did for the interlinears; watch for it coming out elsewhere in a month — hint, hint.)

This has always been an interesting question.

In 1 Cor 7:8, Paul writes, “Now to the unmarried (ἀγάμοιος) and to the widows (χήραις).” It is clear that Paul is unmarried (1 Cor 7:7), but it is not clear that he is or is not a widower.

“Widow” (χήρα) occurs 24 time in the New Testament. Outside of 1 Cor 7, it apparently always refers to a woman. BDAG lists “widow” and not “widower” as the only meaning of χήρας, which is expected since χήρας is a feminine noun and appears to be following natural gender. The masculine χήρος does not occur in biblical literature.

I found a great example of semantic range, and why it is so important to always check the full entry in BDAG. In Rev 10:6 the angel takes an oath saying, “There will be no more delay (χρόνος)!” How can χρόνος mean “delay”?

χρόνος certainly does mean “time.” In Luke 8:27 we read the demoniac had for a long time (χρόνῳ ἱκανῷ) had not worn clothes or lived in a house. This is the normal gloss for χρόνος.

The people who come to life and reign with Christ for 1,000 years are “the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those (καὶ οἵτινες) who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands” (ESV).

In this translation, it appears there are two groups. One group was martyred; the other group did not worship the beast but had not yet been martyred (possibly also NASB, KJV).

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.

I have something that is more of a personal reflection I want to share today. Greek will be back next week.

I am in Bowling Greek visiting my folks. My son Hayden was missing playing golf with his grandpa, and I had a free air ticket; so we flew here for the weekend.

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.

My pastor preached his last of an 80 part sermon series on John today. (Now I don’t feel so bad about preaching for 2 1/2 years on the Sermon on the Mount.) There were so many interesting things in John 21, I am not sure where to start.

John 21:5 has a couple. The ESV translates, “Jesus said to them, ‘Children, do you have any fish?’ They answered him, ‘No.’“ ”Children” is an awkward translation of the vocative plural of παιδίον (see the ESV, NASB, NRSV, NET, KJV).

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.

I heard some really discouraging and sobering news the other day, and I wanted to take a break from Greek instruction to share it with you.

A friend of mine just left the ministry. This is a young man who felt the call of the Lord, and committed his undergraduate education to Biblical Studies. His wife and he made an additional commitment to go to seminary, a decision that involved major sacrifice on their part. It was interesting, they said, to live with all the hookers in their town. But the rent was cheap.

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 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.

At the end of the parable of the Prodigal Son, the father signals his acceptance of his younger son with the bestowal of a ring, which is placed on his χεῖρα (Luke 15:22).

Many translations translate χεῖρα as “finger” (NRSV, NIV, HCSB, NET, NLT, NJB), while some go with "hand" (ESV, RSV, NASB, KJV); after all, where else does on put a ring? (Notice the change from RSV to NRSV.)

If you look at the entry in BDAG, it gets a little interesting. It gives three basic meanings:

1. hand

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.”

We teach that the imperfect designates an action normally occurring in the past that is continuous in nature. “Jesus walked by the sea” is aorist; “Jesus was walking by the sea” is imperfect.

And we also teach that there are different kinds of imperfects. “Descriptive” is the catchall. “Ingressive” focuses attention on the beginning of the action. “Iterative” is repeated action. “Customary” leaves a sense of time behind. But in all these, the action is continuous, ongoing.