“Begotten” is the KJV translation of μονογενής in John 3:16. It describes the unique relationship of Jesus to the Father. However, the KJV “begotten” is based on a misunderstanding of how the word was formed. μόνος conveys the idea of “one and only” (“being the only entity in a class,” BDAG) and γενός refers to a specific “class” or “kind.” From γένος, English derives its word “genus,” i.e., “species.”

There are two words in Mark 1:12 that can be translated two different ways, and they both produce a different translation. Is Mark really picturing Jesus as a man in charge, "immediately" going from one thing to another? And did the Holy Spirit need to "drive" Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by Satan, as if Jesus didn't want to go?

Matthew and Luke have two different genealogies for Jesus, not even agreeing on the name of his grandfather. Is this a contradiction? I will look at three possible solutions and the problems of each. The whole issue of genealogies is compounded by the fact that they can skip generations, the same person can have different names (or different spellings), and levirate marriage can result in a physical father and a legal father.

Matthew 5:19 illustrates several aspects of Greek. Perhaps the most interesting is how Greek can drop words out of the second half of a sentence that is parallel in structure. But it also shows the different meanings of οὕτως, and how a long clause can be the subject of the verb and also have it repeated with a demonstrative pronoun. I still remember in second grade a poster of a man with two hats, and the caption said, "The man he." That's poor English, but acceptable Greek, perhaps good Greek.

When the biblical writer sets of a parallel structure, I think it is important to try and keep that parallelism in translation. But there are times when doing so obscures the meaning of a word, and you have to choose between parallelism and accurately conveying the meaning of the word. In Matthew 7:13–14, is the path of discipleship “narrow” or “difficult”?