Sometimes participles are turned into indicative verbs, especially when the translator feels the sentence is too long. But in doing so, important information on the meaning of a verse can be obscured. Is anyone out there able to just "cast" their anxiety on the Lord? If the participle in 1 Peter 5:7 is left as a participle, it contains a clue on how to do this.

Adverbial participles are capable of a wide range of meanings, and the translator has to use context to make a decision. In addition, Eph 2:1–7 is one long sentence, and sometimes subjects and verbs need to be moved around as the sentence is broken down into more manageable chunks.

Jesus asserts that unless a person’s righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees and scribes, they will not enter the kingdom of heaven (Matt 5:20). He is not calling for more obedience, but for a deeper obedience that comes from the heart. He then covers five examples of this deeper obedience (murder, adultery [including divorce], oath-taking, retaliation, and loving your enemies). V 48 then concludes this portion of the Sermon on the Mount with the admonition, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (NIV),. This is probably a citation of Leviticus 19:2, which uses “holy” and not “perfect” (Deut 18:13 speaks of being “blameless”).

“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”?

We are used to reading that "moth and rust" destroy earthly treasures, but some translations have "vermin" or a "devouring insect" (NET). BDAG says the reading "rust" "finds no support." Apparently, "rust" made its way into English through Tyndale and was made popular by the KJV.

There is meaning in Greek word order, but it is normally so nuanced that it can’t come out in translation. Ephesians 2:8–9 is one of the rare exceptions, illustrating how to emphasize a word or phrase by changing its normal position in the sentence. You can also watch this vlog on YouTube.