One of the functions of the article ὁ is anaphoric. It points back to a previous reference. A simple but clear example is in John 1:7.

John introduces the topic of Jesus being light in v 4. "In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind" (NIV). It occurs again in vv 5 and 7–9. The problem is that most translations start a new paragraph at v 6 when John is introduced. Thankfully, there generally is not a heading here, just a new paragraph.

Here is the problem. In this new paragraph, v 7 reads, "He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light (περὶ τοῦ φωτός), that all might believe through him" (ESV, and most). If you have been reading the larger unit, vv 1ff., the identity of the light is clear — Jesus. But if you start reading at the new paragraph, or start preaching with that paragraph, then the identity of the light is less clear.

I assume this is why the NIV reads, "He came as a witness to testify concerning that light." They see the issue and translate the article explicitly as anaphoric, which it clearly is, and so say "that" and not "the." It appears they are the only translation to do so.

By the way, there was an anaphoric article in v 4 as well. Did you catch it? In him was life (ζωή), and that life (ἡ ζωή) was the light of all mankind" (NIV, also CSB).

Note: you can watch the blog on my YouTube channel.

Before I get into the Greek, I think it is helpful for us to stop and ask ourselves if we really believe this. Think about the things that we value, to which we aspire, what we respect in other people, what we secretly long for. How many of these things are actually “detestable” (NASB), an “abomination” (ESV), “revolting” (CSB) in God’s eyes? I suspect the list is rather long.

The Greek of this verse is pretty simple, but it does illustrate several points.

“What is exalted among men (τὸ ἐν ἀνθρώποις ὑψηλὸν)” shows the use of the article (τό) to turn an adjective (ὑψηλὸν) into a noun. The prepositional phrase ἐν ἀνθρώποις is in the first attributive position even though usually a prepositional phrase is in the second attributive position when performing this function. “Abomination” (βδέλυγμα) is in the predicate position and therefore we need to supply the verb “is.” Does ἐνώπιον simply mean “before” or does it carry the nuance of being in someone’s presence, hence, “in the sight of God”?

The translation is straight forward, and there is no real debate about what it means, although I suspect its application is much more difficult. But look at how much “interpretation” was needed, albeit it a simple enough interpretation that a first year student could do it. The myth of “literal” translation is that you can see the Greek structure behind the English. Good luck on even this simple of a sentence.

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.

“See to it that no one takes you captive by means of philosophy (διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας) and empty deceit (καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης), according to the tradition of men (κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων), according to the elemental spirits of the world (κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου), and not according to Christ (καὶ οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν).“

When Jesus’ parents finally realized they had left Jesus in Jerusalem, returned, and finally found him, Jesus’ response is surprising to all parents.

“Why is it that you were looking for me? Did you not know that I would have to be in my Father’s house?”

This is certainly the traditional understanding of the passage (cf. ESV, NRSV, NIV, NET, HCSB, NLT). But what is interesting is that the NASB puts “house” in italics (indicating that the word is not explicitly there), and the KJV reads, “I must be about my Father’s business.”

We all know that Greek uses ὁ differently than English uses “the.” In fact, I am hesitant to even talk about the Greek definite article, since ὁ functions so differently much of the time.

One of the more difficult constructions is the prepositional phrase where ὁ is regularly omitted. In fact, when you see ὁ before the object of the preposition, it should make you sit up and take notice.

But knowing when to include “the” is a matter of exegesis, and sometimes it can be tricky.

The word that we call the “definite article” in Greek is a slippery fellow. Many of its uses in English overlap with that of Greek, and so it is easy to tell first year Greek students to translate it is “the” when ho is present, and to not include it when ho is absent.

But even in first year Greek we quickly start to see the problems of this approach. Greek uses ho when we never would, such as before proper names. So we tell our students to ignore ho in this case.

This passage has long engendered debate, and I doubt I will forever close that debate in this blog. But it is a good example of how Greek grammar clarifies the issues and gives us an acceptable range of meaning, after which sensitivity to the language and context make the final decisions.

Wouldn’t it be great if a knowledge of Greek solved all the mysteries of the universe, or at least answered all the questions of the New Testament? It doesn’t, and opinions to the contrary border on cult mentality.