personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

User avatar
njd83
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by njd83 » Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:39 pm

Like did you know it records who the 3 wives Noah took for his sons? Interesting because mitochondria research says there are 3 basically origin-al mitochondrial DNA. 2 being very similar, the third different. The 2 could have been sisters from one of lamechs (edit Eliakim's) wives, the 3rd from a different wife. Could be but whenever history and science meet it can be a very good thing

Sent from my KYOCERA-C6742 using Tapatalk
Last edited by njd83 on Sun Aug 07, 2016 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by Paidion » Sat Aug 06, 2016 3:01 pm

About the origin of demons I can't part with. Devils are fallen angels. Accusers. Demons are different. chapter 12-16.
I was unable to find this distinction in Chapters 12-16. Or are you saying that Chapters 12-16 is a discussion of demons only?
I find your distinction between demons and devils (devils being fallen angels and demons something else) does not seem to fit New Testament usage of the terms.

δαιμονιον (demon), in all its forms occurs 52 times in the New Testament, and most translations render it as "demon" or "demons", though the King James translation renders it as "devil" or "devils". These demons are the spiritual entities, some of which Jesus had cast out of people.

διαβολος (devil), in all its forms occurs 33 times. The word means "slanderer" or "false accuser", and in 29 of those occurrences refers to THE devil or Satan, who is the great slanderer of people.

It occurs in the plural only 3 times: 2 Tim 3:3, 2 Tim 3:11, and Titus 2:3. In each instance, translations correctly render it as "slanderers" and that this is correct is obvious from the contexts. It would make no sense in the contexts to translate it as "devils," for in each case, the plural word denotes people who were alive at that time.

There is one instance in which the singular form is used to indicate the false accuser Judas:

Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a false accuser.” (John 6:70)

Unfortunately most translations render it as "one of you is a devil" in this verse. But some of them don't:

Answered them the Jesus: Not I you the twelve choose? and of you one an accuser is. (Diaglot)
Jesus answered them—Did not, I, make choice, of you, the twelve? And yet, from among you, one, is, an adversary. (Rotherham)
Jesus answered and said to them, "Did I not choose you the twelve, and one of you is and adversary (Concordant Version)
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by Homer » Sat Aug 06, 2016 10:19 pm

Paidion,

Thought you might find this of interest:

https://summaphilosophiae.wordpress.com ... tive-case/

I think we often place too much importance on technical aspects when doing exegesis from the Greek into our language. I thing the most important thing is what idea the author is trying to impart, not what Philo, or a hundred others meant, for example, when they used a particular word.

User avatar
njd83
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by njd83 » Sun Aug 07, 2016 10:49 am

Paidion wrote:
About the origin of demons I can't part with. Devils are fallen angels. Accusers. Demons are different. chapter 12-16.
I was unable to find this distinction in Chapters 12-16. Or are you saying that Chapters 12-16 is a discussion of demons only?
I find your distinction between demons and devils (devils being fallen angels and demons something else) does not seem to fit New Testament usage of the terms.

δαιμονιον (demon), in all its forms occurs 52 times in the New Testament, and most translations render it as "demon" or "demons", though the King James translation renders it as "devil" or "devils". These demons are the spiritual entities, some of which Jesus had cast out of people.

διαβολος (devil), in all its forms occurs 33 times. The word means "slanderer" or "false accuser", and in 29 of those occurrences refers to THE devil or Satan, who is the great slanderer of people.

It occurs in the plural only 3 times: 2 Tim 3:3, 2 Tim 3:11, and Titus 2:3. In each instance, translations correctly render it as "slanderers" and that this is correct is obvious from the contexts. It would make no sense in the contexts to translate it as "devils," for in each case, the plural word denotes people who were alive at that time.

There is one instance in which the singular form is used to indicate the false accuser Judas:

Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a false accuser.” (John 6:70)

Unfortunately most translations render it as "one of you is a devil" in this verse. But some of them don't:

Answered them the Jesus: Not I you the twelve choose? and of you one an accuser is. (Diaglot)
Jesus answered them—Did not, I, make choice, of you, the twelve? And yet, from among you, one, is, an adversary. (Rotherham)
Jesus answered and said to them, "Did I not choose you the twelve, and one of you is and adversary (Concordant Version)
In Enoch 12:4 God uses Enoch to begin judging the sin of the angles coming down(sons of God, in Genesis 6:2) and taking beautiful wives for themselves whomever they choose ( other books, maybe jubilees, I believe describes them also taking wives who were already taken in some cases)

Enoch 15:2 describes the offspring as giants

Enoch 15:8-12 describes the offspring as becoming "evil spirits" when they die, well , they are all killed in deluge later on. I believe the main reason for it was the corruption these fallen angles wrought both in taking wives and teaching the earth corrupt ideas (see Enoch 16:3 about what they taught to mankind. Also Enoch 10:7-8, 9:6-9)

Enoch 9:10 talks about the earth crying out to God for the evil going on

Jasher 4:16-18 talks about it "judges and rules" took wives whomever they choose. Earth was corrupt.
Last edited by njd83 on Mon Aug 08, 2016 10:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
njd83
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by njd83 » Sun Aug 07, 2016 11:11 am

Enoch 10:12 says to bind Semjaza for 70 generations. Jesus is 77th, Enoch is 7th.

Sent from my KYOCERA-C6742 using Tapatalk

User avatar
njd83
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:45 pm

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by njd83 » Sun Aug 07, 2016 11:14 am

Another interesting point, a possible lost verse:

Freer Logion
And they excused themselves, saying, "This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits. Therefore reveal thy righteousness now" - thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, "The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was delivered over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more in order to inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness which is in heaven
Sent from my KYOCERA-C6742 using Tapatalk
Last edited by njd83 on Tue Oct 25, 2016 10:54 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by Paidion » Sun Aug 07, 2016 1:40 pm

Greetings Homer, you wrote:I think we often place too much importance on technical aspects when doing exegesis from the Greek into our language. I thing the most important thing is what idea the author is trying to impart, not what Philo, or a hundred others meant, for example, when they used a particular word.
Yes, that is the most important thing. But how can we, around 2000 years later, possibly know what the author is trying to impart by the use of a particular word, until we find out how that word is USUALLY used? And how can we find out how it is usually used, unless we consult many authors who used it, and attempt to ascertain how they used it?

Lexicons don't help much since they have at least a dozen "definitions" for many words. They have arrived at these "definitions" from the various ways in which translators have rendered the word, and so often translators translate the word so that it makes sense in the context (from their point of view which is frequently theologically biased). And even if these translators are not theologically biased, they often make suppositions based on modern concepts and usages of words.

Relying on lexicons can be very useful for the biased exegesist since he can simply pick the "definition" (out of the many that the lexicon offers) that best fits the meaning that he wants it to have in the verse or context with which he is dealing.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by Homer » Tue Aug 09, 2016 11:10 pm

Hi Paidion,

You wrote:
Relying on lexicons can be very useful for the biased exegesist since he can simply pick the "definition" (out of the many that the lexicon offers) that best fits the meaning that he wants it to have in the verse or context with which he is dealing.
I think we all develop our biased views, often without being aware of them, and apply the "analogy of faith" (comparing what we believe) to what we read. There was plenty of that in the discussion of aionios.

In this particular place translating with "of" in stead of "in" makes it difficult to believe Jesus intended to say that:

Mark 11:22-24 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

22. And Jesus *answered saying to them, “Have faith in God. 23. Truly I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and cast into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says is going to happen, it will be granted him. 24. Therefore I say to you, all things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they will be granted you.


If it is translated "of" I do not understand how God has faith. In whom or what? I do not get it. It could legitimately be translated "faithfulness of God" but that does not seem to fit the context regarding prayer.
Another possibility would be "faith from God" but that seems to be a Calvinist concept. The objective genitive "faith in God" makes perfect sense of the context and appears most likely to be what Jesus meant to say (or rather what Mark understood Him to say).

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by Paidion » Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:35 pm

If it is translated "of" I do not understand how God has faith.
Some translate it as "the faithfulness of God," and that may be exactly what Paul had in mind. If we possess the faithfulness of God, that is, if we are faithful as God is faithful, then miracles can happen.

"Faithfulness" is one of the meanings of "πιστις" when applied to persons, according to the lexicon of the Online Bible Program, and also that of NAS Greek lexicon as well as that of Abbott-Smith. Strong's lexicon gives "fidelity" as one of the meanings, a word that is tantamount to "faithfulness."

Here is perhaps the best example where the phrase clearly means "the faithfulness of God" and would make no sense to translate it as "faith in God":

What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar... Romans 3:3,4 ESV
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: personal translation of Romans 3:19-28

Post by Homer » Thu Aug 11, 2016 11:01 pm

Paidion,

Yes, I have long been aware that pistis can be translated "faithfulness", but that doesn't seem to be what Jesus had in mind when he exhorted them to believe when they pray.

I believe the translators found that in the Romans passage you cited that the "faith of God" would be an incongruence.

Post Reply

Return to “Acts & Epistles”