Help me out here...calling all Greek Geeks

[ReformedBaptist]

This has convinced me to learn Greek better....


Which translation is more accurate to the Greek? No, I won't take your word for it either. My 30 lesson primer is on the way..
:laugh:

Romans 5:12

1. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:


2. because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin;

3. Therefore as by one man sin entered into this world [sin entered into the world], and by sin death, and so death passed forth into all men, in which man all men sinned.

4. Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned:--

5. Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—

Not giving the translation on purpose...

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Oh, could you translate from either the TR or Majority? Thanks.

 

[Deacon]

I didn't cheat,

I'll go with #5.

My translation:

Διὰ τοῦτο - Therefore
ὥσπερ - just as,
διʼ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου - through one man
ἡ ἁμαρτία - sin
εἰς τὸν κόσμον – into the cosmos
εἰσῆλθεν - came
καὶ - and
διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας – through sin
ὁ θάνατος, - death
καὶ οὕτως - (and) in this way
εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους - to all men
ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, - death moves
ἐφʼ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον because all sin


Rob

 

[John of Japan]

This has convinced me to learn Greek better....


Which translation is more accurate to the Greek? No, I won't take your word for it either. My 30 lesson primer is on the way..
:laugh:

Romans 5:12

1. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:


2. because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin;

3. Therefore as by one man sin entered into this world [sin entered into the world], and by sin death, and so death passed forth into all men, in which man all men sinned.

4. Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned:--

5. Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—

Not giving the translation on purpose...

I'm not sure if you are asking us to just evaluate the translations, or as per your post #2 translate ourselves. I'd be happy to do my own translation if that is what you are asking (way to go, Rob!), but in the meantime I'll just evaluate. My translation method is called optimal equivalence, and was used for the NKJV and HCSB. I don't say it was used for the KJV since that would be reading a modern method into history, but the optimal equivalence principles were pretty much used by the KJV translators.

Without looking (of course), translation 1 is obviously the KJV, my preferred translation for beauty and accuracy of translation.

Translation 2 appears to be Young's, and it is the closest to the Greek if you are asking for pure literalism. However, that doesn't really cut it. Unless your internal "universal grammar" is properly tuned and trained (in other words, you are a linguist), you'll probably have trouble understanding Young's translation, since his English syntax ends up being strange due to his often slavish adherance to Greek word order.

Of modern versions 3-5, I choose #5 as the best. It not only sticks pretty close to the Greek, but has the best syntax. #3 is probably the Amplified, but I can't place 4 & 5 without cheating and looking. :type:

 

[Pastor Larry]

Which translation is more accurate to the Greek? No, I won't take your word for it either. My 30 lesson primer is on the way..

I don't see any real difference except English word choices. Perhaps you could indicate which particular part you are questioning.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Just for clarification, there is no intention here to elevate one translation above another, or some veiled motive to advance some sort of KJVonlyism.

My heart in this is to understand the greek for myself. Take translation #3 for example. It is the Wycliffe NT translation. Notice how words are used that make the meaning of the passage mean that all sinned in Adam. Other translations, as I read them, leave me with the understanding that death passed to all men becase each and every individual sinned (which is true) but different from an understanding that death passed to all men because in Adam all sinned.

That all sinned in Adam can be drawn from the context of the passage. But if the passage can be properly translated as Wycliffe did then the meaning is clear from the one verse. A few of you chose #5 as the best transaltion, which is the NIV.

The extent of my use and knowledge of Greek does not go beyond definitions and lexical aids. Obviously this is insufficient for translation. Words modify each other. So, is Wycliffe more accurate to the Greek? Or is this a bit of his own theology working its way into the translation?

Why is this important? Practically, Romans 5 teaches the doctrine of orignial sin and what theologically is called federal headship. If verse 12 is rendered as Wycliffe has it (and he translated from the Latin Vulgate I believe) then original sin and federal headship is established without any ambiguity. The passage would not just be saying all have sinned, but that all have sinned in Adam. In other words, when Adam sinned, we sinned in him, and so death spread to all men, even to those who subsequently have not sinned the same exact sin as Adam...and why death reigned before the Law.

 

[J.D.]

Just for clarification, there is no intention here to elevate one translation above another, or some veiled motive to advance some sort of KJVonlyism.

My heart in this is to understand the greek for myself. Take translation #3 for example. It is the Wycliffe NT translation. Notice how words are used that make the meaning of the passage mean that all sinned in Adam. Other translations, as I read them, leave me with the understanding that death passed to all men becase each and every individual sinned (which is true) but different from an understanding that death passed to all men because in Adam all sinned.

That all sinned in Adam can be drawn from the context of the passage. But if the passage can be properly translated as Wycliffe did then the meaning is clear from the one verse. A few of you chose #5 as the best transaltion, which is the NIV.

The extent of my use and knowledge of Greek does not go beyond definitions and lexical aids. Obviously this is insufficient for translation. Words modify each other. So, is Wycliffe more accurate to the Greek? Or is this a bit of his own theology working its way into the translation?

Why is this important? Practically, Romans 5 teaches the doctrine of orignial sin and what theologically is called federal headship. If verse 12 is rendered as Wycliffe has it (and he translated from the Latin Vulgate I believe) then original sin and federal headship is established without any ambiguity. The passage would not just be saying all have sinned, but that all have sinned in Adam. In other words, when Adam sinned, we sinned in him, and so death spread to all men, even to those who subsequently have not sinned the same exact sin as Adam...and why death reigned before the Law.

I share your view on this. Concerning Wycliffe I wonder if the Vulgate agrees with his rendering and if not, does the context warrent Wycliffe's edit? I would like to see Tyndale's translation - which is probably the same as the KJV. In any case, I don't think a literal or "optimal equivalence" translation threatens the federal headship doctrine. The fact remains that men sin because sin is in them. The only real challenge to that would be those that support the age of accountability theory, who insist that infants are not lost until they actually committ a sin. But it would clearly require an eisogesis to use this portion of scripture to support that notion.

 

[EdSutton]

"Calling TCGreek! Calling TCGreek! Come in TCGreek! Over!" :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[John of Japan]

I share your view on this. Concerning Wycliffe I wonder if the Vulgate agrees with his rendering and if not, does the context warrent Wycliffe's edit? I would like to see Tyndale's translation - which is probably the same as the KJV. In any case, I don't think a literal or "optimal equivalence" translation threatens the federal headship doctrine. The fact remains that men sin because sin is in them. The only real challenge to that would be those that support the age of accountability theory, who insist that infants are not lost until they actually committ a sin. But it would clearly require an eisogesis to use this portion of scripture to support that notion.

The Vulgate is: Propterea sicut per unum hominem in hunc mundum peccatum intravit et per peccatum mors et ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit in quo omnes peccaverunt.

Note that what Wycliffe translated as "in which man all men sinned" renders the final Latin phrase, in quo omnes peccaverunt. The prepositional phrase in quo is ablative, "in whom," translated correctly by Wycliffe. The problem is that this is just not in the Greek, as you can clearly see from Rob's translation in post #3. So Wycliffe is not faithful to the Greek. :type:

 

[J.D.]

The Vulgate is: Propterea sicut per unum hominem in hunc mundum peccatum intravit et per peccatum mors et ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit in quo omnes peccaverunt.

Note that what Wycliffe translated as "in which man all men sinned" renders the final Latin phrase, in quo omnes peccaverunt. The prepositional phrase in quo is ablative, "in whom," translated correctly by Wycliffe. The problem is that this is just not in the Greek, as you can clearly see from Rob's translation in post #3. So Wycliffe is not faithful to the Greek. :type:

Or more specifically, Wycliffe was true to the Vulgate, but the vulgate was not true to the greek. Have I got that right?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Which Greek text did the Latin Vulgate use? What was it translated from?

 

[John of Japan]

Or more specifically, Wycliffe was true to the Vulgate, but the vulgate was not true to the greek. Have I got that right?

Exactamundo.

 

[John of Japan]

Which Greek text did the Latin Vulgate use? What was it translated from?

Jerome revised the Old Latin versions, translating from the Greek and Hebrew. The Old Latin versions were from (or even originated, maybe) the Western text family. Jerome's Vulgate (which has been revised over the centuries, so we're not completely sure) was mostly Alexandrian, though it was a mixed text, retaining some Western readings and incorporating some Byzantine readings.