Will J. Kinney
Member
Larry posts: When you hvae a gnat in your wine, you don't strain at it, you strain it out. Forget the OED, look up the word in the BAGD ... after all, that is where you find the word that God used.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strain AT a gnat Matthew 23:24
"Ye blind guides, which strain AT a gnat, and swallow a camel."
There are many who criticize the KJB reading of "strain at a gnat". Some will tell us this is a printing error, yet I would ask how do they know this? It is mere assumption on their part. Others have had no difficulty at all with the rendering of strain at a gnat.
The word "to strain" (diulizo) is found only once in the New Testament. How to translate this word is a matter of perspective. The rendering of "strain at" a gnat, implies only the effort to try to strain out the gnats that might ceremoniously defile their drink and food; it does not necessarily mean they succeeded in always getting them out. The modern versions like the NKJV, NASB, NIV, and even the older English versions of Tyndale and Geneva say "strain OUT a gnat", as though they accomplished what they intended.
In 1729 Daniel Mace made a translation of the New Testament, and in Matthew 23:24 he translated as: "strain..FOR a gnat", which carries the same meaning as that found in the Authorized Version.
There is nothing wrong with the KJB reading of "strain at a gnat." Other commentators in the past have had no problem with the way the phrase stands in the King James Bible.
John Gill
"To this practice Christ alluded here; and so very strict and careful were they in this matter, that to strain AT (caps mine) a gnat, and swallow a camel, became at length a proverb, to signify much solicitude about little things, and none about greater. These men would not, on any consideration, be guilty of such a crime, as not to pay the tithe of mint, anise, and cummin, and such like herbs and seeds; and yet made no conscience of doing justice, and showing mercy to men, or of exercising faith in God, or love to him. Just as many hypocrites, like them, make a great stir, and would appear very conscientious and scrupulous, about some little trifling things, and yet stick not, at other times, to commit the grossest enormities, and most scandalous sins in life.
Matthew Henry
"they strained AT a gnat, and swallowed a camel. In their doctrine they strained AT gnats, warned people against every the least violation of the tradition of the elders. In their practice they strained AT gnats, heaved AT them, with a seeming dread, as if they had a great abhorrence of sin, and were afraid of it in the least instance"
These two commentators do not try to change the KJB reading here, though they both do so in other parts of the Scriptures. They affirm that the Pharisees had a great outward revulsion for minor sins, yet they swallowed a camel.
How many gnats do you suppose were on that camel they swallowed?
The KJB is always right.
Will Kinney
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strain AT a gnat Matthew 23:24
"Ye blind guides, which strain AT a gnat, and swallow a camel."
There are many who criticize the KJB reading of "strain at a gnat". Some will tell us this is a printing error, yet I would ask how do they know this? It is mere assumption on their part. Others have had no difficulty at all with the rendering of strain at a gnat.
The word "to strain" (diulizo) is found only once in the New Testament. How to translate this word is a matter of perspective. The rendering of "strain at" a gnat, implies only the effort to try to strain out the gnats that might ceremoniously defile their drink and food; it does not necessarily mean they succeeded in always getting them out. The modern versions like the NKJV, NASB, NIV, and even the older English versions of Tyndale and Geneva say "strain OUT a gnat", as though they accomplished what they intended.
In 1729 Daniel Mace made a translation of the New Testament, and in Matthew 23:24 he translated as: "strain..FOR a gnat", which carries the same meaning as that found in the Authorized Version.
There is nothing wrong with the KJB reading of "strain at a gnat." Other commentators in the past have had no problem with the way the phrase stands in the King James Bible.
John Gill
"To this practice Christ alluded here; and so very strict and careful were they in this matter, that to strain AT (caps mine) a gnat, and swallow a camel, became at length a proverb, to signify much solicitude about little things, and none about greater. These men would not, on any consideration, be guilty of such a crime, as not to pay the tithe of mint, anise, and cummin, and such like herbs and seeds; and yet made no conscience of doing justice, and showing mercy to men, or of exercising faith in God, or love to him. Just as many hypocrites, like them, make a great stir, and would appear very conscientious and scrupulous, about some little trifling things, and yet stick not, at other times, to commit the grossest enormities, and most scandalous sins in life.
Matthew Henry
"they strained AT a gnat, and swallowed a camel. In their doctrine they strained AT gnats, warned people against every the least violation of the tradition of the elders. In their practice they strained AT gnats, heaved AT them, with a seeming dread, as if they had a great abhorrence of sin, and were afraid of it in the least instance"
These two commentators do not try to change the KJB reading here, though they both do so in other parts of the Scriptures. They affirm that the Pharisees had a great outward revulsion for minor sins, yet they swallowed a camel.
How many gnats do you suppose were on that camel they swallowed?
The KJB is always right.
Will Kinney
, and I will try to answer as I understand it.
