Some Comparisons of our English Translations.

[37818]

When the word is used referring of the Son of God, "uniquely divine" . . .

Your mistranslation. Following it, Luke 8:42 could read as, ". . . For he had a uniquely divine daughter, about twelve years of age, and she lay a dying. But as he went the people thronged him. . . ."

 

[Van]

Your mistranslation. Following it, Luke 8:42 could read as, ". . . For he had a uniquely divine daughter, about twelve years of age, and she lay a dying. But as he went the people thronged him. . . ."

I said when the descriptor was used of Jesus! Please stop trying to find fault when done exists.

 

[37818]

I said when the descriptor was used of Jesus! Please stop trying to find fault when [n]one exists.

So according to you, a special exception is needed as to a meanings of some words, not otherwise exclusive to deity.

 

[Van]

So according to you, a special exception is needed as to a meanings of some words, not otherwise exclusive to deity.

What is your problem? Of course when words have more than one meaning, we must use the context of the passage in which the word is used to determine which meaning applies. This is very basic!

1. The Greek word (transliterated as "monogenes" (G3439) appears about 9 times in the New Testament.

2. In Luke and Hebrews the word describes a child of some human, but in John and 1 John the word is used five times to describe Jesus, the uniquely divine Son of God. John 1:14, 18, 3:16, 18 and 1 John 4:9.

3. Are you denying that monogenes describes Jesus as uniquely divine, God incarnate?

 

[Van]

Snippet from Thayer's:

Hence, the expression ὁ μονογ. υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ and υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁ μονογ., John 3:16, 18; John 1:18 [see below]; 1 John 4:9; μονογενὴς παρὰ πατρός, John 1:14 [some take this generally, owing to the omission of the article (cf. Green, pp. 48f)], used of Christ, denotes the only son of God or one who in the sense in which he himself is the son of God has no brethren. He is so spoken of by John not because ὁ λόγος which was ἐνσαρκωθείς in him was eternally generated by God the Father (the orthodox interpretation), or came forth from the being of God just before the beginning of the world (Subordinationism), but because by the incarnation (ἐνσάρκωσις) of the λόγος in him he is of nature or essentially Son of God, and so in a very different sense from that in which men are made by him τέκνα τοῦ θεοῦ (John 1:13).​

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Snippet from Thayer's:

​

Oh, now you have deemed it worthwhile to identify a source.​

 

[Van]

Oh, now you have deemed it worthwhile to identify a source.​

Yet another violation, addressing my behavior rather than the topic. How long must I suffer from these posts?
Does anyone need a source to know Jesus is uniquely divine? How about the five verses cited!

Rather than uniquely divine, the suspect NIV translates monogenes as "one and only" Son of God. However Jesus is not the only son of God, as Adam was the son of God, and every born anew believer is also said to be the son of God. So the NIV sows error and confusion, rather than a studied choice.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

One and only Son

John 1:18 : NIV, CSB, WEB
John 1:14 : NIV, CSB, WEB [NET : one and only]
John 3:16 : NIV, LEB, CSB, Mounce, NCV, NET, NLT, WEB
1 John 4:9 : NIV, CSB, LEB, Mounce, NCV, NLT, WEB

 

[AVL1984]

One and only Son

John 1:18 : NIV, CSB, WEB
John 1:14 : NIV, CSB, WEB [NET : one and only]
John 3:16 : NIV, LEB, CSB, Mounce, NCV, NET, NLT, WEB
1 John 4:9 : NIV, CSB, LEB, Mounce, NCV, NLT, WEB

Hogwash! t
This would imply that he's the "only begotten." Get real.

 

[37818]

Hogwash! t
This would imply that he's the "only begotten." Get real.

What exactly are you disageeing with?

John 1:18
John 1:14
John 3:16
John 3:18
1 John 4:9

 

[RipponRedeaux]

John 3:18 :

" The only Son of God" : NASB, NRSV, ESV, NABRE
"The one and only Son of God." : CSB, LEB, NET, WEB
"God's one and only Son." : Mounce, NCV, NIV, NLT,

 

[AVL1984]

What exactly are you disageeing with?

John 1:18
John 1:14
John 3:16
John 3:18
1 John 4:9

The "suspect NIV." Get real.

 

[37818]

The "suspect NIV." Get real.

The NIV is not alone in it's errors. What specificly regarding the translation of μονογενους?

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Hogwash! t
This would imply that he's the "only begotten." Get real.

Please explain. You are not making yourself clear.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

The "suspect NIV." Get real.

Again, you need to elaborate. What is your point? How is anyone able to understand your posts?

 

[RipponRedeaux]

So the NIV sows error and confusion, rather than a studied choice.

As you can see from my posts 48 and 51, the NIV is in the company of a dozen other English Bible translations for those five passages. All of them are in line with the NIV rendering.
So Van, stop sowing discord, error and confusion.

 

[AVL1984]

The NIV is not alone in it's errors. What specificly regarding the translation of μονογενους?

Sorry, I speak English...All these people want to gripe and complain about the English being wrong...well...I have studied soem Greek and Hebrew...but, the big issue is English....The KJV tries to make it all about the ENGLISH, but then keep referring bakc to Greek and Hebrew. We have no perfect translations...even the KJV translators admitted this in their preface. If people will read the MV's content and in the context it's written they'll find that it doesn't change the meaning.

 

[Van]

As you can see from my posts 48 and 51, the NIV is in the company of a dozen other English Bible translations for those five passages. All of them are in line with the NIV rendering.
So Van, stop sowing discord, error and confusion.

[Snip]

Rather than uniquely divine, the suspect NIV translates monogenes as "one and only" Son of God. However Jesus is not the only son of God, as Adam was the son of God, and every born anew believer is also said to be the son of God. So all the versions, including the NIV, that say only sow error and confusion, rather than a studied choice.

Jesus is the uniquely divine Son of God, God incarnate.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Van, when a majority of sound Bible translations agree with a rendering that is testimony that the translators are adhering to sound principles of translation.
Van, you are the instigator of heterodox theology and constantly sow discord.

 

[Van]

Van, when a majority of sound Bible translations agree with a rendering that is testimony that the translators are adhering to sound principles of translation.
Van, you are the instigator of heterodox theology and constantly sow discord.

Talk about nonsense. Since there are more than one "sons of God" stated in scripture, to translate monogenes as one and only creates error. Full Stop.

RR, YOU ARE the instigator of disharmony and a sower of false theology, creating discord rather than enlightenment.