Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
5,023
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 757:
Line 757: + + + + + +
→Elaboration: Andy, I'm afraid you are still wrong...
::If you prefer, we could attach significance to the "ὁ" and translate the phrase as "the Son, a human being." But "the Son" means "Son of God."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:03, 22 June 2014 (EDT)
::If you prefer, we could attach significance to the "ὁ" and translate the phrase as "the Son, a human being." But "the Son" means "Son of God."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:03, 22 June 2014 (EDT)
*''But "the Son" means "Son of God."'' No, it just implies "Son of God". It does so in the Greek, and therefore it should do so in the translation. A commentary is the right place to stress this implication, but editorializing "of God" into the "translation" shifts the whole narrative: Jesus Christ isn't declaring proudly time and time again that he is the "Son of God" - an announcement which would have let to drastic reactions by the religious elites of the time. So, a reader of the CBP gets a totally wrong idea of what has happened.
*''"human being" (ἀνθρώπου) does modify "son" (υἱὸς), but that does not mean it should be translated as "son of a human being" or "son of man." Instead, it means that the "son" is of God, but that son is a human being. Hence "Son of God, a human being" is the English that is closest to the original meaning.'' *LOL* this kind of arguments would make you flunk any Greek class! "The Son, a human" would be something like υἱὸς ὁ ἄνθρωπος, similar to the well-known phrase "God the Son", Θεός ὁ υἱός.
*Jesus Christ listener heard that he described himself as "Son of Man", not less, not more. They understood, that he was the Son of God, but this took an insight. A modern reader should get the same insight, and should not be forced on his path by words Jesus Christ d i d n o t u t t e r.
--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:09, 23 June 2014 (EDT)