Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
5,023
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 145:
Line 145: − ::Thanks for the reply! I think I've managed to correct all instances of the term in Gospel of John (if there's something I missed than somebody please let me know), Soon I'll begin working on the removing the term from our translation of Gospel of Mark. Should the use of the phrase "Son of Man" be corrected when translating only the New Testament, or also when translating the Old Testament? - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 11:28, 30 June 2014 (EDT) EDIT: I've finished correcting the usage of the term in Gospels of John, Mark and Matthew. After I'll rest a bit, a correction of our translation of Gospel of Luke will also follow. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 12:01, 30 June 2014 (EDT) − + − + − + − + − + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→ὁ υἱὸς τοὺ ἀνθρώπου in the rest of the CBP: @Aschlafly
:I think it should be "the Son, a human being," unless the context indicates otherwise. It would be great if you could update the other instances of "Son of Man."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:01, 29 June 2014 (EDT)
:I think it should be "the Son, a human being," unless the context indicates otherwise. It would be great if you could update the other instances of "Son of Man."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:01, 29 June 2014 (EDT)
:::PetyrB, thanks, but the translation is "the Son, a human being," not "the Son of God, a human being." The latter would have been blasphemous, which was then a very serious crime.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:11, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
::I advise against such a substitution, futilely, I suppose. But the only justification for this phrase is that Andy likes it, he hasn't come up with ''anything'' resembling a fact, an example for this use of the genitive, etc. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:27, 29 June 2014 (EDT)
::::Whoops... Should have taken better notice. My bad, within a couple of minutes I'll fix this. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 12:12, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
:::Thanks for the reply! I think I've managed to correct all instances of the term in Gospel of John (if there's something I missed than somebody please let me know), Soon I'll begin working on the removing the term from our translation of Gospel of Mark. Should the use of the phrase "Son of Man" be corrected when translating only the New Testament, or also when translating the Old Testament? - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 11:28, 30 June 2014 (EDT) EDIT: I've finished correcting the usage of the term in Gospels of John, Mark and Matthew. After I'll rest a bit, a correction of our translation of Gospel of Luke will also follow. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 12:01, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
:::::Fixed my mistake, after some rest I will start working on Gospel of Luke. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 12:24, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
::::PetyrB, thanks, but the translation is "the Son, a human being," not "the Son of God, a human being." The latter would have been blasphemous, which was then a very serious crime.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:11, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
::::::Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:39, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
:::::Whoops... Should have taken better notice. My bad, within a couple of minutes I'll fix this. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 12:12, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
:::::::No problem, glad to help. I went through the Gospels, Acts and Hebrews, if there's something I'm forgetting let me know. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 13:03, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
::::::Fixed my mistake, after some rest I will start working on Gospel of Luke. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 12:24, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
:::::::Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:39, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
::::::::No problem, glad to help. I went through the Gospels, Acts and Hebrews, if there's something I'm forgetting let me know. - [[User:PetyrB|PetyrB]] 13:03, 30 June 2014 (EDT)
Andy, PetyrB's mistake doesn't come as much as a surprise, as you yourself wrote at [[Talk:John 1-7 (Translated)#Elaboration]]:
{{cquote|υἱὸς means "Son of God" in this context (and in John's usage in his Epistle), while ἀνθρώπου means "human being." So, translated literally, the phrase "υἱὸς τοὺ ἀνθρώπου" means "Son of God, His human being." I'll update the Son of Man entry accordingly now.|||--Andy Schlafly 16:36, 22 June 2014 (EDT)}}
{{cquote|"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.|||--Andy Schlafly 19:47, 22 June 2014 (EDT)}}
Nothing in our discussion over there indicates that you was persuaded by my argument:
{{cquote|''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.|||--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 06:09, 23 June 2014 (EDT)}}
In fact, you even write later:
{{cquote|No one would have crucified Jesus if he merely called himself the "Son of Man." He was crucified for call himself "'''the''' Son [of God], a human being."|||--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:53, 23 June 2014 (EDT)}}
It is nice to see that you now adopt my argument: my actions are not totally futile after all! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 14:55, 30 June 2014 (EDT)