service genset jogja
Genesis 1:8

Genesis 1:8b (Only in LXX)

Filed Under: Bible Translation, Genesis by Chuck
December 10, 1969

Genesis 1:8b in the LXX conatains a phrase missing from the BHS and the VULGATE

LXX (Septuagint): καὶ εἶδεν ὁ Θεὸς ὅτι καλόν

BETS (Brenton English translation Septuagint):  and God saw that it was good

NETS (New English Translation Septuagint): And God saw that it was good

OSB (Orthodox Study Bible): And God saw that it was good

 

The observation or pronouncement of the second day creation being good is absent from both the BHS and the VUL. One commentators explains its absence if you choose to accept it.

Lacking here is the statement of divine approval, “and God saw that it was good.” Perhaps the author viewed the creation of the expanse as merely a preliminary stage to the emergence of the dry land on day three. Another possibility is that, given the fear that ancient people had of the firmament falling, it was important to make it clear that God was in complete control of it. He himself made it and it is, therefore, not to be feared. Another reason the formula of divine approval was withheld may be for stylistic reasons. Since the formula was to be used twice on the third and sixth days giving seven in total, not using it here allowed the author to preserve the pattern of sevens.48 [1]

It is observable that in connection with the second day’s work the usual formula, “And God saw that it was good,” is omitted. The “καὶ εἰδεν ὁ θεος ὅτι καλόν” of the Septuagint is unsupported by any ancient version. The conceit of the Rabbis, that an expression of the Divine approbation was omitted because on this day the angels fell, requires no refutation. Aben Ezra accounts for its omission by making the second day’s work terminate with ver. 10. Lange asks, “Had the prophetic author some anticipation that the blue vault was merely an appearance, whilst the savans of the Septuagint had no such anticipation, and therefore proceeded to doctor the passage?” The explanation of Calvin, Delitzsch, Macdonald, and Alford, though declared by Kalisch to be of no weight, is probably the correct one, that the work begun on the second day was not properly terminated till the middle of the third, at which place, accordingly, the expression of Divine approbation is introduced (see ver. 10).[2]

 

English Translations with variant readings:

Very similar! The only translations that reflect the notice of the “goodness” of the day’s efforts are those based on the LXX.

 

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): And God noted that it was very good.

CLV In the beginning God created heaven and earth but the earth was invisible and incomplete. And darkness covered the abyss. The spirit of God was brooding over the abyss’ darkness so God issued a decree that there should be light, and there was light. God saw the light and declared that the light was very good. Then God named the light “day” and he named the darkness “night.” And it was evening and it was morning: Day One! And God declared, “Let there be some solid border that will keep the waters above separated from the waters below.” And so it was. So God made the barrier, and he caused a separation between the waters which were under the barrier and between the waters which were over the barrier. That’s what happened. And God noted that it was very good.

48 Wenham, Genesis 1–15, p. 6: “The correspondence of the first paragraph, 1:1–2, with 2:1–3 is underlined by the number of Hebrew words in both being multiples of 7. 1:1 consists of seven words, 1:2 of fourteen (7 × 2) words, 2:1–3 of 35 (7 × 5) words. The number seven dominates this opening chapter in a strange way, not only in the number of words in a particular section but in the number of times a specific word or phrase recurs. For example, “God” is mentioned 35 times, ‘earth’ 21 times, ‘Heaven/firmament’ 21 times, while the phrases ‘and it was so’ and ‘God saw that it was good’ occur 7 times.”

[1] Paul J. Kissling, Genesis, The College Press NIV Commentary (Joplin, MO: College Press Pub. Co., 2004–), 103–104.

[2] H. D. M. Spence-Jones, ed., Genesis, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 15–16.

Tags:
Permalink
Genesis 1:8

Genesis 1:8c

Filed Under: Bible Translation, Genesis by Chuck
December 9, 1969

Genesis 1:8b in the LXX conatains a phrase missing from the BHS and the VULGATE

LXX (Septuagint): καὶ εἶδεν ὁ Θεὸς ὅτι καλόν

BETS (Brenton English translation Septuagint):  and God saw that it was good

NETS (New English Translation Septuagint): And God saw that it was good

OSB (Orthodox Study Bible): And God saw that it was good

 

The observation or pronouncement of the second day creation being good is absent from both the BHS and the VUL. One commentators explains its absence if you choose to accept it.

Lacking here is the statement of divine approval, “and God saw that it was good.” Perhaps the author viewed the creation of the expanse as merely a preliminary stage to the emergence of the dry land on day three. Another possibility is that, given the fear that ancient people had of the firmament falling, it was important to make it clear that God was in complete control of it. He himself made it and it is, therefore, not to be feared. Another reason the formula of divine approval was withheld may be for stylistic reasons. Since the formula was to be used twice on the third and sixth days giving seven in total, not using it here allowed the author to preserve the pattern of sevens.48 [1]

It is observable that in connection with the second day’s work the usual formula, “And God saw that it was good,” is omitted. The “καὶ εἰδεν ὁ θεος ὅτι καλόν” of the Septuagint is unsupported by any ancient version. The conceit of the Rabbis, that an expression of the Divine approbation was omitted because on this day the angels fell, requires no refutation. Aben Ezra accounts for its omission by making the second day’s work terminate with ver. 10. Lange asks, “Had the prophetic author some anticipation that the blue vault was merely an appearance, whilst the savans of the Septuagint had no such anticipation, and therefore proceeded to doctor the passage?” The explanation of Calvin, Delitzsch, Macdonald, and Alford, though declared by Kalisch to be of no weight, is probably the correct one, that the work begun on the second day was not properly terminated till the middle of the third, at which place, accordingly, the expression of Divine approbation is introduced (see ver. 10).[2]

 

 English Translations with variant readings:

Very similar! The only translations that reflect the notice of the “goodness” of the day’s efforts are those based on the LXX.

 

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): And God noted that it was very good.

CLV In the beginning God created heaven and earth but the earth was invisible and incomplete. And darkness covered the abyss. The spirit of God was brooding over the abyss’ darkness so God issued a decree that there should be light, and there was light. God saw the light and declared that the light was very good. Then God named the light “day” and he named the darkness “night.” And it was evening and it was morning: Day One! And God declared, “Let there be some solid border that will keep the waters above separated from the waters below.” And so it was. So God made the barrier, and he caused a separation between the waters which were under the barrier and between the waters which were over the barrier. That’s what happened. And God noted that it was very good.

48 Wenham, Genesis 1–15, p. 6: “The correspondence of the first paragraph, 1:1–2, with 2:1–3 is underlined by the number of Hebrew words in both being multiples of 7. 1:1 consists of seven words, 1:2 of fourteen (7 × 2) words, 2:1–3 of 35 (7 × 5) words. The number seven dominates this opening chapter in a strange way, not only in the number of words in a particular section but in the number of times a specific word or phrase recurs. For example, “God” is mentioned 35 times, ‘earth’ 21 times, ‘Heaven/firmament’ 21 times, while the phrases ‘and it was so’ and ‘God saw that it was good’ occur 7 times.”

[1] Paul J. Kissling, Genesis, The College Press NIV Commentary (Joplin, MO: College Press Pub. Co., 2004–), 103–104.

[2] H. D. M. Spence-Jones, ed., Genesis, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 15–16.

Tags:
Permalink
John

John 1:1

Filed Under: The Gospel of John by Chuck
December 31, 1968

JOHN 1:1

Greek

Ἐν ἀρχῇ        ἦν    ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος   ἦν   πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

In beginning was the word and the word was   with God       and God was the word

 

Latin

In principio   erat Verbum et Verbum erat      apud              Deum et Deus erat Verbum

In beginning was   word   and  word    was with/at/by near   God and God was Word

 

English Translations with variant readings:

Standard: In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God.

AMP: In the beginning [before all time] was the Word (Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God Himself.

CEV: In the beginning was the one who is called the Word. The Word was with God and was truly God.

EMPH: Originally was the Word, And the Word was with God; And the Word was God.

GNB: In the beginning the Word already existed; the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

LB: Before anything else existed, there was Christ, with God. He has always been alive and is himself God.

TM: The Word was first, the Word present to God, God present to the Word. The Word was God.

NET: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God.

NEB: WHEN ALL THINGS BEGAN, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was. [Or: The Word was at the creation.]

 

Comments and Commentaries:

In Genesis 1, God speaks, and his word creates the universe. In John 1 God’s word becomes flesh and is now a living person.  In the fullest sense you might say that God’s Word, Jesus, encompasses his entire works and words as well as his entire ministry. Jesus is the Communication of God to us. Through creation his works show his love for mankind. In Jesus he demonstrates the depth of that love on the cross.

The Logos according to the stoics represents the rational principle by which everything exists.

Philo, ancient Jewish philosopher influenced by Plato, distinguished between the ideal world of concepts and the real world of which to Plato was just a shadow of the ideal. Philo called the ideal world “the logos of God.”

Logos can mean inner thought or idea.

Logos can refer to the content of speech or the message that is spoken.

Logos is how God expresses Himself and/or reveals himself to mankind.

Tertullian suggested that the Logos was the thought expressed by the spoken word.

Early Latin Church used three terms for it: sermo, verbum, and ratio. Verbum officially won out and from that we got “word” in all our modern translations which still falls short.

The word “logos” is repeated three times in the first verse alone.

The first time draws our attention back to Genesis 1:1 because of the opening phrase “in the beginning.” But Genesis seems to be focused on what happened “in the beginning” and John focuses on “who was there at the beginning.”  Jesus was already there. It’s like “the beginning” marked the difference between eternity past, and the starting of the clock, time. The barrier between time and eternity. John says Jesus was there before the barrier into time was crossed.

The second us of logos states that the word was “with God.” This suggests an intimacy between Father and Son. Jesus speaks of it often. It did not begin as his birth, baptism or any other time but existed from eternity past, on the other side of the time barrier.

The third use of Logos in verse one insists that the logos was in and of itself God. This is not saying that they are one and the same. We can say “the word was God” but we cannot say “God was the word.” One commentator says, “Such is the case, for example, when a single individual is known as both ‘Mr. Thomas’ and ‘the manager.’ Two or more expressions may refer to the same person, making it completely natural to say, ‘Mr. Thomas is the manager,’ or the reverse, ‘The manager is Mr. Thomas.’” But throughout the NT we see the distinction between the two “persons” of the God head as suggested in the 2nd use of Logos.

 

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): The Word existed in eternity past in company with God and actually was of the same nature as God.

Tags:
Permalink
John 1:2

John 1:2

Filed Under: Bible Translation, The Gospel of John by Chuck
December 29, 1968

Greek

ουτος            ην    εν αρχη                   προς τον θεον

this (one)    was    in the beginning  with God

 

Latin

Hoc            erat          in principio    apud Deum

This (one) was   in the beginning with God

 

 

English Translations with variant readings:

Standard: He (this one) (the same) was in the beginning with God.

NEB: The Word, then, was with God at the beginning

AMP: He was present originally with God.

CEV: From the very beginning the Word was with God.

TM: in readiness for God from day one.

 

Comments and Commentaries:

I like using “this one” rather than “he” because that’s the literal rendering of both the Greek and the Latin words that begin this sentence.

The repetition of “in the beginning” again focuses our attention on Genesis 1:1

God the Father is unseen and unknowable with the Logos. The Logos is the complete manifestation of God to man. When God speaks in the OT it is the Logos. When God acts in the OT it is the Logos.

Augustine says that “the beginning” mentioned in the first two verses “has no beginning.”

In John 14:8, Philip asks Jesus, “show us the father and we will be satisfied.” If it takes seeing God, or knowing God to live a satisfied life, then the satisfied life is available to us all because as Jesus answered Philip, so too does he answer us, “if you’ve seen me you have seen the father.”

Jesus became flesh! What Jesus is, God is. What Jesus is like is what God has always been like.

Barclay says, “What Jesus did was to open a window in time that we might see the eternal and unchanging love of God.”

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): This one had always existed with God before the very beginning of the world.

Tags:
Permalink
John 1:3

John 1:3

Filed Under: Bible Translation, The Gospel of John by Chuck
December 28, 1968

Greek

πάντα         διʼ αὐτοῦ        ἐγένετο,      καὶ  χωρὶς   αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο       οὐδὲ                 ἕν  

All things through him    came to be and without   him  came to be not one thing   which

ὃ γέγονεν

had come to be

 

Latin

Omnia per ipsum facta sunt et sine ipso factum est nihil quod factum est

DRB: All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.

 

English Translations with variant readings:

Standard: All things were made through (by) him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

NASB: All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

DARBY: All things received being through him, and without him not one thing received being which has received being.

AMP: All things were made and came into existence through Him; and without Him was not even one thing made that has come into being.

CEV: And with this Word, God created all things. Nothing was made without the Word. Everything that was created

GENEVA: All things were made by it, & without it was made nothing that was made.

LB: He created everything there is—nothing exists that he didn’t make.

NEB: and through him all things came to be; no single thing was created without him.

 

Comments and Commentaries:

This verse states the truth in two ways. First, that the “word” created everything that exists. That’s the positive side of the statement. Then John proceeds to say it negatively to reinforce the truth. If the Word, Jesus, created everything that exists, then “nothing can come into existence without him.”

All things came to be through the Word of God. All creatures came to be through the Word of God but people came to be through the “breath” of God.

One commentator makes an interesting comment: “Plato, we are told, once turned to that little group of philosophers and students that had gathered around him during the Greek Golden Age in Athens and said to his followers, “It may be that some day there will come forth from God a Word, a Logos, who will reveal all mysteries and make everything plain.” Now John is saying, “Yes, Plato, and the Logos has come; now God is revealed to us perfectly.”[1]

There are about 100 billion stars in the average galaxy, and there are at least one hundred million galaxies in known space. Einstein believed that we have scanned with our largest telescopes only one billionth of theoretical space. This means that there are probably something like 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in space (ten octillion). How many is that? 1,000 thousands = a million; 1,000 millions = a billion; 1,000 billions = a trillion; 1,000 trillions = a quadrillion; 1,000 quadrillions = a quintillion; 1,000 quintillions = a sextillion; 1,000 sextillions = a septillion; 1,000 septillions = an octillion. So ten octillion is a 10 with twenty-seven zeros behind it. And Jesus created them all![2]

 

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): Everything that exists came into being by the power of the Word of God. Nothing exists apart from Him.

[1] James Montgomery Boice, The Gospel of John: An Expositional Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2005), 35.

[2] R. Kent Hughes, John: That You May Believe, Preaching the Word (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1999), 17.

Tags:
Permalink
John 1:4

John 1:4

Filed Under: Bible Translation, The Gospel of John by Chuck
December 17, 1968

Greek

ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ  ἦν,     καὶ ἡ ζωὴ     ἦν   τὸ φῶς   τῶν ἀνθρώπων

In him    life  was  and  the life  was the light of all men

Latin

in   ipso  vita erat    et    vita erat lux hominum

in,  him  life   was  and  life  was  light to all men

 

English Translations with variant readings:

Traditional: In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.

CJB: In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind

CEV: received its life from him, and his life gave light to everyone.

GW: He was the source of life, and that life was the light for humanity.

LB: Eternal life is in him, and this life gives light to all mankind

TM: What came into existence was Life, and the Life was Light to live by.

NAB: through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race;

NCV: In him there was life, and that life was the light of all people.

NLT: The Word gave life to everything that was created, and his life brought light to everyone.

 

Comments and Commentaries:

Earlier John asserts that Jesus (The Word) created all things. This verse adds the idea that he sustains everything that he made because he was “life” and it’s life that is sustained by God’s word.

Hebrews 1:3 supports this idea it says, “who is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, sustaining all things by the word of power…”

That life is “in him” means “he is the source of this life.”

It seems that “life” is referring to eternal life, not physical life. According to most of the commentators the Greek word for life is only used in John to refer to eternal life.

In John it seems that eternal life is not longevity as much as it is quality. He talks about “real” life or “true” life in contrast to just life. We should think of  not only never ending life but the best quality of life also. John’s “life” is not mere existence.

That life gave “light” to mankind or the human race. Whereas the first phrase refers to everything; plants, plants, animals etc., the last phrase refers to the uniqueness of humanity being created in  the image of God with such a nature to be able to recognize how the universe declares the glory of God. Mankind also has been presented with the light of life of God’s son. God’s very own Jewish people will not comprehend it but many will.

 

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): The Word had eternal life in himself and he brought that life to mankind so that all might comprehend the truth.

Tags:
Permalink
John 1:5

John 1:5

Filed Under: Bible Translation, The Gospel of John by Chuck
December 16, 1968

Greek

και το φως    εν τη σκοτια   φαινει και   η σκοτια      αυτο ου κατελαβεν

And the light in the darknes shines and the darkness   it   did not comprehend

 

Latin

et lux in tenebris lucet et tenebrae eam non conprehenderunt

And the light shined in darkness: and the darkness did not comprehend it.

 

English Translations with variant readings:

Traditional: And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

NEB: The light shines on in the dark, and the darkness has never mastered it.

AMP: And the Light shines on in the darkness, for the darkness has never overpowered it [put it out or absorbed it or appropriated it, and is unreceptive to it].

CJB: The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not suppressed it.

HCSB: That light shines in the darkness, yet the darkness did not overcome it.

LB: His life is the light that shines through the darkness—and the darkness can never extinguish it.

TM: The Life-Light blazed out of the darkness; the darkness couldn’t put it out.

NCV: The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overpowered it.

NIRV: he light shines in the darkness. But the darkness has not understood it

NLT: The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness can never extinguish it.

YLT: And the light in the darkness did shine, and the darkness did not perceive it.

 

Comments and Commentaries:

Possible translations of κατελαβεν are: comprehend, catch, overcome, overtake. The Lexham dictionary says that John 1:5 should be defined as “overcome.” The analytical Greek Lexicon says “overpower, seize, grasp with force, gain control over.”

The most popular translation by the English translators seems to have something to do with overpowering or overcoming the light. Only a few translations refer to it as “understanding.”

All these translations are right. The darkness certainly did not understand the light. It did not overcome it. And yet, there is another meaning of the word that I believe comes even closer to John’s true meaning and is more appropriate. It is “to quench,” “to extinguish,” or “to eclipse,” the concepts employed by J. B. Phillips and the New English Bible. Thus, to use the terms of astronomy, which may certainly be involved here, we can say that God’s light is shining in the darkness and that it has never been eclipsed.[1]

In World War II during the blackouts in London, on a clear night a lighted match could be seen for twenty miles from the air. Our Lord is a light shining in the darkness.[2]

In fact, wherever it is true that the light shines in the darkness, it is also true that the darkness has not understood it (taking katelaben as in the niv). Reading v. 5 this way anticipates the rejection theme that becomes explicit in vv. 10–11.[3]

 

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): This light of life is shining in the darkness, and the darkness cannot make the light go out.

[1] James Montgomery Boice, The Gospel of John: An Expositional Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2005), 48.

[2] R. Kent Hughes, John: That You May Believe, Preaching the Word (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1999), 25.

niv New International Version.

[3] D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991), 120.

Tags:
Permalink
John 1:6

John 1:6

Filed Under: Bible Translation, The Gospel of John by Chuck
December 15, 1968

Greek

εγενετο     ανθρωπος απεσταλμενος παρα θεου    ονομα     αυτω ιωαννης

there came a man            sent            from God. The name  to him: John

 

Latin

fuit homo missus a Deo cui nomen erat Iohannes

DRB: There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

 

English Translations with variant readings:

NEB: There appeared a man named John, sent from God;

NASB: There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John.

CEV: God sent a man named John,

EMPH: There arose a man､ sent from God, whose name was John

GNB: God sent his messenger, a man named John,

TM: There once was a man, his name John, sent by God

 

Comments and Commentaries:

This is the only Gospel that does not call this man “John the Baptist.” This gospel just calls him a man named “John.” I expect that’s because the writer of this Gospel is also named John and he doesn’t feel it’s necessary to distinguish between himself and the baptizer. He speaks very little of himself.

The fact that it’s emphasized that John was “sent from God.” Is interesting and as some commentators observe it puts him in the same category as Moses in a way. We all come from God but John came from God with a specific purpose to accomplish. I might argue, don’t we all?

 

CLV (Chuck Larsen Version): God sent a man named John.

Tags:
Permalink
sewa motor jogja
© Chuck Larsen 2019. Powered by WordPress.