1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Born or Fathered?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Van, Aug 30, 2019.

  1. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Has Van now schooled himself in the Greek texts and language to agree/disagree with your points here?
     
  2. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Have you been studying biblical Greek ?
     
  3. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Note that Y1 does not address the topic, but instead addresses my qualifications. The fact that Dr. Wallace (NET) and LEB translators provide the basis of my view is not addressed. Obfuscation on display.
     
  4. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    One difficult verse in choosing to render our word "fathered" where "out of God" is present is John 1:13, The difficulty is in the "not of bloods" at the start of the verse. This may point to joint contribution of a biological conception, thus John is comparing not human fathering to Godly fathering, but human caused conception with God caused conception. So, even though the NASB footnotes "begotten" for born, and the YLT and Weymouth NT, use begotten, I think John was presenting the result of human conception, thus born addresses the idea t Thin perhaps, but here I stand. The other meaning of "not of bloods" is that it might be referring to the Jewish bloodline back to Abraham. Either way born appears to be better than fathered even though "out of God" is present indicating divine origin.

    Here is John 1:13 NASB, but edited to show "blood" as plural:
    New American Standard Bible
    who were born, not of bloods nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
     
    #64 Van, Sep 8, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2019
  5. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No,just wondering if you are qualified to actually discuss what is the point of the OP itself!
     
  6. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    @Yeshua1: I agree with this.
     
  7. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Notice that not one of those questioning the NET/LEB translation of 1 John 5:1 has offered to describe the grammar. Here is my understanding of the English translation grammar:

    Everyone - subject of first clause of the sentence.
    believing - used as an adjective to modify or describe the subject.
    that Jesus is the Christ - adjectival clause used to modify or describe the subject
    has been fathered - passive verb showing the action taken upon the subject
    by God - adverbial phrase used to modify or describe who did the fathering.

    Notice that the subject remains the subject and was not obscured in any way.
    Notice that the verb remains the verb and was not obscured in any way.

    There is more to the verse but there is no need for more explanation, as the negative assertions against the translation choice have focused on the first clause.
     
Loading...