From the Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. "in":
in ME. the distinction of in and on was gradually restored, though many traces of their former blending still remain. (See sense 2.)
The formal coincidence of in with the L. prep. in (with which it is originally cognate) led to its being employed, in translating from L., in senses or uses which were idiomatic in L., but not originally English. These also have affected the current contextual use of the preposition.
2. a. = ON (of position). Obs.
Partly a reaction from the blending of in with on in OE.; but partly also transl. L. in, and partly due to a different notion in reference to the n.
22. Formerly (and still sometimes) used, where at, on, during, for are now in use, or where the preposition is omitted.
32. The sense of motion or direction formerly gave rise to various modifications. [Cf. L. in with acc.] Obs. a. = upon, on.
In vs On
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Rufus_1611, Aug 30, 2007.
Page 3 of 3
-
-
You assume too much.
You think the devil is just stupid enough to allow the Book of Revelation to have within its pages a description of the mark of the beast and then have people run around with that mark in plain view for all the world to see. You underestimate the powers of darkness and are overtaken by him at his will in this particular area and are also unwise to his deceits.
I am glad I've got you to tell me what my problems are, I just wish you knew more of what you are talking about when you think you know it. -
-
We are not to determine what best translates the Greek, but we are to be busy about what best expresses the word of God.
To soley rely upon a singular language of men to understand what the Spirit saith is heading down a dead end.
The arguements will soon appear against advanced revelation and such, but men want the word of God to remain dead and not be alive as God will have it. -
-
In Rev. 19:16 the KJV translated epi as "on" twice: "And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS."
-
I am not attempting to indict you, here, but merely to show how easily this is often done (and I am sure I may have done the same, at times), and by those who are completely well-intentioned individuals, such as yourself. That occurred where you made this statement, in post #13.
Ed -
:laugh: :rolleyes: :D -
In any event I don't believe it is a "right" or "wrong" issue but what is better or best for the modern English speaker.
But after looking at the Greek "epi" of Revelation 13:16, I would say for a 21st century translation "on" or "upon" (as in the NKJV) would be the better choice than the 1611 choice of "in".
HankD -
How in the world can a discussion over "in" vs "on" get personal?
Page 3 of 3