Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | "even" is confusing. | John 1:12 | load | 326 | ||
The word "even" in this verse is confusing. Almost as if "receiving Him" was not completely necessary, but atleast believing in Him...? I see receiving and believing as one in the same, but the word "even" seems to distinguish between them. Any comments? | ||||||
2 | "even" is confusing. | John 1:12 | Hank | 2654 | ||
Notice that the word "even" is printed in italics in the NASB text. This indicates that the word does not appear in the original language but, in the view of the translators, is implied. By inserting italicized words into the test, it is their aim to give the English sentence more clarity or a better syntax. Obviously they do not always achieve their goal, as in the verse you cite. "Even" is one of those annoying little words of which the KJV translators were so fond. The NASB uses it too, although to a far lesser extent. For the word "even" in this verse, try reading it "...children of God -- to those who believe in His name." Believing in Christ is a prerequisite to receiving Him. | ||||||
3 | "even" is confusing. | John 1:12 | kalos | 2684 | ||
Dear Hank: Your answer is right on target. Thanks for the explanation of words that are italicized in the NASB text, as well as the text of other translations. Before I read your reply, I read the original question and thought about it. I was going to say to load to try reading the verse, omitting the word "even." But I see you have already made the same suggestion. --JVH0212 | ||||||
4 | "even" is confusing. | John 1:12 | Hank | 2687 | ||
A further comment on your question, load, and JVH's note. Readers of a number of modern translations and paraphrases will find no such italicized words. Because they, many of them at least, make no pretext of having followed the ancient texts with the same precision as the NASB translators have done, the usage of italics by them would be both moot and decidedly voluminous. I can think of a couple of versions offhand that would be printed largely in italics. One would not go far afield to say that the presence of an occasional italicized word or phrase in the text is virtually one of the hallmarks of a reliable translation! | ||||||
5 | "even" is confusing. | John 1:12 | kalos | 2692 | ||
I agree with Hank. Not without purpose did the translators of the KJV, the NASB and others use italics to clarify the meaning of various passages. Try this: in the KJV or NASB, read a few passages, omitting the italicized word, and note whether the presence or absence of the italicized word significantly alters the meaning. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes, not always, a more literal meaning will be ascertained by the omission of italics. . . . For example, when Jesus tells the Pharisees, "I am [he]," they accused him of blasphemy. Why? Because Jesus was literally saying, "I am," which is the name of the LORD, the word [he] having been supplied by the translators. . . . To all of us I would like to point out, if you will take the time to read the introduction to whatever translation you use, you will note that often the format or principles of interpretation are explained for the reader. Having this information will give you a better understanding of that translation as you read and study it. |
||||||