Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What is so significant about Malta? | Acts 28:1 | ron_runsvold | 13307 | ||
In Acts 27:26, Paul says that they must land on a "certain island." Why is that? What was so special about Malta vs. any other island? Is there a significance to the people there or maybe a definition for the name of the place that I have missed? | ||||||
2 | What is so significant about Malta? | Acts 28:1 | Morant61 | 13312 | ||
Greetings Ron! This wasn't a very good translation by the NASB. The Greek text actually uses an indefinite pronoun to refer to the island in question. It can be translated as "a certain island," but the thought is not a particular island. Rather, the thought is simply of any old island as opposed to a specific island. The NIV translates it better: Acts 27:26 - "Nevertheless, we must run aground on some island." The point of the verse was simply that the wreck was necessary in God's plan. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | What is so significant about Malta? | Acts 28:1 | Makarios | 13329 | ||
Hello Tim and Ron! I did a little 'digging' here and found that the formal equivalence translations, such as the NASB, KJV, NKJV, Darby's New Translation and ASV all have this verse (Acts 27:26) translated as "a certain island." However, Tim is correct in saying that the Greek does not lead one to be specific here, but it uses an indefinite pronoun. I agree that this verse is best rendered as "any old island" rather than a "specific island".. The RSV and dynamic equivalence translations such as the NIV, ISV, NLT, Amplified, Holman Christian Standard, and Today's English Version all render this verse as "some island", which is a clearer meaning here. Is this verse in its context a "triumph" of dynamic equivalence over formal equivalence, since the meaning is conveyed a little clearer in dynamic equivalence translations? I believe that the RSV/NRSV tradition and Young's Literal Translation have the 'advantage' here in this passage, since the NRSV and YLT are considered to be formal equivalence translations and render this verse in this way, "When the fourteenth night had come, as we were drifting across the sea of Adria, about midnight the sailors suspected that they were nearing land." (NRSV) This is an interesting study comparing the formal equivalence translations with the dynamic equivalence translations.. --Nolan |
||||||
4 | What is so significant about Malta? | Acts 28:1 | Morant61 | 13332 | ||
Greetings Nolan! Thanks for the input! I prefer the dynamic equivalent style of translation. I don't dislike the formal style, but I think for most Christians, the dynamic makes things a little clearer. The only disadvantage is that it adds a slightly more interpretative flavor. But, I think the clarity makes it worth the risk. After I posted my note, I sort of cringed because I noticed that I said this verse was a bad translation on the part of the NASB. I was waiting to get blasted for that slip of my fingers. What I meant to say was that it wasn't as clear as it could be. I didn't mean to say it was a bad translation. 'Tis' can certainly be translated 'a certain.' It's just that in English it sounds more definite, though in Greek it is an indefinite pronoun. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||