Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why "only begotten GOD" as against "Son | Bible general | PeterH | 240832 | ||
Do you know why the NASB chose to use "only begotten God" as against "only begotten Son" in John 1:18. Even the sister translation - the Amp. - has "only begotten Son as an alternative. Thank you. | ||||||
2 | Why "only begotten GOD" as against "Son | Bible general | Beja | 240833 | ||
PeterH, The reason is because different ancient texts vary on this verse. Some of them read son and others read God. It is a matter of text criticism to try and determine which is more likely the original reading. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
3 | Yes but why did the NASB choose "God" | Bible general | PeterH | 240834 | ||
Yes but why did the NASB choose "only begotten God"? | ||||||
4 | Yes but why did the NASB choose "God" | Bible general | Beja | 240836 | ||
PeterH, A person could list the evidence for one reading verses the other. But only those who actually made the decision can tell you what particular evidence they found the most compelling. I would point you to "A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament" 2nd ed. by Bruce Metzger. On there you will find what persuaded that particular group concerning various textual differences of significance. They determined "God" to be most likely original in that passage and they briefly list why. From there you would need to look into what the NASB's policy was. Did they just accept the other committee's judgement or did they make up their own mind? This you might find in the foreword to you NASB. Best of luck. In Christ, Beja |
||||||