Subject: pagan influence? |
Bible Note: Greetings Bern! Rom. 9:5 really isn't a translation issue as much as a punctuation issue. Leon Morris, in his "The Epistle to the Romans", published by IVP, lists six reasons why the main reading of the NIV should be accepted and only one why some think that it shouldn't be accepted. The six reasons are: (The following is a loose paraphrase of Leon Morris' material on page 350 of his commentary) 1) The word order favors the reading that Christ is 'God over all' because the relative pronoun does not precede the noun to which it refers. If 'God over all' does not refer to Christ, then Paul is beginning a new sentence and the relative pronoun occurs before the noun 'God'. There are no examples of this in the New Testament. 2) The only way that 'God over all' could not refer to Christ would be if this were a new sentence, in which case, it would be a closing doxology. However, doxologies always begin with 'Blessed be', whereas, this sentance would not. 3) Further, a doxology here would be out of place, since Paul is lamenting the Jewish rejection of Christ. 4) The phrase 'Christ according to the flesh' looks for an antithesis. To make the last clause a new sentence, would take away this antithesis. 5) A doxology which applies to someone other than Christ here would be an abrubt change of subject. 6) The early church fathers usually took the words as a reference to Christ. The only arguement for puncutating this verse differently is not grammatical in nature, but theological. Some believe that this would be too strong of a statement of the Deity of Christ, so they punctuate it differently. But, this decision is not based upon grammar. In fact, the argument that Paul does not call Christ 'God' anywhere else has also been used in the following passages: 1) Eph. 1:20-22 2) Col. 2:9 3) 1 Thess. 1:12 4) Tit. 1:3-4, and 5) Tit. 2:13. At which point does this arguement lose it's effectiveness! ;-) So, I would argue that the context and grammar all weigh in favor of the primary NIV reading. Are other punctuations possible? Of course, every verse COULD be punctuated differently if one so desired. However, is another punctutation probable? I would argue, "No!" Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |