1 Corinthians 8:13; Never Ever Forever!

13 For this very reason, if food causes my brother (or sister) to stumble, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause my brother (or sister) to stumble. My Translation

Paul has been talking to the Corinthians about how their “knowledge” that idols are nothing in this world, so it is fine to eat food sacrificed to idols in the Pagan temples will cause weak conscience fellow Christians to sin.  As a result, the “knowledgable” Corinthians sin against Christ (εἰς Χριστὸν ἁμαρτάνετε, verse 12).  He follows that up with a statement about himself that can be translated in many ways.  Here are a few examples:

“Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall.”

(1 Corinthians 8:13 NIV11)

“For this reason, if food causes my brother or sister to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I may not cause one of them to sin.”

(1 Corinthians 8:13 NET)

“Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.”

(1 Corinthians 8:13 ESV)

“Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.”

(1 Corinthians 8:13 KJV)

First of all, let’s discuss the two main verbs in the verse: σκανδαλίζω (skandalizō).  The base meaning of this word is “to cause to stumble”.  Morally, it became “to cause someone to sin”.  In other ways, it means “to offend someone”.  It’s cognate noun is σκάνδαλον (skandalon), which can mean “a stumbling block”, “a trap”, “an enticement” or “an offense”.  We get our modern term “scandal” from this word.

Probably the most interesting aspect of this verse is Paul’s emphatic response.  Let me try to demonstrate this.  First of all, Paul uses οὐ μὴ (not not) when he says “I will never eat meat”.  This use alone causes the statement to be emphatic.  Almost all translators will translate this as I have; “never”.  But for Paul, οὐ μὴ is not enough.  At the end of this phrase, he adds εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα which means “into the age”.  This is the normal Greek idiom for “forever”.  Since “I will never eat meat forever” is awkward English, most translators either translate it out of the verse (See blog on John 4:14 which features the same expression) or translate this prepositional phrase as “again”.

So, for you purists (I’m being funny) who think that the Bible must be translated literally, here goes:

“I shall/will not not eat meat into the age”

If we are to maintain the Greek word order, then:

“not not I shall/will eat into the age”.

1 Corinthians 5:6-8; In the light of the Sun

1 Corinthians 5:6-8:

6 Your boasting is not good.  Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough?  7 Clean out the old yeast, so that you may be a new batch of dough, as you are unleavened bread.  For Christ, our passover lamb, has been sacrificed.  8 Therefore, let us not feast/keep the F/festival with old yeast, neither the yeast of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. My Translation

Leading up to this passage, Paul has been reprimanding the Corinthians for taking pride (being puffed up) over a man who is carrying on a sexual relationship with his father’s wife (not his mother).  The Corinthians’ theological flaws are being revealed by Paul.

A couple of things about this passage that may not be so obvious should be pointed out.  First of all, in verse 7 we have καὶ γὰρ τὸ πάσχα ἡμῶν ἐτύθη Χριστός which literally means: “And/even for the passover of us has been sacrificed Christ”.  To put it into proper English, it should read: “For Christ, that is/even our passover, has been sacrificed”.  Of course, in order to understand what Paul means here is to understand what the sacrifice of the Passover was, it was a lamb!  Therefore, most modern translations add in “lamb” to the translation as that in undoubtably what Paul means.  This could mean that "festival" should be "The Festival" of Unleavened bread, or as we know it, "The Passover Festival".

The last area of interest appears at the end of this passage: ἀλλ᾿ ἐν ἀζύμοις εἰλικρινείας καὶ ἀληθείας (but in/with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth).  I want to focus on “sincerity”.  One of the things that appeals to me about the Greek text is how the ancients put together words in order to gather a meaning.  In this case, εἰλικρίνεια, which means “a quality or state of being free of dissimulation” or “sincerity” (BDAG), is one of these words.  This word is made up of two Greek words: ἥλιος (sun) and κρίνω (to judge, to decide).  Therefore, the word literally means “to decide/judge by the light of the sun” or “tested by the light of the sun” (TDNT).  Morally, it would mean that whatever is decided or judged is in the light of the sun where all can see it.  Therefore, nothing is hidden from view.  So, if one is sincere, then that are in full view, in the light of the sun for all to see.  Nothing should be hidden from view in a true Christian.

Codex Sinaiticus: 1 Corinthians 1:8

Since my purchase of Codex Sinaiticus, Facsimile Edition (you can get one here), I've been exploring this great Bible's secrets for myself.  Currently, I'm reading 1 Corinthians.  I'm sure there will be some "nuggets" out of this.  But today, I wanted to share where the scribe wrote 1:8 twice.  The little marks start on line 7 with 'OC and end with IYXY'.  You can also see the marks on the verse on both sides of lines 8, 9, 10, and ending on line 11.  The "first" verse 8 starts on line 2 where the scribe seems to have dipped his stylus into fresh ink as OC is darker than the preceding IYXY.  There are possibly two probables for the mistake: 1. The scribe here made the copy error, or 2. the exemplar (the manuscript that was being copied) already had the mistake which was probably due to the fact that both verse 7 and verse 8 end with IYXY (Jesus Christ).  The scribe's eyes probably went back to the IYXY of verse 7 and copied verse 8 again knowing that the last part was IYXY.

Proof that copying by hand was difficult in the Ancient world.

Introducing the Biblia Graeca: LXX + NA28

Finally, the German Bible Society is publishing a combined Septuagint (LXX) and the latest Greek New Testament (NA28).  This is something that I've wanted for a couple of years.  It will be released in the fall.  The price is a little hefty, but to have a single volume of both the Greek Old Testament and the Greek New Testament will be well worth it.  See the link here.  Also, see christianbook.com's link here.

The description:

This edition combines the Rahlfs-Hanhart Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament) with the 28th edition of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece. A one-of-a-kind, useful tool for pastors, scholars, and students.
- Includes critical apparatus, cross-references, and much more.

Galatians 3:15; The Cognates of Kυρόω

15 Brothers, to take from a human analogy, I say: even if it is a human covenant that has been ratified, nevertheless, no one can annul it or can add to it. Galatians 3:15

Paul uses the Greek verb κυρόω in verse 15 which means “to give sanction to something, confirm, ratify, validate, make legally binding” (BDAG).  What is not normally taught is that one of this verb’s cognate nouns is κύριος which is translated into English as “lord”.  Another cognate is κῦρος (supreme power), but it is not used in the NT.  Kύριος has a wide range of meanings in the NT, but it mostly given as a title to Jesus.

In the Greek OT (LXX), κύριος is the main word that replaces Yahweh (God’s name) from the Hebrew.  This was done in the LXX because the Jews were afraid that they would take God’s name in vain (or blaspheme), thus breaking the law of Moses.

I would have to say that κύριος is a fitting title for God.  If the verb means to ratify, to validate, to make legally binding, then κύριος is the one who ratifies, validates and make something legally binding.  By example, God spoke the creation into existence.  By speaking it, he ratified it, thus making it happen, thus putting it into existence.

This very idea could have been in John’s thoughts when he penned “In the beginning, there was the word/message”.  When the word is spoken by the one who makes it legally binding, it comes into existence.  The message about Jesus is the message that redeems all humans from their sin by putting their faith in him.  When he speaks it, we are truly pronounced righteous before him and thus sealed with his empowering Holy Spirit.

Psalms 22 LXX (23); Septuagint Studies

There are some interesting things that go on in Greek rendering of the 23rd Psalm, which is the 22nd Psalm in the LXX.  Let’s take a look at an English translation:

1 A song of David.  The Lord shepherds me, and he causes me to not lack anything.  2 In a grassy place, he has set up a place for me to dwell there.  At the restful water, he has fed me.  3 He has returned my soul to where it once was.  He has led me on the path of righteousness for the sake of his name.  4 For even if I go in the midst of the shadow of death, I will not be afraid of evil things, because you are with me.  Your rod and your staff, they have comforted me.  5 You have prepared a table before me in the presence of the opposition who afflict me.  You have anointed my head with oil.  Your cup makes me drunk as the best wine.  6 Your mercy will follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for a great many days. (My Translation)

Of course, the biggest thing one will see is at the end of verse 5!  The LXX represents Jewish thought at the time it was rendered.  Therefore, “the full cup that is so full of wine that the wine is running over the brim” means that there is so much that one can become drunk.  That wine is not ordinary wine, it is the best wine.  The wine that only the Lord can give.

Brenton translates this part (καὶ τὸ ποτήριόν σου μεθύσκον ὡς κράτιστον) as “and thy cup cheers me like the best wine”.  Now we know how it cheers a person up.

2 Peter 1:20: One’s own (private) interpretation

I know it's been a while since I've posted, but I've been very busy with my teaching duties in my local fellowship.

There seems to be many who appeal to 2 Peter 1:20 when a person has a different view of Scripture that others do.  Many folk’s get this from the KJV’s rendering of this verse.

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. KJV

Of course, the problem with isolating this verse is that when one removes it from its context, it can mean anything.  In reality, verse 20 is explained by verse 21.  How?  Why?

Verse 21 has the explanatory word γὰρ (for) which means that Peter is now going to explain what he means by what he wrote in Verse 20.  So, to keep the discussion around the KJV, let’s look at the KJV’s rendering of verse 21.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. KJV

First and foremost, “holy men” is not in the Greek, even in the Textus Receptus.  Nevertheless, the verse is still a good translation from the Greek.  Now the question is “how does verse 21 explain verse 20 in this KJV rendering?  Quite frankly, it doesn’t.  So, if it doesn’t explain verse 20, then what’s wrong?  Is there a problem with what Peter is trying to say?

The reality is that verse 20 is a terrible translation.  It’s terrible because it came about by early Catholic teaching that the lay people can’t understand Scripture, so therefore, only the priest can explain it to the lay people.  This idea also carried over to the translators of the KJV of the Bible, and has influenced a great deal of Christian churches who still use the KJV.  Let’s take a closer look at verse 20.

The verse’s translation hinges on what ἰδίας (private in KJV) means.  It actually means “one’s own”.  There are times in the NT where it is used as “private”, but it is often used with another word to bring this out.  For instance, in Galatians 2:2 it is used for Paul’s private meeting with Peter, James, and John.  There it is κατ᾿ ἰδίαν (according to one’s own).

So, in verse 20 who is “one’s own” referring to?  In the KJV, it seems that it is the “reader” of the prophecy that is view.  Therefore, the KJV translators translated the passage to mean that.  But if verse 21 explains verse 20, then how can “one’s own” be the person reading the prophecy?  It just can’t!  “One’s own” here is referring to the prophets who spoke the prophecy.  They didn’t come up with the prophecies on their own.  Which was probably what Peter’s opponents were saying.  Peter’s context up onto verse 20 has been that the prophecies in the OT prove what the Apostles are now preaching about Jesus.  Those prophecies were ὡς λύχνῳ φαίνοντι ἐν αὐχμηρῷ τόπῳ (like a lamp shining in a gloomy place).

Here is my translation of the passage along with the NIV11 and the NET which have it right.

20 Knowing this first, that every prophecy in Scripture doesn’t come from one’s own explanation.  21 For prophecy wasn’t ever brought into being by a human’s will, but it was brought into being as the humans (prophets), being carried by the Holy Spirit, spoke from God. My Translation*

20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things.  21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. NIV11

20 Above all, you do well if you recognize this: No prophecy of scripture ever comes about by the prophet’s own imagination, 21 for no prophecy was ever borne of human impulse; rather, men carried along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. NET

κατά KJV!

* I translate προφητεία γραφῆς as an objective genitive (Scripture), thus “prophecy in Scripture.  The NLT does the same.