Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 21:21:55 -0600 From: Organization: Deja News Posting Service Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian

Michael Smith < writes:

* Nigel claims the following:

* 1. The KJV translation of 1 Cor 14:26 is blatantly different from the original Greek text. 2. That Michael K has been repeatedly made aware of this. 3. That Michael K’s continued use of a passage which he knows is mistranslated is dishonesty.

[Some translations deleted.]

* Now as Nigel reads Greek and neither Michael K nor I do, it is fairly hard to dispute point 1. with him.

* However I believe other a.r.c contributors (such as Rowland, Andrew and Patrick) do understand Greek, so can probably comment with more authority.

Disclaimer:

I’m no authority on Greek, I’m merely an interested lay person who knows enough to do minor semi-competent word and grammar studies, given sufficient time. When I comment on Greek, I tend to spend a lot of time searching through reference books first, then report as I understand the situation, and I’m fully prepared to be proven wrong.

As I understand the issue here, it’s entirely about one word which appears in most English translations, and that word is “or”.

[1 Corinthians 14:26 NRSV] What should be done then, my friends? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, _OR_ an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up.

[1 Corinthians 14:26 KJV] How is it then, brethren? When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

There is no corresponding Greek word to the English word “or” in this translation, but it must be remembered that Greek simply doesn’t work the same way as English in this instance. The Greek also has no words corresponding to the many occurrences of “a”/”an” which all translations that I’ve checked (including YLT, which is interesting) insert. This is because to produce a usable English translation you always must insert small words such as this. It’s not enough to replace each Greek word with a corresponding English word, in any translation (especially formal ones), you have to replace Greek style with the equivalent English style.

OK, so why do pretty much all modern translations insert “or” here? Because of Paul’s use of the word *hekastos* (translated as “each one” or “every one” here) which linguists understand as implying disjuction in the list that follows.

Here are some other uses of the word which show the way that this word works in this situation. Use of *hekastos* is surrounded by asterisks.

[1 Corinthians 1:12 NRSV] What I mean is that *each* of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.”

This verse clearly implies that the quotations should be separated by “or”. Interestingly enough, the KJV inserts “and” rather than “or” here:

[1 Corinthians 1:12 KJV] Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

But still, it’s pretty clear that Paul doesn’t mean to imply that everybody is saying all four statements.

[Romans 2:6–8 NRSV] For he will repay according to *each* one’s deeds: to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; while for those who are self-seeking and who obey not the truth but wickedness, there will be wrath and fury.

Once again, it’s pretty clear that in the list that follows, the implied conjunction (if the translators decided to insert one) is not “and” but “or”.

Now I don’t think that Koine makes a distinction between “inclusive” or and “exclusive” or, as logicians and computers do. In that sense, it could be argued that the NRSV (like other modern translations), taken on this verse alone, does not rule out the possibility of all Christians speaking in tongues. In the absence of information to the contrary, I’d have to say this is probably correct. However absence of refutation does not imply support.

The KJV takes a more neutral position by not inserting a conjunction.

Looking at context, it’s clear that v26 does not imply that every Christian, or indeed any Christian in any given gathering, brings an interpretation (see v28), so this would imply that not all Christians “bring a tongue” either.

* So the question is: from the Greek text, could one reasonably say that the KJV translation is accurate?

The KJV is more word-for-word in the sense that the number of English words that it uses more closely corresponds to the number of Greek words that appear. This does not make it less misleading due to the different properties of Greek and English.

* Could one reasonably interpret it to support Michael K’s view that every Christian is able to speak in tongues?

My take is this: if you take the verse out of context, it does not disprove this view, though it definitely can’t be used as support. However, the context strongly implies that this Michael’s view is incorrect.

That’s my analysis. Any takers to tear this to shreds?

Cheers, Andrew Bromage