Originally posted by tabibito
View Post
I used the NA28 in my translation. The OP is about my translation. Does your criticism apply to it? Here is your chance to change my mind. I have the ability to change it, and will if you show me I am wrong. I am grateful that you labeled it as "expository." In fact, I may make two translations, or rearrange the footnotes.
Now, lets look at how the punctuation changes the meaning of the text.
The ancient punctuation with a total of 26 English words:
John 1:1 ᾽Εν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
2 οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν
3 πάντα δι αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο
All Things through him came to be 7
καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. PERIOD
and apart from him not one thing thing came to be. 11
ὃ γέγονεν 4 ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν
what came to be in him was life 8
The newly changed punctuation with a total of 26 words:
John 1:1 ᾽Εν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
2 οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν
3 πάντα δι αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο
All Things through him came to be 7
καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν
and apart from him not one thing thing came to be 11
ὃ γέγονεν PERIOD
that came to be. 4
4 ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν
in him was life 4
There are no extra works in Greek or English.
However, the early quotes from Church Fathers are all the ancient (non KJV) punctuation.
That being said, MY translation from the OP is certainly a valid one and I will defend it.
What is more interesting is Danker's gloss of "and so" for και. Even if we just see it as "and" there are three states and not two. There is no grammatical justification for assuming that that is said about the Word at 1:1b and c is already true at 1:1a. In fact, at 1:1a, it also cannot be said that the Word was προς τον θεον.
Comment