Translation in Romans 1:4

How do I work out the meaning of a Greek text? How can I best understand the forms and vocabulary in this particular text?
Forum rules
This is a beginner's forum - see the Koine Greek forum for more advanced discussion of Greek texts. Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up.

Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Bobby Garringer » April 15th, 2013, 1:53 pm

James Orr -- in his book on the virgin birth of Christ -- states that the relevant phrases in Romans 1:4, including especially the reference to "power" and "Spirit," are an echo of the angel's statement in Luke 1:35 and are, therefore, an indirect reference to the virgin birth. I am wondering if there is a sound grammatical basis for his conception.

The text reads: TOU hORISQENTOS hUIOU QEOU DUNAMEI KATA PNEUMA hAGIWSUNHS EX NEKRWN ...

Is it possible that Paul intends to indicate that the resurrection of Jesus designated Jesus to be "the-Son-of-God-with-power-according-to-the-Spirit-of-Holiness [the Holy Spirit]?" Can this understanding of the phrases be grammatically justified?
Bobby Garringer
 
Posts: 15
Joined: April 15th, 2013, 1:36 pm

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Stephen Carlson » April 16th, 2013, 1:59 am

The Greek text you posted is garbled, missing words etc. Where are you getting it from? The actual text is:
Rom 1:4 wrote:τοῦ ὁρισθέντος υἱοῦ θεοῦ ἐν δυνάμει κατὰ πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν, Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν,

What are the options you are considered for relating ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν ("from the resurrection of the dead") to the rest of the sentence. Your gloss doesn't seem to take this key phrase into account.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke, New Testament)
Stephen Carlson
 
Posts: 1981
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Bobby Garringer » April 16th, 2013, 7:52 am

In a sense, I'm asking how the phrase, ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν, relates to the earlier part of the verse?

Must the phrase, "according to the Spirit of holiness" [κατὰ πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης], be taken as the means by which Jesus is raised? Or can it be an aspect of what it means to be "the Son of God in power" [υἱοῦ θεοῦ ἐν δυνάμει]?

If the latter is possible, then James Orr could be right in finding, in Paul's statement here, an echo of the tradition preserved in Luke 1:35.
Bobby Garringer
 
Posts: 15
Joined: April 15th, 2013, 1:36 pm

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Stephen Carlson » April 16th, 2013, 1:34 pm

As I mentioned in another thread, I don't think that asking whether a reading is "possible" is very helpful. After all, it is "possible" that "Ich bin ein berliner," means "I am a jelly doughnut," but no one really thinks that President Kennedy announced to whole world that he a fine tasting pastry. Could you reformulate the question without the word "possible"?

By the way, my inclination is to read all three prepositional phrases with the participle ὁρισθέντος rather than the noun phrase υἱοῦ θεοῦ.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke, New Testament)
Stephen Carlson
 
Posts: 1981
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby John Brainard » April 16th, 2013, 6:18 pm

Stephen Carlson wrote:As I mentioned in another thread, I don't think that asking whether a reading is "possible" is very helpful. After all, it is "possible" that "Ich bin ein berliner," means "I am a jelly doughnut," but no one really thinks that President Kennedy announced to whole world that he a fine tasting pastry. Could you reformulate the question without the word "possible"?

By the way, my inclination is to read all three prepositional phrases with the participle ὁρισθέντος rather than the noun phrase υἱοῦ θεοῦ.


Interesting reply. I need to ask, "Do you of any translations that would disagree with your position on the three prepositions in verse 4"?

John
John Brainard
 
Posts: 72
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 5:17 pm

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Bobby Garringer » April 16th, 2013, 6:53 pm

James Orr has proposed translating Romans 1:4, "who was declared the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead..."

What grammatical objections might be raised to such a translation? And are they fatal to his translation?
Bobby Garringer
 
Posts: 15
Joined: April 15th, 2013, 1:36 pm

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby John Brainard » April 16th, 2013, 7:32 pm

I meant to ask if you knew of any translation.

John
John Brainard
 
Posts: 72
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 5:17 pm

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Stephen Carlson » April 17th, 2013, 6:55 am

I'm getting concerned about the reliance on "translation" here in this thread. There's a diffrence between translating the Greek and understanding the Greek. Many times when the source language is vague or potentially ambiguous, it possible to translate the vagueness or ambiguity into the target language somewhat mechanically but this does not necessarily evidence a particular understanding of the source text. In these cases, the translation by itself is not adequate to convey the translator's understanding of the Greek, if there is one.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke, New Testament)
Stephen Carlson
 
Posts: 1981
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Bobby Garringer » April 17th, 2013, 10:43 am

Are you asserting that Orr's translation lacks due consideration of the grammar?
Bobby Garringer
 
Posts: 15
Joined: April 15th, 2013, 1:36 pm

Re: Translation in Romans 1:4

Postby Stephen Carlson » April 17th, 2013, 10:55 am

I think Orr's translation as quoted here is ambiguous and as such, it is insufficient to convey what he thinks of the grammar (as related by you).
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke, New Testament)
Stephen Carlson
 
Posts: 1981
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne

Next

Return to What does this text mean?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest