Romans 1:3. Own translation. Grammar check

[davidstansfield]

Romans 1:3
περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ γενομένου ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ κατὰ σάρκα, (concerning the Son of him, the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David according to the flesh,)

Hello,
I have translated the above text as, “the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David”. I think the definite article the is used for precision here. Is the Greek grammar compatible with the meaning of, having come into being out from the (crucified, dead and buried…) seed [singular] of David?

[Stirling Bartholomew]

Romans 1:3
περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ γενομένου ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ κατὰ σάρκα, (concerning the Son of him, the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David according to the flesh,)

Hello,
I have translated the above text as, “the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David”. I think the definite article the is used for precision here. Is the Greek grammar compatible with the meaning of, having come into being out from the (crucified, dead and buried…) seed [singular] of David?

Your comment on the article caught my attention. Perhaps we can kick-start a discussion on that. The Greek article is probably obligatory here. It should not be translated. Someone else can take it from here.

[Stirling Bartholomew]

(τοῦ γενομένου) should not be translated (with an English article).

Tyndale translated it "the which" perhaps following Wycliffe. The Ancient Greek Article needs to be understood independent of translation. Translation isn't a path to understanding.

[Barry Hofstetter]

Romans 1:3
περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ γενομένου ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ κατὰ σάρκα, (concerning the Son of him, the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David according to the flesh,)

Hello,
I have translated the above text as, “the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David”. I think the definite article the is used for precision here. Is the Greek grammar compatible with the meaning of, having come into being out from the (crucified, dead and buried…) seed [singular] of David?

I think the article here does a kind of double duty: it directly relates γενομένου back to υἱοῦ, and it substantizes γενομένου. Secondly, σπέρματος may be singular, but here it's collective, and refers to the entire line springing from David.

The Ancient Greek Article needs to be understood independent of translation. Translation isn't a path to understanding.

I think that's an amen.

[davidstansfield]

Thank you,
Please assume the the is included, as I have done.

The remainder of my translation (obviously?) has an important possible interpretative option. To focus on my question,

Is the Greek grammar compatible with the meaning of, having come into being out from the (crucified, dead and buried…) seed [singular] of David?

[Barry Hofstetter]

Thank you,
Please assume the the is included, as I have done.

The remainder of my translation (obviously?) has an important possible interpretative option. To focus on my question,

Is the Greek grammar compatible with the meaning of, having come into being out from the (crucified, dead and buried…) seed [singular] of David?

I'm trying to make sense out of that. Why do you supply "crucified, dead and buried" in parentheses? Do you mean those words to modify "seed?" If so, there is certainly nothing in the context and less in the Greek to justify supplying such words. i thought I answered this above with my comment on σπέρμα. It's a collective referring to the entire line of David.

[davidstansfield]

I'm trying to make sense out of that.

Understood, and recognised...

Why do you supply "crucified, dead and buried" in parentheses?

I have provided “crucified, dead and buried” in my comment on the translation, and not in my translation itself (!), to prompt people on this board to consider this history, here...

Do you mean those words to modify "seed?" If so, there is certainly nothing in the context and less in the Greek to justify supplying such words.

As above, I mean to prompt the story.

n.b. Compatible with the (theological) theme of ‘representative Messiahship’, the seed [singular] was crucified, dead and buried. And, raised from the dead...

i thought I answered this above with my comment on σπέρμα. It's a collective referring to the entire line of David.

No, you have not answered my question. (I have noted, “The remainder of my translation (obviously?) has an important possible interpretative option.” And, I have repeated my question.)

[Daniel Semler]

Hi David,

Are you trying to translate or commentate ?

The position of your parenthetical suggests modification of, or commentary upon, "seed". If the seed is dead nothing comes out of it. Dispensing with the parenthetical, the English is unnatural, but it can be understood. But might one not just say "... who descended from the line of David ..." and carry the intent perfectly well ?

As to interpretative options, wouldn't it be better to translate it all first, without undue pressure from one interpretative framework or another, and then figure out how it might be interpreted ?

Thx
D

[Bill Ross]

Romans 1:3
περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, τοῦ γενομένου ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ κατὰ σάρκα, (concerning the Son of him, the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David according to the flesh,)

Hello,
I have translated the above text as, “the having come into being out from the seed [singular] of David”. I think the definite article the is used for precision here. Is the Greek grammar compatible with the meaning of, having come into being out from the (crucified, dead and buried…) seed [singular] of David?

Your comment on the article caught my attention. Perhaps we can kick-start a discussion on that. The Greek article is probably obligatory here. It should not be translated. Someone else can take it from here.

There used to be a magazine called "Sexy Greek Definite Nouns". I subscribed, but I told everyone it was just for the articles!

Nyuk, nyuk.

[davidstansfield]

Are you trying to translate or commentate ?

I am (a beginner) asking whether the Greek grammar (morphology and syntax) is compatible with my translation.

The position of your parenthetical suggests modification of, or commentary upon, "seed".

No, I think the opposite. The content of the square brackets, [singular], identifies that σπέρματος is singular. Whereas, the English word for “seed” is ambiguous and can mean plural seeds.
 (The square brackets can be formatted as a footnote.)