1 Corinthians 14:16

[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation Mitch Larramore mitchlarramore at yahoo.com
Sun Oct 17 22:16:28 EDT 2004

 

[] A proper introduction and a question [] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation EPEI EAN EULOGHiS [EN] PNEUMATI, hO ANAPLHRWN TONTOPON TOU IDIWTOU PWS EREI TO AMHN EPI THi SHiEUCARISTIAi EPEIDH TI LEGEIS OUK OIDENThe NET Bible translation has:Otherwise, if you are praising God with your spirit,how can someone without the gift3 say “Amen” to yourthanksgiving, since he does not know what you aresaying?Footnote 3 reads:3 tn Grk “how can someone who fills the place of theunlearned say ‘Amen.'”Can someone share with me how the “how can someonewithout the gift” comes from hO ANAPLHRWN TON TOPONTOU IDIWTOU PWS ?What specifically are the grammatical and syntactical(and perhaps even lexical) considerations that permitthis translation? Please understand I am notchallenging the translators. I am only trying tounderstand this translation, because it almost lookslike a “paraphrase” of some kind or another.Commentaries I have referenced (admittedly not manythough) had a hard time with TOU IDIWTOU, so I suspectthe “without the gift” must relate to this some how.=====Mitch LarramoreSpring Branch, TexasStudent/Memorial High School_______________________________Do you Yahoo!?Declare Yourself – Register online to vote today!http://vote.yahoo.com

 

[] A proper introduction and a question[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation

[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Sun Oct 17 22:48:26 EDT 2004

 

[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation [] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation Dear Mitch,>EPEI EAN EULOGHiS [EN] PNEUMATI, hO ANAPLHRWN TON>TOPON TOU IDIWTOU PWS EREI TO AMHN EPI THi SHi>EUCARISTIAi EPEIDH TI LEGEIS OUK OIDEN> >The NET Bible translation has:> >Otherwise, if you are praising God with your spirit,>how can someone without the gift3 say “Amen” to your>thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are>saying?> >Footnote 3 reads:> >3 tn Grk “how can someone who fills the place of the>unlearned say ‘Amen.'”> >Can someone share with me how the “how can someone>without the gift” comes from hO ANAPLHRWN TON TOPON>TOU IDIWTOU PWS ?> >What specifically are the grammatical and syntactical>(and perhaps even lexical) considerations that permit>this translation? Please understand I am not>challenging the translators. I am only trying to>understand this translation, because it almost looks>like a “paraphrase” of some kind or another.>Commentaries I have referenced (admittedly not many>though) had a hard time with TOU IDIWTOU, so I suspect>the “without the gift” must relate to this some how.HH: It seems like a paraphrase to me, too. You should read the BAGD entry on IDIWTHS. I will basically quote it. The entry distinguishes the IDIWTHS from the APISTOS, saying that the IDIWTHS is neither a full-fledged believer nor an APISTOS. Rather he obviously stands between the two groups as a kind of proselyte or catechumen, perhaps “inquirer.” In religious associations the term is used for non-members who may participate in the sacrifices. The closer relation which an IDIWTHS held with the Christian group, in contrast with an APISTOS, is clearly shown by the fact that he had a special place in the room where the Christians assembled.HH: I myself wonder whether there was really a section in the assembly earmarked for such people. Perhaps somebody more knowledgeable in Greek could address this issue. It seems that hO ANAPLHRWN TON TOPON TOU IDIWTOU could be an idiomatic way for saying “the person there who was an IDIWTHS.” It has the idea of filling a seat of course, but does the phrase really require a special seating section for such people?HH: Anyway, the NET translation seems to have sacrificed some of the specific information of the Greek in order to get a more basic idea across. The issue one might take with the NET translation is that the Greek seems to be connoting something of an outsider. A believer who regularly attended, even if he could not understand, might have the general Christian understanding to say the amen at the end, but such speech could be alienating to a visitor. To say “someone without the gift” seems too broad in the sense that it includes all the Christians, too, except a gifted few.Yours,Harold Holmyard

 

[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation

[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Mon Oct 18 06:24:25 EDT 2004

 

[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation [] Col. 1:5-6 At 7:16 PM -0700 10/17/04, Mitch Larramore wrote:>EPEI EAN EULOGHiS [EN] PNEUMATI, hO ANAPLHRWN TON>TOPON TOU IDIWTOU PWS EREI TO AMHN EPI THi SHi>EUCARISTIAi EPEIDH TI LEGEIS OUK OIDEN> >The NET Bible translation has:> >Otherwise, if you are praising God with your spirit,>how can someone without the gift3 say “Amen” to your>thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are>saying?> >Footnote 3 reads:> >3 tn Grk “how can someone who fills the place of the>unlearned say ‘Amen.'”> >Can someone share with me how the “how can someone>without the gift” comes from hO ANAPLHRWN TON TOPON>TOU IDIWTOU PWS ?> >What specifically are the grammatical and syntactical>(and perhaps even lexical) considerations that permit>this translation? Please understand I am not>challenging the translators. I am only trying to>understand this translation, because it almost looks>like a “paraphrase” of some kind or another.>Commentaries I have referenced (admittedly not many>though) had a hard time with TOU IDIWTOU, so I suspect>the “without the gift” must relate to this some how.Mitch, I think that you may find the Louw & Nida note on this word and itsusage in the text in question useful:27.26 IDIWTHS, OU m: a person who has not acquired systemic information orexpertise in some field of knowledge or activity – ‘layman, ordinaryperson, amateur.’ EI DE KAI IDIWTHS TWi LOGWi, ALL’ OU THi GNWSEI ‘perhapsI am an amateur in speaking, but certainly not in knowledge’ 2Cor 11:6.In 1Cor 14:16 IDIWTHS is used to refer to a class of persons whowere neither unbelievers nor fully instructed Christians, but who wereinquirers or catechumens. In such a context, IDIWTHS may be rendered as’ordinary, uninitiated’ (EPEI EAN EULOGHiS [EN] PNEUMATI, hO ANAPLHRWN TONTOPON TOU IDIWTOU PWS EREI TO AMHN EPI THi SHi EUCARISTIAi ‘when you givethanks to God in spirit only, how can an ordinary, uninitiated persontaking part in the meeting say “Amen” to your prayer of thanksgiving’).– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

 

[] 1 Cor 14:16 and NET Bible’s translation[] Col. 1:5-6

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

9 thoughts on “1 Corinthians 14:16

  1. It is like Paul said. He had rather speak five words , in the Church with understanding than ten thousand with unknown tongues , unless there be someone that can i turner it. Where the whole Church can know and be blessed. Otherwise. Speak to your self and to God. God hears my speaking. And blessed. But if the whole Church heard it. You would be blessed. But the Church would have no understanding. So it’s better to speak a few words that they could be blessed also. There is a gift of speaking Messages in tongues. But the Bible said pray that you can interpret. The the church can be blessed also. But if there be no one to interpret. Speak to your self and to God. So there must be some with a special gift of interruption. I think Corinthians says that. I know there are different gifts , and also for the Church. We should use what God gives us to use. And it didn’t go out when the apostles all died. In that verse they use to say it did. They take part of the verse. It also says in that same whether there be knowledge. It shall cease. Or be done away with. I should have looked it up. But the point is. Knowledge , do you think it has ceases. The Bible says as time goes on , men will get wiser. So what is to talking about. When we get to Heaven. There will be no need to give messages in tongues. We will be with the Lord. We can talk face to face. No sinners that will need repentance. Because we will already have Glorified body’s. Like Jesus Himself. You study it out and see if that isn’t what it means. I should have renewed my mind, because it has been a while since I studied it out. But I know the Gifts Of The Spirit Hasn’t ceased. Not yet.

    1. Isara Mo Isara Mo says:

      Louise Cummings
      Thanks sis Louise. As I was reading your post down near the end you said sth very interesting(for me)..//when we get to heaven there will be NO NEED to give messages in tongues.. //
      Am just trying to think this out//
      Will there be ONE LANGUAGE spoken by those who will be blessed to be with the Lord?
      Surely not Greek or Hebrew or English or Swahili…
      In 1 Cor 13 something is mentioned about the “language of angels”..
      Do angels have THEIR LANGUAGE..(S.)
      How does the Creator God communicate direct and coordinate the affairs of the Universe? I mean which language does Jesus USE to speak to his angels?..

    2. Isara Mo Thanks Isara Mo. I haven’t read much in the Bible about Angels language. What I have noticed , God just tells them what to do and they do it. Sodom and Gomorrah is the only place that I remember reading where angels talked. They wanted to become like men. And wanted to come in to men. Not women. When you see pictures of angels, they always paint them as women. But I have never read in the Bible. Where God made angels to be women. They are always men you read about in the Bible. Well is that where homosexuality started. Just a question. I don’t know. But I know they desired the men. Then it seems like you might read about some angels on earth after that. I know the were manifested on earth for certain reasons. Three men appeared to Abraham and Sarah , to tell them their child that God had promised them was about ready to come. Two of them was angels dressed as men. The Third one or one of them was God. Abraham knee He was God. But the Bible says you can’t look on Gods face and live. So God couldn’t come in His full Glory. His Glory would have been so Bright. It would have consumed them. But when we shanked in His likeness. Then we shall behold Him. Well I have written a lot you didn’t ask for. But as far as their language. I don’t know. Which ever God needs us to be at the time I guess.

    1. Isara Mo Isara Mo says:

      Troy Day
      1 Cor 14:16 is quiet challenging.
      If I praise and give thanks to God in the Spirit the man next to me won’t understand what I’m saying..
      But so as to appease him I have to disconnect myself from God(for whoever speaks in a tongue doesn’t speak with men but with God..) so that the man next to me might get an understanding and conviction…
      Difficult prayer situation this is..
      I have found that when men are really connected to God they are oblivious of activities around them… Not an easy verse to chew..11 Cor 14:16..

    2. Troy Day Troy Day says:

      Isara Mo I would very much like to hear RichardAnna Boyce on this one as lately he/she has professed NOT SO Pentecostal beliefs letting me believe something is bapticostal with the not so FREE grace

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.