From: WINBROW@aol.com
Date: Tue Aug 15 1995 - 14:31:53 EDT
I wonder why the NRSV committee went back to the translation of 2 Tim. 1:12
found in the KJV, the ASV, and the NIV, when the RSV, CEV, TEV, and the
Translator's Handbook opted for the translation given below.
OIDA GAR hWI PEPISTEUKA, KAI PEPEISMAI hOTI DUNATOS ESTIN THN PARAQHKHN MOU
FULAXAI EIS EKEINHN THN hHMERAN.
For I know in whom I have believed and I am persuaded that he is able to
guard that which he committed to me until that day.
KJV . . . to guard that which I have committed to him . . .
We have had a couple series of post on the subject/objective genitives in
which the consensus was that this must be determined by the context. The
basic arguments in the translator's handbook points the use of the word
PARAQHKHN in I Timothy 6:20 and 2 Tim 2:14 to refer to the "sound doctrine"
which was being entrusted to "Timothy." I would add that the verb form of
the word (PARAQOU) is used in 2 Tim 2:2 in instructing "Timothy" to pass the
tradition on to other faithful teachers who can pass it on to still others.
This mean that the only uses of the word for deposit or tradition in the
context of this verse refers to what has been committed to faithful people to
be kept and passed on to others.
With this translation, the Pastor would be expressing his faith that God (the
Holy Spirit in 1:14) is also involved in helping the faithful ministers in
the task of passing on the tradition. This would mean that the deposit is a
synonym for sound doctrine, the faith, and eventually Christian Scripture.
Grace,
Carlton Winbery
Fogleman Prof. NT & Greek
LA College, Pineville, LA
(318) 487-7241 Fax (318) 487-7425 off. or (318) 442-4996 home
Winbrow@aol.com or Winbery@andria.lacollege.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:25 EDT