tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post8112772855774323144..comments2023-10-20T07:28:50.948-07:00Comments on Better Bibles Blog: Grammatical GenderWayne Lemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-61401610264417988822008-05-25T17:00:00.000-07:002008-05-25T17:00:00.000-07:00Suzanne, Thanks for the thoughts. And some day I'd...Suzanne, <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the thoughts. And some day I'd like to take you up on your invitation to converse a bit about kephale in the NT, but I have a few pressing deadlines at present. <BR/><BR/>blessings till then, <BR/><BR/>Gerald<BR/><BR/>P.S. I couldn't get the hyper link in your above comment to work. Perhaps you could re-link it?Geraldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14013963385157671557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-45513434121113179242008-05-25T16:10:00.000-07:002008-05-25T16:10:00.000-07:00The count for rosh translated as archon varies fro...The count for rosh translated as archon varies from 109 to 138 depending on the study. I don't know how this is tallied but it is the vast majority of cases.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-27889809096618405942008-05-25T16:00:00.000-07:002008-05-25T16:00:00.000-07:00Gerald,Out of 180 times that rosh is translated in...Gerald,<BR/><BR/>Out of 180 times that rosh is translated into Greek metaphorically, it is translated as,<BR/><BR/>- αρχων<BR/>- ηγεομαι Deut. 1:13-15<BR/>- αρχηγος Deut. 33:21<BR/>- χιλιαρχ Deut. 1:13-15 <BR/>- κεφαλη Judges 10 and 11. <BR/><BR/>I don't have exact numbers because different studies organize the data differently. The vast majority of the times archon is the translation. <BR/><BR/>However, κεφαλη as a translation of rosh, and meaning "leader" is restricted to Jephthah. The other occurrences are more vague than the 2 Sam. 22 example. <BR/><BR/>So, no, it is not circular reasoning. If everywhere else there is an established way to translate rosh, as archon, archegos or hegeomai, then translating it as kephale, which is the literal translation, is clearly an exception. The most logical reason is that a literal or concrete equivalent is a fallback when the translator does not know what else to do. That is seen in several of the passages. So, I see Jephthah as the one exception. He was in a sense a hero, chosen for a particular battle, to be at the front of the army. No one wanted him as a long term ruler. That was clear. So, I think the Greek word for archon is deliberately avoided for Jephthah for the simple reason that he was never the archon (ruler) of those tribes, he was their chosen warrior-hero for one task, one battle. <BR/><BR/>I just don't see kephale ever used for authority in the usual sense, in any sense actually. These are quite odd examples you have chosen. I don't think the whole argument can rest on Jephthah and translation literature. <BR/><BR/>In fact, I would argue that Jephthah is such a poor example that Grudem chose other examples although they are not exactly <A REF="http://www.cbmw.org/Journal/Vol-1-No-3/The-Meaning-Of-Head-In-The-Bible">as he presents them. </A><BR/><BR/>I would be happy to talk about kephale in the NT if you like.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-24005214385808427202008-05-25T14:56:00.000-07:002008-05-25T14:56:00.000-07:00Gerald,More later. I would argue that kephale is n...Gerald,<BR/><BR/>More later. I would argue that kephale is not the first, second or third way to translate rosh. But I'll get back to that. <BR/><BR/>TC,<BR/><BR/>Phil. 2:25 is a named person. There is no intention of setting up a male class in contrast to a female class. I suppose it could be done, but I don't think it is. I think some other qualifier would have to be present, it would have to say "male" in some other way. <BR/><BR/>Kurk,<BR/><BR/>One day I will get the Barnstone translation. That is a very interesting choice of words. It really does give the correct sense of anthropos, as in 1 cor. 15.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-40519980300660114812008-05-25T14:19:00.000-07:002008-05-25T14:19:00.000-07:00I don't think the word adelphos is ever used for a...<I>I don't think the word adelphos is ever used for a generic male Christian excluding the female Christian.</I><BR/><BR/><I>Phil 2:25?</I><BR/><BR/>I like how Matthew translates Jesus's question in 16:13. Look at the male and generic human references.<BR/><BR/>τίνα λέγουσιν οἱ <B>ἄνθρωποι</B> εἶναι τὸν <I>υἱὸν</I> τοῦ <B>ἀνθρώπου</B><BR/><BR/>Willis Barnstone cleverly makes that "Who do the <B>people</B> say is the <B>earthly</B> <I>son</I>?"<BR/><BR/>Isn't "earthly" an illusion to the Adam / adama pun in Genesis? And if you continue with Barnstone, there's a big contrast in 16:16,<BR/><BR/>You are the mashiah, the anointed, the <I>son</I> of the living <B>God</B>. <BR/><BR/>Matthew's context supplies the human gender (and the grammar gender too) with the male human son of the earthly human / and of the heavenly God:<BR/><BR/>σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ <I>υἱὸς</I> τοῦ <B>θεοῦ</B> τοῦ ζῶντοςJ. K. Gaylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07600312868663460988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-22900706010046736812008-05-25T13:48:00.000-07:002008-05-25T13:48:00.000-07:00I don't think the word adelphos is ever used for a...<I>I don't think the word adelphos is ever used for a generic male Christian excluding the female Christian.</I><BR/><BR/>Is it too obvious that adelphos refers to a male in Phil 2:25?<BR/><BR/><I>I don't think there is any point at all in translating grammatical gender, so why would it be brought up in class. It is only subsequent to the anti-TNIV fiasco that this has even been discussed.</I><BR/><BR/>I'm not speaking of grammatical genders proper, but how to best render them in English translations.tcrobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02518043696892409099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-26466529902448961922008-05-25T13:44:00.000-07:002008-05-25T13:44:00.000-07:00Suzanne, Thanks for the response. Your frequent po...Suzanne, <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the response. Your frequent posts on the wider "gender" debates have been very helpful at certain points. A couple of thoughts in response to your above comment:<BR/><BR/>First, I wonder why it is relevant whether or not the "kephale" is over his own people or over a foreign people. I think you are the defining the complementarian understanding of kephale too narrowly when you define it as "Godly authority of a leader of his own people." Certainly if you define it this narrowly, then yes, it doesn't fit in 1 Kings, etc. But I think most complementarians would be content to render it simply as "leader." In which case, it fits. <BR/><BR/>Second, I understand the point you are making about the translation of the 2 Samuel passage being overly literal and thus a poor translation, but your argument has a ring of circularity to it. You have concluded that kephale doesn't mean "leader." Thus when it is used metaphorically in this sense you discount the significance of its occurrence on the basis that the passage in which it resides must be a bad translation, in part because it uses kephale in a metaphorical sense of “leader.” This seems to me a bit like the scientist who rejects data as tainted because it doesn’t square with his theory. <BR/><BR/>Third, I grant that kephale is not the typical rendering of rosh when rosh is used in a metaphorical sense to mean "leader." But I wonder if you press this observation into more service than is warranted. Just because kephale is not the first Greek word of choice for rendering rosh when rosh is used metaphorically to mean “leader” is not proof that kephale cannot mean “leader.” It only means that kephale is not the first Greek word of choice for rendering rosh when rosh is used in a metaphorical sense to mean "leader." For instance, In English, the terms “boss” and “chief” both have the connotations of “leader.” Yet if someone was translating a business management book from say, French to English, we would expect to find the French word for “the head of a company” translated most often as “boss” and seldom, if at all, as “chief.” (Perhaps the rendering “chief” might sneak in a few times as a form of shorthand for “Chief Executive Officer.”) But that fact that the French word for “head of a company” is not translated very often by the term “chief” says nothing about the meaning of “chief.” For my part, I think Grudem does a fairly decent job of showing that kephale is used frequently with this meaning, both within and outside of canonical literature. But I’m sure you’ve read the same article and don’t agree. <BR/><BR/>Regardless, as far as the gender debates are concerned, the use of kephale in the LXX and surrounding literature is only of secondary nature compared to its use in the NT (in particular, Paul). It seems to me that Paul utilizes this metaphorical meaning of head in as much as “head/body” metaphor of Christ and the Church is already in play. But that's another story. <BR/><BR/>Thanks again for your response. I continue to regularly read the BBB with interest. Many blessings.Geraldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14013963385157671557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-38906922947973359212008-05-25T12:55:00.000-07:002008-05-25T12:55:00.000-07:00I am terrified by your eruditionFabulous stuffthan...I am terrified by your erudition<BR/>Fabulous stuff<BR/>thanks<BR/>just wish it was in French and i could share it with my fem theol group<BR/>stay strong sisiterJanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04405344181636487394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-83672645211796888652008-05-25T11:13:00.000-07:002008-05-25T11:13:00.000-07:00Hi Gerald,Good to see you again. 2 Samuel 22:43 κα...Hi Gerald,<BR/><BR/>Good to see you again. <BR/><BR/>2 Samuel 22:<BR/><BR/>43 καὶ ἐλέανα αὐτοὺς ὡς χοῦν γῆς ὡς πηλὸν ἐξόδων ἐλέπτυνα αὐτούς <BR/><BR/>44 καὶ ῥύσῃ με ἐκ μάχης λαῶν φυλάξεις με εἰς κεφαλὴν ἐθνῶν λαός ὃν οὐκ ἔγνων ἐδούλευσάν μοι <BR/><BR/>45 υἱοὶ ἀλλότριοι ἐψεύσαντό μοι εἰς ἀκοὴν ὠτίου ἤκουσάν μου <BR/><BR/>46 υἱοὶ ἀλλότριοι ἀπορριφήσονται καὶ σφαλοῦσιν ἐκ τῶν συγκλεισμῶν αὐτῶν<BR/> <BR/>A curious passage; <BR/><BR/><I>I ground them down like the dust of the earth, like mire of exits I beat them fine<BR/><BR/>And you will rescue me from battle with peoples, you will guard me to be head of nations, a people whom I did not know was subject to me<BR/><BR/>Foreign sons lied to me, at the hearing of the ear they heard me. <BR/><BR/>Foreign sons shall be cast away and shall stumble out of their enclosures.</I><BR/><BR/>Here is the KJV,<BR/><BR/><I>43Then did I beat them as small as the dust of the earth, I did stamp them as the mire of the street, and did spread them abroad.<BR/><BR/> 44Thou also hast delivered me from the strivings of my people, thou hast kept me to be head of the heathen: a people which I knew not shall serve me.<BR/><BR/> 45Strangers shall submit themselves unto me: as soon as they hear, they shall be obedient unto me.<BR/><BR/> 46Strangers shall fade away, and they shall be afraid out of their close places. </I><BR/><BR/>The two problems with kephale in this passage are,<BR/><BR/>1. The quality of the translation is poor. It appears that in each verse the translator falls back on a literal and concrete rendering rather than translating the actual meaning or sense of the Hebrew.<BR/><BR/>2. David is called the "head of the heathen/nations" not the head of his own people. In fact, a king is not once in Greek literature called the "head of the nation" although this has been claimed by some. <BR/><BR/>I am curious to know why this was presented by Grudem as "David as king of Israel is called the "head" of the people" <BR/><BR/>The difference between people and gentiles is rather important at this juncture. I can't think that misrepresenting this quote is helpful. <BR/><BR/>Since there are many places where the leaders of tribes and families are talked about in the Hebrew Bible one can easily see that the normal word is αρχων or some other word meaning leader. <BR/><BR/>My main argument against this passage would be the quality of the surrounding translation. <BR/><BR/>In Judges, Jephthah was called the head, and was requested to take over leadership of tribes that he had been expelled from, just for a particular battle. It is clear that he was hated but respected as a warrior. He seems to have been a hero as a warrior. <BR/><BR/>It is odd that these are the only two places where the word rosh when referring to the person who is the leader, are translated as kephale. <BR/><BR/>There are dozens of references to the <I>rosh</I> of the tribes and families, but they are translated using other words. These two are cases that do not fit what we are looking for, Godly authority of a leader over his own people. If the LXX was a source of the term kephale as authority over, these two examples do not represent the relationships in 1 Cor. 11.<BR/><BR/>These do not counter my claim,<BR/><BR/><I>I am not aware of even one place where the rosh, the leader, of a family or tribe is translated into Greek as κεφαλη.</I><BR/><BR/>We could go through other examples in the kephale study if you like. I have not examined every one in depth, although I have seen the list. The fact remains that kephale is usually avoided when the rosh of a tribe is translated into Greek.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-89541492835555711522008-05-25T08:28:00.000-07:002008-05-25T08:28:00.000-07:00I am not aware of even one place where the rosh, t...<I>I am not aware of even one place where the rosh, the leader, of a family or tribe is translated into Greek as κεφαλη.</I><BR/><BR/>Suzanne, <BR/><BR/>I may not be following you correctly, but what about passages such as 2 Kings 22:44, Judges 10:18, Judges 11:8, etc.? If I remember correctly, I believe there are a total of nine occasions where the LXX translates the Hebrew <I>rosh</I> with κεφαλη, where κεφαλη has the metaphorical meaning of leader.Geraldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14013963385157671557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-32608174684560001342008-05-25T00:45:00.000-07:002008-05-25T00:45:00.000-07:00When I said 'of the same womb' that is the derivat...When I said 'of the same womb' that is the derivation of the word. There was no particular point to that other than general interest.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-77723040649194873612008-05-25T00:44:00.000-07:002008-05-25T00:44:00.000-07:00Clearly as a singular word, it contrasts with adel...Clearly as a singular word, it contrasts with adelphé in the feminine. But if adelphos appears alone, I do not think that one can determine that it refers only to a male, unless it says, "male" or contrasts it with the female. I don't think the word adelphos is ever used for a generic male Christian excluding the female Christian.<BR/><BR/>I don't think there is any point at all in translating grammatical gender, so why would it be brought up in class. It is only subsequent to the anti-TNIV fiasco that this has even been discussed.<BR/><BR/>I'll write more about aner, since it does have a very specific gender neutral use, although not in the passage I cited in this post. Here they are masculine.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-40957224311020054922008-05-25T00:31:00.000-07:002008-05-25T00:31:00.000-07:00Sue, thanks for this post. When you say that αδελ...Sue, thanks for this post. When you say that αδελφος means "of the same womb,"Are you at the same time nullifying its reference to a male as in Jas 2:15? Your point wasn't clear to me.<BR/><BR/>Do you have any reference in the LXX or classical literature where Αδελφη refers to a person, whether male or female?<BR/><BR/>I'm in agreement with you contention for the accurate rendering of both ανθρωπος and ανηρ in the NT.<BR/><BR/>Though I've done grad work in Greek, grammatical gender in translating Scripture was never emphasized, which I consider quite unfortunate.tcrobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02518043696892409099noreply@blogger.com