[B-Greek] Sahidic Coptic Version (was "Another example ofa qualitative Q...
Awohili at aol.com
Awohili at aol.com
Tue Jul 11 11:14:25 EDT 2006
Of the several different English translations of the Coptic Bible that I
have seen, whether Sahidic or Bohairic, not one translates Coptic John 1:1c
qualitatively. Not even the version made by Coptic scholar and theologian George
W. Horner.
A case for a qualitative translation here, which is not the normal
translation of ou noute, would have to be made, on the basis of the grammar, and on
clear examples of that usage of ou noute in other verses of the Coptic New
Testament, by those advocating such a translation. It is not enough to read
later ideas into the Coptic text.
Though personally I have no objection to translating the Coptic -- or the
Greek -- as "the Word was divine," that is more of an interpretative translation
than a literal one. On the other hand, there can be no grammatical
objection at all to translating the Sahidic Coptic rendering neunoute pe, or the
Bohairic Coptic rendering ne ounouti pe, literally as "the Word was a god" or
"the Word was a God."
Solomon Landers
In a message dated 07/11/2006 7:05:32 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
alethinon61 at milwpc.com writes:
Thus, again, even if the Coptic translator used the indefinite
article to highlight the nature of the one named, that doesn't mean
that he didn't mean to convey this by calling the Logos "a god",
which, in point of fact, is exactly what he called the Logos.
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list