[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