Anyway, I recently raised a question to Pastor Bill Mounce in his website at www.billmounce.com about Bible translations into other languages aside from English. I learned a lot from his book, Basics of Biblical Greek, and I will forever be graceful to God for him for the knowledge I’ve acquired from him especially about Biblical languages. Anyway, here is part of the email question I sent him weeks ago:

Now both translations, as stated in their prefaces, claimed to have based their translation work from the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts but as I work my way through the translation (have a working knowledge of Greek, English and Tagalog grammar), I began to notice that our Tagalog translation of theBible may have based it’s work not on the Hebrew and Greek themselves but on actually on the English Bibles (KJV and NIV).

Moreover, English grammar is VERY VERY different from the Tagalog language. Just for verbs alone, we don’t have tenses but only aspects (just like the greek). We also don’t follow strict word order because we have verb “focus”, a declension of the verbs that helps determine the main subject of the sentence, object and etc.
This is the reason why I noticed the similarity of the English Bible with our own Tagalog translation. It seems to follow the same grammatical rules of the English grammar while it should have been following the Greek or Hebrew.

Does it really the case then? Do most translation of the Bibles in other languages really came straight from the Hebrew/Greek text or mediated from the English Bible?

 Well, the exciting news here is that he answered back by posting my question into his blog site. In there, he gave his own personal insight about the issue and even appreciated our language’s verb focus. You can check out his full post in his website: www.billmounce.com

En Xristos,

Lance Filio

I was surprised to get a text message from my sister, asking for my help to explain the meaning of the Greek word “katoptrizo”. She probably have read some of my email blast from my http://ekpotamou.wordpress.com blog site so she knows that I’m interested with these kind of stuff.

She mentioned in the text that she needs to understand this word because she will use it as name for their choir group. So I pray that she will be able to find what she needs from this article.

Verse Focus:

And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord’s glory,
are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory,
which comes from the Lord,
who is the Spirit. (NIV)

ημεις δε παντες ανακεκαλυμμενω προσωπω την δοξαν κυριου κατοπτριζομενοι την αυτην εικονα μεταμορφουμεθα απο δοξης εις δοξαν καθαπερ απο κυριου πνευματος (Koine Greek)

ēmeis de pantes anakekalummenō prosōpō tēn doxan kuriou katoptrizomenoi tēn autēn eikona metamorphoumetha apo doxēs eis doxan kathaper apo kuriou pneumatos (Transliterated Greek)

Verse Meaning:

This word, katoptrizomenoi, which only occurred in 2 Cor 3:18, can be pronounced as (kat-op-trid’-zom-ahee). This word, when used in 2 Cor 3:18, was in the form of participle. By the way, a participle usually takes a base form of verb and add a suffix -ing , making it a verbal noun. So whenever there is a verb in a the form of a participle, the clause where it belongs is called a participial phrase. Therefore, the more accurate form of this word should have been “reflecting” or “beholding” but NIV translators focuses more on meaning not form so they intentionally retained the base form of the verb since essentially the it means the same.

Now, the base form of katoptrizomenoi is katoptrizo and it is pronounced as (kät-op-trē’-zō). “Katoptrizo”, according to Strong’s concordance, is said to be a combination of two words, “kata” and “optrizo”. Now, “kata” is a preposition which semantically means either “according to” or “against” while “optrizo” is synonymous to gaze, see, look and etc. So when combined, it is supposed to mean as “gazing oneself against something”. This is probably why, the KJV version used the phrase “beholding as in a glass” because a glass or a mirror (which is more accurate) is what we use to look into oneself. Therefore, the main idea then is “reflecting something”.

Now, the idea of reflecting God’s glory goes way back since the time of Moses. The story can be found in Exodus 33:11-23 and while I have yet to make a comprehensive study of this narrative block (in Hebrew), by just scratching at the surface, we can quickly understand that Paul is clearly echoing this famous narrative and he is using it to express the idea of having a intimate encounter with God.

So what Paul was saying then to the Christians in Corinth, just like Moses, is that our encounter with God comes without intermediaries. And just as Moses spoke to Yahweh, face to face, seeing his full glory (which literally means weight or figuratively, importance), we too can see Jesus face to face, just like a reflection from a mirror. And since it is a mirror, the reflection is the exact representation of one being reflected. Therefore, Paul was summoning the Christians in Corinth to be transformed in the image which is exactly what Paul said in the next clause: “transformed into the same image from glory to glory”.

Moreover, the idea of being transformed in to the likeness of Jesus whenever his glory is beheld was also affirmed by John in his book at (1:14):

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Although the Greek word used here was not “katoptrizomenoi” but “theaomai, according to Strong’s concordance, they essentially meant the same (gaze, look, see). Therefore, John was also referring to same idea which Paul said in Corinthians. Also, we can see from this verse from John that the idea of beholding God’s glory came from the narrative of Moses in Exodus 33:11-23.

How?

You can notice that I highlighted the word “dwelt” in the verse above. The connection is not obvious here because dwelt here has been popularly understood outside of the Old testament. So most of the time, it is understood as Jesus coming here on earth, the sending of God’s son, Jesus living in the flesh as a human. However, if we are to understand the idea of God dwelling among us, we need to understand this within John’s Jewish understanding of the word.

The Hebrew equivalent of the word dwelt, in Greek or in English, is “miskan”. This word when used in the Old testament is always translated as “tabernacle”. This is the same idea why tabernacle was the name of the tent where Moses meets Yahweh because the word literally meant “to dwell”. Therefore, when John used this idea of tabernacle as miskan, he implied here that Jesus, coming in the flesh, is the new miskhan of God, the new tabernacle, the new temple of the living God. This is why the idea of God being with us has always been referred to as the foreshadowing of the temple built in Jerusalem. This is also why Jesus, when he came into the temple in Jerusalem, placed his judgment against that temple saying that God will rebuild it in three days! Imagine everyone’s surprise when they heard it because the last temple took 46 years to built. But just like what John commented in (2:19-21). Jesus was talking about the raising of his body, the tabernacle of God in the flesh, in the third day, his resurrection.

Both Paul and John referred to the these idea from Moses which they used in order to make sense of becoming like Jesus, the tabernacle of the living God whose ever increasing glory we behold with unveiled faced, becoming like him and being transformed in his likeness.

I often hear this verse being used to defend oneself against the judgment of others. This is why this verse is often quoted as a guard against self-righteousness which according to popular understanding, it is unchristian because we are being called not to be “judgmental”.

However, come to think of it. If Jesus is really teaching not to make judgment over the things then does he expects us to determine the right from the wrong. Is judging really the issue then does Jesus really want us to stop making judgments?

In order to clarify the meaning of this text, I reviewed the verse again using the tool I learned from Greek grammar. I also used it to helped me see the background that came with the verse, which according to my study, was the Sermon at the Mount.

Verse Focus:

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. (NIV)

μη κρινετε ινα μη κριθητε (Koine Greek)

Verse Meaning:

The question I would like answered is this: Who is the one being judged and who is one judging back?

Now, the background of this verse is this: Jesus is the one talking, his audience was his disciples and his topic (over-aching subject which assumed in the entire Sermon) is the coming of God’s rule over them.

Again about the grammar, the first clause: “Judge not” is an imperative. The Greek word used was “krinete”. This means that the second person subject “you all” was assumed here. The plural is important. It means Jesus was talking to all of his audience – the disciples.

However, what was not explicit here is object of the clause. Who received the judgment?

Moving on to the next clause: “that ye be not judged”: The Greek word behind the translation, “ye be not judged”, was the verb “krithēte”. We know that the subject of the clause was “ye” which means “you all” (plural). And just like the first clause, this referred to the Jesus’ audience, his disciples.

Now, because the verb was passive in form, the object of the clause was also not explicit. Who judged back?

A lot of us assumed that the object of these two clauses refers to “the brother”, mentioned in Matt 7:3, who have a speck of dust in his eye. And just like what popular interpretation suggest, Matt 7:1 was a warning against judging each other.

However, if we are going to look at other clause construction of other passive verbs, we can see that the object of this verb can also be assumed to be God who rules the heaven and not the brother.

Verse Interpretation:

Let us take Matt 7:7 as the example:

Ask and it will be given (dothēsetai) to you;

Seek and you will find (eurēsete);

Knock and the door will be opened (anoigēsetai) to you.

 Now, the form of these clauses also follows the pattern of Matt 7:1 (except for the double negation) – the second clause contained passive verbs (highlighted in blond fonts). At the same, the subject was “you all” which refers to the audience of Jesus, his disciples. But again, the question remains: who is the object of the clause? Who is the one giving what was asked? Who allowed the seeking? Who opened the door to the one knocking?

Again, dictated by popular understanding, we all assume rightly that it was God and not other people. God was the implicit main subject of the all the verses in the Sermon at the mount. He is the assumed topic, his kingdom, his coming rule.

It became very clear then that there are three nouns involved here: the disciples, (the subject of the imperative), God (the main subject of the passive) and the “thing” being given, sought and knocked for (instrumental object).

Now, applying this to Matt 7:1: We can also assume that although the first clause (Judge not) may refer to judging others, the second clause (be not judged) may refer to God judging you back. This means that when we look at the next verse, we can clear see that the warning is not really asking not to judge but actually, it was a warning against a wrong kind of judging:

For the same way you judge others, you will be judged (by God), and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. (Matt 7:2)

This explains why Jesus called his disciples to forgive the wrongdoing of others so that God would do the same to them. The same measure they applied to others will be the same measure God will apply to them. Jesus warned his disciples against this practice because it was the sin of the Pharisees to the Jewish people. Jesus did want them to burden people will various laws and conditions but they were not doing it themselves. That’s hypocrisy! That’s fake!

This also explains why in Matt 7:3, Jesus asked them to clear things with God first. Do the things they require before asking them from others:

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

Again, the point here was not to judge. The point was: when you are going to judge other, make sure you judged yourself first because judging yourself will force you to deal with God first before dealing with other people.

I realized just now that the reason why people are so afraid to correct or rebuke others because deep inside, they know they themselves are not doing it. They know its hypocrisy. It’s self-righteousness. Come to think of it, self-righteousness can only be called as SELF-righteousness if it’s the SELF that is making the judgment. This is the wrong kind of judgment. For judgment to be right has to be done with God where both you and I are subjected, both you are I are corrected.

May we all be under God’s judgment, his rule.

I re-visited one of my father’s often used verses whenever he emphasizes the importance of God’s word in a Christian life.

The verse can be found in 1 Peter 1:23-25. And in this verse, Peter referred to the Word of God as the imperishable seed, paralleled it to Isaiah 40:6-8 then summarized by saying that “this” was the gospel preached to the church.

So In order to fully understand the meaning of these verse and make a tagalized translation straight from the Greek, I examined the text using the tools I’ve acquired from learning Greek and Bible translations.

Verse Focus: 1 Peter 1:23-25

For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God. For, All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord stands forever.” And this is the word that was preached to you. (NIV)

ἀναγεγεννημένοι οὐκ ἐκ σπορᾶς φθαρτῆς ἀλλὰ ἀφθάρτου διὰ λόγου ζῶντος θεοῦ καὶ μένοντος εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. διότι πᾶσα σὰρξ ὡς χόρτος καὶ πᾶσα δόξα ἀνθρώπου ὡς ἄνθος χόρτου· ἐξηράνθη ὁ χόρτος καὶ τὸ ἄνθος αὐτοῦ ἐξέπεσεν· τὸ δὲ ῥῆμα κυρίου μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦτο δέ ἐστιν τὸ ῥῆμα τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν εἰς ὑμᾶς (Greek)

Ipinanganak kayong muli, hindi sa binhing nasisira kundi sa walang kasiraan, sa pamamagitan ng salita ng Diyos na nabubuhay at namamalagi magpakailanman. Ito ay sapagkat sinasabi: Ang lahat ng tao ay gaya ng damo. Ang lahat ng kaluwalhatian ng tao ay gaya ng bulaklak ng damo. Ang damo ay natutuyo at ang bulaklak ay nalalagas. Ngunit ang salita ng Panginoon ay mamamalagi magpakailanman. Ito ang ebanghelyo na ipinangaral sa inyo. (Ang Tagalog Biblia)

Verse Meaning:

By just looking at the Greek text behind the verse there were several things I noticed:

anagegennēmenoi -  was translated in NIV as “For you have been born again…” – that was a six-word english equivalent for a single greek word! Now, looking at the details for this word, I observed the following:

     a. Tense – The greek word is perfect in tense which explains the “have” helping verb in the NIV translation. However, translating it in tagalog as “ipinanganak” is quite inaccurate since ipinanganak is in the Completed Aspect. In tagalog grammar, we have no perfect tense equivalent. The only way we can communicate this meaning is by a using a particle “na”. So we say: “ipinanganak na kayong muli…”

     b. Voice - The voice is passive which explains the use of the helping verb “been”. The receiver of the action is the subject “you”. Now, there is something missing here. Someone is implied. Who is the one causing the subject “you” to be born again? Also, who is the one being born again? This clue led me to conclude that verse 23 was a subordinate clause. I would need to look at the preceeding verses in order to answer these questions.

     c. Form - anagegennēmenoi is a verb participle. This means the verse is a participial phase. And similar to item b, it seems that this verse was a subordinate clause and not a stand-alone sentense. NIV must have supplied the words “For you…” in order to create a break from its previous verses. In order to discovery the fuller context, I checked the NKJV and there I learned from there that verses 23-25 were subordinated to verse 22. Here is the NJKV version of 1 Peter 1:22-23. I highlighted the translation of the anagegennēmenoi.

Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart, having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever: (NKJV)

Now, this translation makes much more sense. The verse 22-23 is really one long sentence. The subject of this sentence or the “you” is the “one with purified souls because of their obedience in the truth of the Spirit and their sincere love for their faith-brothers.” They are being instructed by Peter to continue in this kind of love but do it more passionately (fervently with a pure heart).

Why do they need continuously do it? And How?

The answer is in verse 23 -  because they have been born again with an incorruptible seed.

This seed is bound not to perish or to subside through the passing of the years. This seed will continue to get stronger and more purer in love. And since it will live and continue forever, their love for each other will always be stronger as time passesby. Their love comes from the eternal love of the seed and the seed is the Word of God!

But what or who is the Word of God?

There were several clues which could help us point to the right direction.

logou teou – was described as an incorruptible (aphthartes) seed and was contrasted to the corruptible (phthartes) seed.

     a. phthartes – aside from verse 23, this word was also used in verse 18. When it was used there, Peter likened it to “silver and gold”. Therefore, I can clearly conclude that this refers to the stuff of this-world. I can understand from here that anything that comes from this sin-corrupted world were bound to perish, nothing from this-world would last and all these things will soon fade away.

     This was the truth Peter wanted to express when he used Isaiah 40:6 and 8:

All flesh is as grass, And all the glory of man as the flower of the grass.The grass withers, And its flower falls away, But the word of the LORD endures forever.

     Peter was trying to show his readers that anything sown from this corruptible seed, all the men and its glory, like grass and flowers will soon fall away. Nothing will stay. No one gets to live forever. Nothing permanent. And just what Isaiah said: The only stuff that would endure everything and that would live forever were the men and glories sown by the incorruptible seed – the word God which lives and abides forever. Incorruptible was a translation from the greek word “aphthartes”.

     b. aphthartes – aside from verse 23, was also used in verse 4. When Peter used it there, he was describing the kind of hope given to us by the Father through His son, Jesus. He expressed assurance to his readers that this hope given by the Father was the fact that Jesus, His Son, resurrected from the dead. And because Jesus was resurrected – given life beyond the stuff of this-world, Peter was certain that everyone who was in Christ would receive the same inheritance. All believers would also be resurrected just like Jesus because he was the seed (sporas) sown by God.

    c. sporas - the seed, as described by Peter, incorruptible is the word of God - logou teou. This is the same metaphor used by God to describe His promise to Abraham and his descendants. God made a promise of inheritance to Abraham’s family. That through their seed (lineage or descendant) the Messiah will come and bless all the nations of the earth.  The seed was the bodily human lineage wherein the Son of God will be born. 

And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”

Genesis 26:4-5

It was a “incorruptible” seed because it was God who made the promise and not any man. And since it was God, it will be fullfilled. Actually, it was fulfilled through the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh (John 1:14). God sown the “incorruptible” promise-seed in the lineage of Abraham and God fullfilled his promise by the giving of His only Son (John 3:16).

Verse Interpretation:

But what does this mean to us now?

The promise-seed sown by God in Jesus was the same incorruptible seed that was sown in the lives of anyone who would believe in this. God sown it in the body of Jesus through his resurrection and it was given-out in the pentecost through the giving of the Holy Spirit. And although we are not yet being resurrected, the Holy Spirit in us was the deposit guaranteeing our resurrection to life in the days to come, And just like what Paul said about this topic:

For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. Now it is God who has made us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come. 

2 Corinthians 5:3-6

Verse Ekpotamou:

Ipinanganak na nga kayo: hindi sa binhing nabubulok, kundi sa di-nabubulok, sa salita ng Dios – buhay at nananatili magpakailanman.

“Sapagkat katulad ng lahat ng tao ang damo, ng lahat ng kaluwalhatian ng tao ang bulaklak – ang damo natutuyo at ang bulakalak nalalagas ngunit ang salitang ng Dios mananatili magpakailan man.”

Ito ang salitang ipinangaral sa inyo.