The ESV reverse interlinear has a bug. It is in the word "Son" in John 1:34 indicates there is no Greek word linked to the word "Son". Why is this the case?
Why is this the case?
Because the word son does not appear in the base Greek text.
What part of tracking this down - show interlinear, note popup, and/or right click context menu - do you need help with to understand how to use the system?
I had trouble showing the reverse interlinear
This is very helpful.
no Greek word linked to the word "Son"
Check out the Lexham English Bible and NET Bible for more literal translations.
The more I read the LEB the more I appreciate that translation!!
It's not a bug. There is actually fairly significant textual variant there. A majority of old witnesses, including P66/75, A, B, C, and Byz miniscules read 'huios'; one old witness (P5) along with Siniaticus reads 'eklektos'; so on external evidence, huios wins. On internal evidence, eklektos tends to win. 'Elect Son' is a fairly obvious conflation of the two older readings.
It's a tough call, which you can see reading the textual commentaries.
Personally, I lean toward eklektos being the original reading.
This thread illustrates those who have obtained their Logosian Graduate Degree, and normal people.
Correct me, if I'm wrong (my Logos degree is pretty iffy), this is a case where a Logos greek text was glued to an ESV (as their other RI's), blythely ignoring ... the ESV. Yes, a varient, but ESV didn't choose the chosen one.
Correct - which is why it is worth reading the Information panel of the ESV so that you know what original language text it has been mapped to. But then I am a normal compulsive person who absolutely has to know precisely what Logos is trying to feed me.
Carefully understating my verbage, but I view this (the RI practice) as slightly between misleading, and fraudulant. The latter from knowingly/intentionally delivered, with poor (none) consumer disclosure upon purchase. I'm a George disciple ... no Logos RI's for me.
I'm a George disciple ... no Logos RI's for me.
So it is a principle of original language learning spurred on by Logos' possible fraudulent and inaccurate/misleading RI's? Despite the fact that the Information panel of a translation will have relevant information for the consumer?
Since you all are discussing the LEB... could you share with me the proper translation of Act 2:47? LEB it as "adding to the total". Is that correct?
Since you all are discussing the LEB... could you share with me the proper translation of Act 2:47?
No such thing as the "proper translation". I relate αὐτός to "the people" in 47a and would translate "adding to them" which early translations state as being "church", "assembly". Later ones prefer "their number". In 47b we see "them" as "those being saved"
