Tag: christianity

2 PETER 1:1 & KJV

This post has been taken from the following: 2 Peter 1:1 – “of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”.

2 Peter 1:1 – “of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”

“Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:”

The Authorized Version has been accused of inconsistency in its translation of 2 Peter 1:1 when compared with its translation of 2 Peter 1:11. In the later passage we read, “For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”In making such an accusation, some have provided the following comparison between 2 Peter 1:1 and 2 Peter 1:11.

1:1: tou theou emon kai soteros Iesou Christou

1:11: tou kuriou emon kai soteros Iesou Christou

It is then noted that the only difference between the two verses is the substitution of kuriou (Lord) in verse eleven instead of theou (God) as found in verse one. Therefore, according to the Greek, verse one must be translated as “our God and Savior” in order to be consistent. [1] Since the KJV does not do this, it is looked upon as mistranslating this passage.

The point is well taken, and would be correct if the Greek text that underlies the KJV read as presented. However, it does not. The Greek text used by the King James translators was Beza’s text of 1589 and 1598. There we find an additional emon (our) at 2 Peter 1:1 that is not provided by those who call this a mistranslation. The two are compared below with Beza’s text presented first.

Tou theou emon kai soteros emon Iesou Christou

Tou theou emon kai soteros Iesou Christou

The translation of Beza’s text is correct and consistent in the Authorized Version, and is consistent since the additional emon appears in 2 Peter 1:1 and not 2 Peter 1:11.

The question exists why Beza provided the additional emon at 2 Peter 1:1 that is not found in other Greek texts. Dr. Bruce Metzger may supply the answer. Although not discussing this passage, Dr. Metzger does note the following concerning Beza:

Accompanied by annotations and his own Latin version, as well as Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, these editions (of Beza’s text from 1565, 1582, 1589, and 1598) contained a certain amount of textual information drawn from several Greek manuscripts which Beza had collated himself, as well as the Greek manuscripts collated by Henry Stephanus, son of Robert Stephanus. [2]

Since the Greek text of Robert Stephanus did not contain the addition, and the Greek text of Beza does, it is logical to assume that Beza added the emon at 2 Peter 1:1 based on the various manuscripts that he possessed (or the ones possessed by Henry Stephanus). We would be mistaken to presume that all existing manuscripts used in the sixteenth century are still in existence today. Some have undoubtedly passed away over the process of time. Regardless, the inclusion of the extra emon in this passage provides evidence of its preservation. It is certainly not a mistranslation on the part of the KJV.

[1] White, 268.

[2] Metzger, The Text Of The New Testament, 105.

FURTHER READING

TITUS 2:13 & KJV

1 John 5:7 (Johannine Comma)

This posted has been uploaded from the following article: .

1 John 5:7 (Johannine Comma) – “These Three Are One”

“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” —1Jo 5:7

The passage is called the Johannine Comma and is not found in the majority of Greek manuscripts. [1] However, the verse is a wonderful testimony to the Heavenly Trinity and should be maintained in our English versions, not only because of its doctrinal significance but because of the external and internal evidence that testify to its authenticity.

The External Support: Although not found in most Greek manuscripts, the Johannine Comma is found in several. It is contained in 629 (fourteenth century), 61 (sixteenth century), 918 (sixteenth century), 2473 (seventeenth century), and 2318 (eighteenth century). It is also in the margins of 221 (tenth century), 635 (eleventh century), 88 (twelveth century), 429 (fourteenth century), and 636 (fifteenth century). There are about five hundred existing manuscripts of 1 John chapter five that do not contain the Comma. [2] It is clear that the reading found in the Textus Receptus is the minority reading with later textual support from the Greek witnesses. Nevertheless, being a minority reading does not eliminate it as genuine. The Critical Text considers the reading Iesou (of Jesus) to be the genuine reading instead of Iesou Christou (of Jesus Christ) in 1 John 1:7. Yet Iesou is the minority reading with only twenty-four manuscripts supporting it, while four hundred seventy-seven manuscripts support the reading Iesou Christou found in the Textus Receptus. Likewise, in 1 John 2:20 the minority reading pantes (all) has only twelve manuscripts supporting it, while the majority reading is panta (all things) has four hundred ninety-one manuscripts. Still, the Critical Text favors the minority reading over the majority in that passage. This is common place throughout the First Epistle of John, and the New Testament as a whole. Therefore, simply because a reading is in the minority does not eliminate it as being considered original.

While the Greek textual evidence is weak, the Latin textual evidence for the Comma is extremely strong. It is in the vast majority of the Old Latin manuscripts, which outnumber the Greek manuscripts. Although some doubt if the Comma was a part of Jerome’s original Vulgate, the evidence suggests that it was. Jerome states:

In that place particularly where we read about the unity of the Trinity which is placed in the First Epistle of John, in which also the names of three, i.e. of water, of blood, and of spirit, do they place in their edition and omitting the testimony of the Father; and the Word, and the Spirit in which the catholic faith is especially confirmed and the single substance of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is confirmed. [3]

Other church fathers are also known to have quoted the Comma. Although some have questioned if Cyprian (258 AD) knew of the Comma, his citation certainly suggests that he did. He writes: “The Lord says, ‘I and the Father are one’ and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, ‘And these three are one’.” [4] Also, there is no doubt that Priscillian (385 AD) cites the Comma:

As John says “and there are three which give testimony on earth, the water, the flesh, the blood, and these three are in one, and there are three which give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Christ Jesus.” [5]

Likewise, the anti-Arian work compiled by an unknown writer, the Varimadum (380 AD) states: “And John the Evangelist says, . . . ‘And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one’.” [6] Additionally, Cassian (435 AD), Cassiodorus (580 AD), and a host of other African and Western bishops in subsequent centuries have cited the Comma. [7] Therefore, we see that the reading has massive and ancient textual support apart from the Greek witnesses.

Internal Evidence: The structure of the Comma is certainly Johannine in style. John is noted for referring to Christ as “the Word.” If 1 John 5:7 were an interpretation of verse eight, as some have suggested, than we would expect the verse to use “Son” instead of “Word.” However, the verse uses the Greek word logos, which is uniquely in the style of John and provides evidence of its genuineness. Also, we find John drawing parallels between the Trinity and what they testify (1 John 4:13-14). Therefore, it comes as no surprise to find a parallel of witnesses containing groups of three, one heavenly and one earthly.

The strongest evidence, however, is found in the Greek text itself. Looking at 1 John 5:8, there are three nouns which, in Greek, stand in the neuter (Spirit, water, and blood). However, they are followed by a participle that is masculine. The Greek phrase here is oi marturountes (who bare witness). Those who know the Greek language understand this to be poor grammar if left to stand on its own. Even more noticeably, verse six has the same participle but stands in the neuter (Gk.: to marturoun). Why are three neuter nouns supported with a masculine participle? The answer is found if we include verse seven. There we have two masculine nouns (Father and Son) followed by a neuter noun (Spirit). The verse also has the Greek masculine participle oi marturountes. With this clause introducing verse eight, it is very proper for the participle in verse eight to be masculine, because of the masculine nouns in verse seven. But if verse seven were not there it would become improper Greek grammar.

Even though Gregory of Nazianzus (390 AD) does not testify to the authenticity of the Comma, he makes mention of the flawed grammar resulting from its absence. In his Theological Orientations he writes referring to John:

. . . (he has not been consistent) in the way he has happened upon his terms; for after using Three in the masculine gender he adds three words which are neuter, contrary to the definitions and laws which you and your grammarians have laid down. For what is the difference between putting a masculine Three first, and then adding One and One and One in the neuter, or after a masculine One and One and One to use the Three not in the masculine but in the neuter, which you yourselves disclaim in the case of Deity? [8]

It is clear that Gregory recognized the inconsistency with Greek grammar if all we have are verses six and eight without verse seven. Other scholars have recognized the same thing. This was the argument of Robert Dabney of Union Theological Seminary in his book, The Doctrinal Various Readings of the New Testament Greek (1891). Bishop Middleton in his book, Doctrine of the Greek Article, argues that verse seven must be a part of the text according to the Greek structure of the passage. Even in the famous commentary by Matthew Henry, there is a note stating that we must have verse seven if we are to have proper Greek in verse eight. [9]

While the external evidence makes the originality of the Comma possible, the internal evidence makes it very probable. When we consider the providential hand of God and His use of the Traditional Text in the Reformation it is clear that the Comma is authentic.

[1] The first and second editions of Erasmus’ Greek text did not contain the Comma. It is generally reported that Erasmus promised to include the Comma in his third edition if a single manuscript containing the Comma could be produced. A Franciscan friar named Froy (or Roy) forged a Greek text containing it by translating the Comma from the Latin into Greek. Erasmus was then presented with this falsified manuscript and, being faithful to his word, reluctantly included the Comma in the 1522 edition. However, as has now been admitted by Dr. Bruce Metzger, this story is apocryphal (The Text Of The New Testament, 291). Metzger notes that H. J. de Jonge, a respected specialist on Erasmus, has established that there is no evidence of such events occurring. Therefore, opponents of the Comma in light of the historical facts should no longer affirm this report.

[2] Kurt Aland, in connection with Annette Benduhn-Mertz and Gerd Mink, Text und Textwert der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments: I. Die Katholischen Briefe Band 1: Das Material (Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 1987), 163-166.

[3] Prologue To The Canonical Epistles. The Latin text reads, “si ab interpretibus fideliter in latinum eloquium verterentur nec ambiguitatem legentibus facerent nec trinitatis unitate in prima joannis epistola positum legimus, in qua etiam, trium tantummodo vocabula hoc est aquae, sanguinis et spiritus in ipsa sua editione ponentes et patris verbique ac aspiritus testimoninum omittentes, in quo maxime et fides catholica roboratur, et patris et filii et spirtus sancti una divinitatis substantia comprobatur.”

[4] Treatises 1 5:423.

[5] Liber Apologeticus.

[6] Varimadum 90:20-21.

[7] Some other sources include the Speculum (or m of 450 AD), Victor of Vita (489 AD), Victor Vitensis (485 AD), Codex Freisingensis (of 500 AD), Fulgentius (533 AD), Isidore of Seville (636 AD), Codex Pal Legionensis (650 AD), and Jaqub of Edessa (700 AD). Interestingly, it is also found in the edition of the Apostle’s Creed used by the Waldenses and Albigensians of the twelfth century.

[8] Fifth Orientation the Holy Spirit.

[9] Actually the 1 John commentary is the work of “Mr. John Reynolds of Shrewsbury,” one of the ministers who completed Matthew Henry’s commentary, which was left incomplete [only up to the end of Acts] at Henry’s death in 1714.

FURTHER READING

LATIN WITNESSES TO 1 JN 5:7

WALLACE & 1 JOHN 5:7

Edward F. Hills on 1 John 5:7

Turning the Tables Pt. 6a: The Three Witnesses of 1 John 5:7

Turning the Tables Pt. 6b: The Three Witnesses of 1 John 5:7

ONE AND ONLY OR ONLY BEGOTTEN?

This post is uploaded from the following article: John 1:18 – “only begotten Son”.

John 1:18 – “only begotten Son”

“No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

There are really two problems here, although only one appears on the surface. Should the proper translation be “only begotten Son” or should it be as the New American Standard Version renders it, “only begotten God”? This particular problem is not translational but textual because there is a difference in the Greek texts underlining these two translations. However, there is another problem that has to do with the Greek word monogenes. Both the King James and the New American Standard correctly translate it as only begotten. There is a growing movement to understand this word as unique, one of a kind, or simply only. We will deal with this difference first.

Many of the current handbooks on Greek syntax state that monogenes should not be translated as only begotten. [1] Instead, they take the word to mean only or unique. If this were true, the translation of the KJV would not be alone in its “error” for this is the translation of the New American Standard Version, the New King James Version, and several other translations of the twentieth century.

The problem here is a misunderstanding of the Greek language (both Koine and Modern). The word monogenes does means one or unique in the sense that an only child is the only one of his parents. It does not mean unique, as in special, such as in the phrase, “his work is very unique.” Here the Greek would be monadikos, not monogenes. As we examine the New Testament we find the word monogenes used eight times (not counting its usage here in John 1:18). In every case it is used to describe a relationship between a parent and child (Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; John 1:14; 3:16, 18; Hebrews 11:17; 1 John 4:9). Since this is how the Holy Spirit uses the word in the New Testament, we must accept this definition when reading John 1:18. [2]

The evidence establishes that Jesus Christ, although God (John 1:1), is also the only begotten Son of God. None other can claim hold to this title. Those who accept Christ as their personal Savior are spiritually born of God and are called His sons (John 1:12). But no human can lay claim to the title of only begotten Son. This phrase has not only to do with Christ’s virgin birth, but also His eternal place within the Trinity.

Having established this point, we are now faced with the question of the word following monogenes. Should it be heios (Son) or theos (God)? The oldest known Greek manuscripts, P66 and P75, read only begotten God. However, these manuscripts all come from the Alexandrian line and smack of ancient Gnosticism. The Gnostics taught that Christ was a begotten god, created by God the Father, whom they called the Unbegotten God.

When those who had been tainted with Gnosticism cite John 1:18, they cite it as only begotten God. Such is true of Tatian (second century), Valentinus (second century), Clement of Alexandria (215 AD), and Arius (336 AD). On the other hand, we find many of the orthodox fathers who opposed Gnosticism quoting John 1:18 as only begotten Son (Irenaeus, Tertullian, Basil, Gregory Nazianzus, and Chrysostom). [3]

Even some that served on the textual committee for the UBS-4 recognized that the proper reading of John 1:18 is only begotten Son. Dr. Allen Wilkgren, who served on the committee, writes, “It is doubtful that the author (i.e., John) would have written monogenes theos, which may be a primitive, transcriptional error in the Alexandrian tradition.” [4] Additionally, Professor Bart Ehrman of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has noted that he believes the original reading is monogenes heios and not monogenes theos. [5] Although Professor Ehrman did not serve on the UBS-4 committee, he is a recognized scholar in the field of Biblical textual criticism. [6] Thus, not all scholars agree as to the original reading in this regard.

The majority of orthodox church fathers support the reading monogenes heios, as do the majority of existing Greek cursive manuscripts. The reading contained in the majority of uncials (such as A, C3, K, W, Q, Y, D, P, X, and 063), Old Latin, Latin Vulgate, and the Old Syrian also support the reading monogenes heios.

Since we know the Greek word monogenes concerns the parent/child relationship, and that God is never called monogenes (accept for Christ in His relationship to the Father), it is clear that monogenes heios is the correct reading.

[1] See, Newman and Nida, A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of John (New York: United Bible Societies, 1980), 24. Also, Moulton and Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdman’s, 1930), 416-417. However, others recognize that monogenes means only begotten. See, Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Milford, MI: Mott Media, 1977 ed.), 417-418. Moulton, The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978 ed.), 272. And, Prestige, God in Patristic Thought (London: SPCK, 1952) 37-51, 135-141, 151-156.

[2] It has further been established that the word monogenes has as its root word genos. Again, some have suggested that this root word means kind or type. This is true, but again in the sense that those who are born of a given parentage are a certain type or kind. The Greek word genos appears twenty-one times in the New Testament. It is translated as kind, nation, stock (of Abraham), nation, offspring, kindred, generation, and country in the KJV, demonstrating the word has to do with descendents. The New International Version translates it as born in Mark 7:26, and the New American Standard Version translates it as birth in Acts 4:36.

[3] It is also interesting to note that the New World Translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses also uses the phrase only begotten god. This is, of course, in line with their teaching that Christ is a created god. Once we accept the reading only begotten god, we have opened the door to reinterpret all other verses concerning the deity of Jesus Christ.

[4] Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament (New York: United Bible Societies, 2^nd ed.), 170.

[5] Bart D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption Of Scripture (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 78-82.

[6] In fairness to Professor Ehrman’s position he does not support the Traditional Text, and his support for the traditional reading here should not be taken as an endorsement of that text. Ehrman believes that many of the textual variants are a result of scribes seeking to establish orthodox Christianity by altering the text in favor of orthodoxy. It is his hypothesis that John 1:18 in the Critical Text is an orthodox corruption, stating that Christ was the unique God. Thereby supporting the orthodox view regarding the Deity of Jesus Christ.

My hypothesis is that many of the textual variants were caused by scribal corruption. However, not by orthodox scribes seeking to establish orthodoxy, but by heretical scribes seeking to corrupt Scripture to support their false doctrines. Once we understand that monogenes theos does not mean that Christ is uniquely God, but instead would be understood as a begotten god, we have a reading that would support the Gnostic teaching which proclaimed this very heresy. When we consider those in the second, third, and fourth centuries who support this false reading and the doctrine they held in this regard, it is not far fetched to draw such conclusions. If one accepts Ehrman’s position as feasible than they should also be willing to accept the possibility of the opposite being true. Namely, that the corruption of the text may be afforded to various heretical groups who sought to move the text of Scripture away from Biblical orthodoxy and toward their heretical position.

FURTHER READING

JOHN 1:18 REVISITED… AGAIN!

John 1:18 – What Does Μονογενὴς Mean?

John 1:18 – Some Patristic Evidence

The Only Begotten Son: A Defense of the King James’ Rendering of John 1:18

Monogenes Theos: A Gnostic Corruption?

The Gnostic & Arian Corruption of John 1:18

James White and the NA/UBS Compilation

John 1:18 – Sinaiticus: The Devil in the Details

ONE MORE TIME: SON OR SERVANT?

In this post I revisit the issue of whether Jesus in Acts 3:13, 26 and 4:27, 30 is being described as God’s Servant or Son. I will cite a slew of ancient versions and English translations that render the articular Greek word as Son or Child, thereby identifying Jesus as God’s Son/Child.

In order to help the readers see what the issue I quote two specific English translations, which are both based on the same Greek textual tradition which underlies the King James Version (AV)

New King James Version (NKJV)

“The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified His Servant Jesus (ton Paida autou, ‘Iesoun), whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let Him go… To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus (ton Paida autou), sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.” Acts 3:13, 26

“For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus (ton hagion Paida sou ‘Iesoun), whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together… by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus (tou hagiou Paidos sou, ‘Iesou).” Acts 4:27, 30

Modern English Version (MEV)

“The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His Son Jesus, whom you handed over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release Him… God, having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to you first, to bless you in turning every one of you from your iniquities.”

“Indeed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were assembled together against Your holy Son Jesus whom You have anointed… by stretching out Your hand to heal and that signs and wonders may be performed in the name of Your holy Son Jesus.”

Here we have two different English renderings that follow the tradition of the AV that disagree on how to translate the specific term pais, which can refer to a male or female servant, or a child, whether a boy/son or a girl/daughter.

With the foregoing in perspective I will now reference a host of translations, some of which are based on ancient versions of the Greek NT in various languages, in order to see how Christians throughout the ages understood Jesus’ being identified as the pais of God.

ACTS 3

“The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, The God of our fathers, has glorified his Son Yeshua (laḇrēh yešūᶜ), him whom you handed over and rejected in the presence of Pilatus, when he had rightly judged to release him. But you rejected The Holy One and The Righteous One and you demanded a man who was a murderer to be given to you. And you killed him, The Ruler of Life, whom God raised from among the dead, and we are all his witnesses… God appointed to you from the first and sent his Son (laḇrēh) to bless you, if you are converted, and you return from your evils.” Acts 3:13-15, 26 Peshitta Holy Bible Translation (PHBT https://biblehub.com/hpbt/acts/3.htm)

“The God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob, the God of our Fathers has glorified his Son Jesus whom you delivered up and denied him in the presence of Pilate when he was determined to let him go… Now it was for you first, God appointed and sent his Son to bless you if you turn and repent from your evils.” Acts 3:13, 26 George Lamsa Bible (LAMSA https://biblehub.com/lamsa/acts/3.htm)

“The God of Abraham, and of Ishok, and of Jakub, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his son Jeshu, him whom you delivered up, and denied before the face of Pilatos, when he had justified (him) and would have released him… with you from the first he hath established; and Aloha hath sent his Son, blessing you, if you will return and repent of your iniquities.” Etheridge⁽ⁱ⁾’s Peschito Syriac NT

“The God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he would have justified him and set him free… he hath first established to you: and God hath sent his Son to bless you, if ye will be converted, and repent of your wickedness.” Murdock (i)’s Syriac Peshitta

13 The God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus, whom you indeed delivered up and denied before the face of Pilate, when he judged he should be released.

Deus Abraham, et Deus Isaac, et Deus Jacob, Deus artum nostrorum glorificavit filium suum Jesum, quem vos quidem tradidistis, et negastis ante faciem Pilati, judicante illo dimitti…

26 To you first God, raising up his Son, hath sent him to bless you; that every one may convert himself from his wickedness.

Vobis primum Deus suscitans filium suum, misit eum benedicentem vobis : ut convertat se unusquisque a nequitia sua. Douay-Rheims + Latin Vulgate (DR+LV)

“God of Abraham, and God of Ysaac, and God of Jacob, God of oure fadris, hath glorified his sone Jhesu, whom ye bitraieden, and denyeden bifor the face of Pilat, whanne he demede hym to be delyuered… God reiside his sone first to you, and sente hym blessynge you, that ech man conuerte hym from his wickidnesse.” Wycliffe (i)

“The God of Abraham Isaac and Iacob the God of oure fathers hath glorified his sonne Iesus whom ye delyvered and denyed in the presence of Pylate whe he had iudged him to be lowsed… Fyrst vnto you hath God raysed vp his sonne Iesus and him he hath sent to blysse you that every one of you shuld turne from youre wickedness”. Tyndale⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham and of Isaac, and of Iacob, ye God of oure fathers hath glorifyed his childe Iesus, whom ye delyuered and denyed in the presence of Pilate, whan he had iudged him to be lowsed… First vnto you hath God raysed vp his childe Iesus, & sent hi vnto you, to blesse you yt euery one shulde turne fro his wickednesse.” Coverdale⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham Isaac and Iacob, the God of our fathers hath glorified hys sonne Iesu, whom ye delyuered and denyed in the presence of Pylate, when he had iudged hym to be lowsed… Fyrste vnto you hath God raysed vp his sonne Iesus, and hym he hath sent to blesse you, that euery one of you shuld turne from your wickednes.” Matthew⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac and of Iacob, the God of oure fathers hath glorified hys sonne Iesus, whom ye delyuered, and denyed in the presence of Pylate, when he had iudged hym to be loosed… Fyrst whan God had raysed vp hys sonne Iesus vnto you, he sent him to blesse you, that euery one of you shulde turne from his wyckednes.” Great⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Iacob, the God of our fathers hath glorified his Sonne Iesus, whom ye betrayed, and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had iudged him to be deliuered… First vnto you hath God raysed vp his Sonne Iesus, and him hee hath sent to blesse you, in turning euery one of you from your iniquities.” Geneva⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Iacob, the God of our fathers hath glorified his sonne Iesus, whom ye betrayed and denyed in the presence of Pilate, when he had iudged hym to be loosed… Unto you first, God hath raysed vp his sonne Iesus, and hath sent hym to blesse you, in turnyng euery one of you from his iniquities.” Bishops⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his son Jesus, whom ye delivered up, and renounced him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to release him… God having raised up his Son, hath sent him to you first, to bless you, by turning every one of you from your iniquities. Wesley (i)

“The God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob, the God of our fathers hath glorified his son Jesus, whom ye delivered up, and denied before Pilate, when he determined to release Him… and to you first God having raised up his son Jesus, sent Him to bless you; in your turning away every one of you from your iniquities.” Worsley (i) New Testament

“The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified His Child Jesus, Whom ye, indeed, delivered up, and denied before Pilate’s face, when he gave judgment to release Him… To you first, God, having raised up His Child, sent Him forth, blessing you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.” Worrell (i)

“the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and renounced in opposition to Pilate, who was determined to let him go… it is to you that God first of all sent his son Jesus, having raised him up to bless you, provided you all renounce your iniquities.” Mace (i)

“The God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers hath glorified his Son Jesus Christ, whom ye delivered up to Judgment, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined and willing to let him go… Unto you first, God having raised up his Son, sent him forth to bless [you,] in turning away every one from your iniquities.” Whiston (i)

“The God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he had determined to release him… Unto you in the first instance, hath God, after raising up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, to the end that every one of you should turn away from your iniquities.” Haweis⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go… To you first, God having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” Webster⁽ⁱ⁾

“It is to you first that God, having raised up his son Jesus, hath sent him, blessing you, when you turn every one from his iniquities.” Acts 3:26 Thomson⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his Son Jesus, whom you delivered up, and whom you rejected in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to release him… To you first, God, having raised up his Son Jesus, has sent him to bless you, in turning every one of you away from his iniquities.” Anderson (i)

“The God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, God of our fathers, has honoured his child Jesus; whom ye have delivered up, and denied him before the face of Pilate, he having judged to loose…To you first God, having raised up his child Jesus, sent him praising you, in turning away each from your wickedness.” JuliaSmith⁽ⁱ⁾

“The God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Child, Jesus, who you indeed delivered up and denied before the face of Pilate having decided to release Him… To you God, having first raised up his Son, sent him blessing you, in turning each one from your sins.” Godbey (i)

“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, did glorify His child Jesus, whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, he having given judgment to release [him]… to you first, God, having raised up His child Jesus, did send him, blessing you, in the turning away of each one from your evil ways.” Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)

“The God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorifies His Boy Jesus, Whom you, indeed, give up and disown before the face of Pilate, when he decides to release Him… To you first, God, raising His Boy, commissions Him to bless you by turning away each of you from your wickedness.” Concordant Literal Translation (CLV (i))

“The ‘God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob,’ ‘the God of our fathers,” Ex. 3:15 glorified His child Jesus, whom you delivered up, and denied Him in the presence of Pilate, that one having decided to set Him free… Having raised up His child Jesus, God sent Him first to you, blessing you in turning away each one from your iniquities. Green’s Literal Translation (LITV (i))

“The Elohim of Abraham and of Yischaq and of Yaaqov – the Elohim of our fathers glorified his lad Yah Shua – whom you delivered and denied at the face of Pilatos when he judged to release him… To you first, Elohim raised his lad Yah Shua, apostolized him to eulogize you, in turning each of you away from his evils.” Exegeses Companion Bible (ECB (i))

“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his Boy Jesus, whom ye actually delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate who preferred to release that man… To you first, having raised up his Boy Jesus, God sent him blessing you, in turning away each man from your evils.” ACV (i)

ACTS 4

“For truly, Herodus and Pilatus, with the Gentiles and the mobs of Israel gathered in this city against The Holy One, your Son Yeshua (ᶜal qaddīšā bərāḵ yešūᶜ), The One whom you anointed… And stretch your hand for healing and for mighty acts and for signs to occur in the name of your Holy Son Yeshua (bašmēh daḇrāḵ qaddīšā yešūᶜ).” Acts 4:27, 30 (PHBT https://biblehub.com/hpbt/acts/4.htm)

“For truly, they assembled in this very city, together with both Herod and Pilate and with the Gentiles and with the people of Israel, against your holy Son Jesus… Just as your hand is freely stretched out for healings, and wonders and the miracles which are done in the name of your holy Son Jesus.” (LAMSA https://biblehub.com/lamsa/acts/4.htm)

“For verily they are assembled in this city against thy holy Son Jeshu, whom thou hast anointed, – Herodes and Pilatos with the Gentiles and the synagogue of Israel… while thy hand thou outstretchest unto healings and mighty works which they shall do in the name of thy holy Son Jeshu.” Etheridge

“For, in reality, against thy holy Son Jesus whom thou hast anointed, Herod and Pilate, with the Gentiles and the congregation of Israel, have been combined together in this city… while thou extendest thy hand for cures and prodigies, to be done in the name of thy holy Son Jesus.” Murdock

27 For of a truth there assembled together in this city against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel,

Convenerunt enim vere in civitate ista adversus sanctum puerum tuum Jesum, quem unxisti, Herodes, et Pontius Pilatus, cum gentibus, et populis Israel…

30 By stretching forth thy hand to cures, and signs, and wonders to be done by the name of thy holy Son Jesus.

in eo quod manum tuam extendas ad sanitates, et signa, et prodigia fieri per nomen sancti filii tui Jesu. DR+LV

“For verili Eroude and Pounce Pilat, with hethene men, and puplis of Israel, camen togidre in this citee ayens thin hooli child Jhesu… in that thing that thou holde forth thin hond, that heelthis and signes and wondris be maad bi the name of thin hooli sone Jhesu.” Wycliffe

“For of a trueth agaynst thy holy chylde Iesus whom thou hast annoynted bothe Herode and also Poncius Pylate with the Gentils and the people of Israel gaddered them selves to gedder… So that thou stretche forth thy honde that healynge and signes and wonders be done by the name of thy holy chylde Iesus.” Tyndale

“Of a trueth agaynst thy holy childe Iesus, whom thou hast anoynted, both Herode & Pontius Pilate with the Heythen and people of Israel, haue gathered the selues together… and stretch out thine hande, that healinge and tokes and wonders maye be done by the name of thy holy childe Iesus.” Coverdale

“For of a trueth againste thy holy childe Iesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herode and also Poncius Pilate, with the Gentyls & the people of Israel, gathered them selues together… So that thou stretche forth thy hande, that healing and signes and wounders be done by the name of thy holye chylde Iesus.” Matthew

“For of a trueth, agaynst thy holy chylde Iesus (whom thou hast anoynted) both Herode and also Poncius Pylate, which the Gentyls and the people of Israel, gathered them selues together… So that thou stretche forth thyne hande, that healynge and sygnes and wonders be done by the name of thy holy chylde Iesus.” Great

“For doutlesse, against thine holy Sonne Iesus, whome thou haddest anoynted, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel gathered themselues together… So that thou stretch forth thine hand, that healing, and signes, and wonders may be done by the Name of thine holy Sonne Iesus.” Geneva

“And of a trueth, agaynst thy holye chylde Iesus, who thou hast anoynted, both Herode and also Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, gathered them selues together So that thou stretch foorth thyne hande, that healyng, and signes, and wonders, be done by the name of thy holy chylde Iesus.” Bishops

“in the hand of thee to stretch out thee for healing, and signs and prodigies to do through the name of the holy child of thee Jesus.” Acts 4:30 Diaglott (i)

“for it was truly against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, that Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, united themselves in this city… by displaying thine hand in miraculous cures, and prodigies, which by the name of thy holy child Jesus shall be done.” Mace

“For of a truth in this city against thy holy Son Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel were gathered together… By stretching forth [thine] hand to heal: and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy Son Jesus.” Whiston

“For of a truth, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed… While thou stretchest forth thy hand to heal, and signs and wonders are done thro’ the name of thy holy child Jesus.” Wesley

“For of a truth both Herod and Pontius Pilate, the Gentiles and the people of Israel, combined against thy holy child Jesus… and while signs and wonders are done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.” Worsley

“For, of a truth, there were gathered together in this city, against Thy Holy Child Jesus, Whom Thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the gentiles and peoples of Israel—… by stretching forth Thy hand for healing; and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Thy Holy Child Jesus.” Worrell

“For they have been in truth collected together against thy holy Son Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, even Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the heathen, and the people of Israel… by stretching out thy hand for healing; and that signs and miracles may be performed by the name of thy holy child Jesus.” Haweis

“For indeed against thy holy Child Jesus whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with nations and the tribes of Israel, were gathered together… when thou stretchest forth thy hand for healing; and signs and. wonders are done by the name of thy holy child, Jesus.” Thomson

“For in truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were assembled… By stretching forth thy hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.” Webster

“For of a truth, against thy holy Son Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the heathen, and the people of Israel… whilst thou stretchest out thy hand to heal, and signs and wonders are doing through the name of thy holy Son Jesus.” Living_Oracles

“For, in truth, against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, did meet together… by stretching out thy hand to heal, that both signs and wonders may be done through the name of thy holy child Jesus.” Anderson

“For against the truth were they gathered together against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the nations and peoples of Israel… In thy stretching out thy hand for healing; and signs and wonders to be for the name of thine holy child Jesus.” JuliaSmith

“For in truth they were assembled together in this city, against thy holy Child Jesus, whom thou didst anoint; both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel… while, reaching forth thy hand unto healings, both miracles and wonders are wrought through the name of thy holy child Jesus.” Godbey

“for gathered together of a truth against Thy holy child Jesus, whom Thou didst anoint, were both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with nations and peoples of Israel… in the stretching forth of Thy hand, for healing, and signs, and wonders, to come to pass through the name of Thy holy child Jesus.” YLT

“For of a truth, in this city were gathered against Thy holy Boy Jesus, Whom Thou dost anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, together with the nations and the peoples of Israel… by the stretching out of Thy hand for healing and signs and miracles to occur through the name of Thy holy Boy Jesus.” CLV

“For truly both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the nations and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together against Your holy child Jesus, whom You anointed… in the extending of Your hand for healing and miracles and wonders to happen through the name of Your holy child Jesus.” LITV

“For of a truth, against your holy lad Yah Shua whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilatos with the goyim and the people of Yisra El gathered together… by spreading your hand to heal; and that signs and omens become through the name of your holy lad Yah Shua.” ECB

“For in truth, against thy holy Boy Jesus, whom thou anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together… by thy stretching forth thy hand for healing, and signs and wonders to happen through the name of thy holy Boy Jesus.” ACV

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The foregoing data demonstrates that early Christians and many more recent translators all understood the term pais to be a description of Jesus being God’s holy and beloved Son/Child, not Servant. The aforementioned evidence seems to vindicate the fact that the translators of the AV were correct in the way they translated these specific verses from the book of Acts:

“The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go… Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” Acts 3:13, 26

“For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together… by stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.” Acts 4:27, 30

FURTHER READING

On Second Thought! Revisiting Jesus as God’s Son or Servant in Acts Pt. 1, Pt. 2

Is Jesus God’s Servant or Son? Pt. 1, Pt. 2, Pt. 3, Pt. 4, Pt. 5, Pt. 6, Addendum A, Addendum B