3

Since no one seems to know the answer to my original question and I’m just being attacked, I thought I would post the comment you decided to delete. I don’t appreciate being bullied when I’ve been perfectly kind. Just because someone has a different point of view doesn’t mean you should censor them. It’s cowardly to delete a post that you disagree with even though I provided proof. Rather than delete something you should refute it which I know none of you are capable of doing. Cheers

There seems to be a lot of focus on the fact that I emphasized the masculine aspect of peacemaking. There is nothing unbiblical about what I said. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 11:7 that man is in the glory of God and the woman comes from the man. In Ephesians 2:14 we learn that Jesus is the source of peace. It’s clear from these passages that the order is as follows God>Man>Woman>Children. This is not discriminatory or unfair it is a hierarchy that is thoroughly established. Men do not submit to peace on women’s terms just as Jesus does not submit to peace on man’s terms. My original question was really about Protestant translators and if they were reluctant to associate the word Huios with son in some instances so as not to confuse it with the son of God.

1
  • you should try the original que on Christianity SE.
    – Michael16
    Jun 24 at 15:47

3 Answers 3

0

Typically, the word for children is translated from 'tekna'. Huios is usually translates as sons. But this is not always the case.

12
  • Hi thanks for your response! Yes I’ve been studying Greek and I concur with that 100%. However for my paper I need to confirm that Protestant translators preferred to translate Huios as children rather than sons. I’m looking for either a primary source to confirm that or secondary author. Thanks!
    – Bunny7
    Jun 22 at 23:15
  • For other references you should check Ellicott or Bengel's Gnomen or the BAGD
    – oldhermit
    Jun 22 at 23:25
  • In all the Textus Receptus versions I reviewed all had children instead of sons. In all the ancient manuscript translations I checked, like the Vulgate had sons. I’m wondering if there was a Protestant bias in using children instead of sons. In the King James Bible I noticed in numerous places that when not referring to Jesus they used children in place of sons to not confuse the son of God and other sons of God. My paper is arguing against the KJV on this particular verse.
    – Bunny7
    Jun 22 at 23:26
  • That could be a possibility but this would only be speculating as to the motives of the translators.
    – oldhermit
    Jun 22 at 23:29
  • Yes it would be speculation. However the wiki entry seems quite certain so I’m wondering if there are any sources to back up the assertion.
    – Bunny7
    Jun 22 at 23:31
4

There is an old aphorism that "Men do not own their own gender". By this is meant that a feminine word (for a person) is always feminine; but a masculine word often includes both sexes.

One can see this in many places. Here are some examples:

  • Jesus title of "Son of Man" means son of humanity, ie, both sexes included.
  • Jesus said in Mark 1:27, 28, "“The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Therefore, the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” Here the highlighted "man" clearly means "mankind", is, humanity.
  • Rom 8:14 - For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. Again, υἱοί here means both sexes.
  • Acts 13:26 - “Brothers, sons of the family of Abraham, and those among you who fear God, to us has been sent the message of this salvation. Again, both "brothers" and "sons" includes both sexes.
  • Mark 13:28 - Truly I tell you, the sons of men will be forgiven all sins and blasphemies, as many as they utter. Again, this represents both sexes.

Indeed, many such examples could be quotes such as: Eph 3:5, Matt 5:9, Luke 20:36, Rom 8:19, 9:26, Gal 4:6, etc.

On the specific subject of "peacemakers" in Matt 5:9, this gaian, can apply to botn sexes as displayed several times in the Bible:

  • Prov 24:17, 18 - Do not gloat when your enemy falls, and do not let your heart rejoice when he stumbles, or the LORD will see and disapprove, and turn His wrath away from him.
  • Prov 15:1 - A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.
  • Jer 18:20 - Should good be repaid with evil? Yet they have dug a pit for me. Remember how I stood before You to speak good on their behalf, to turn Your wrath from them.
  • Prov 29:8 - Mockers inflame a city, but the wise turn away anger.

We have some wonderful stories of wise women who were peacemakers such as:

  • 2 Sam 14:24 - wise woman from Tekoa
  • 2 Sam 20:15-23 - the wise woman of Abel
  • 1 Sam 25:3 - Abigail was wise enough to prevent bloodshed

Thus, by explicit teaching and example, peacemakers can be of both sexes.

3
  • The linguistics terminology would be to say that the feminine (and neuter) genders are more marked, while the masculine gender is unmarked. There are situations where grammatical genders/word-classes can even be shown as a Venn diagram, so that the non-masculine genders aren't entirely distinct, but just categories which in some situations have distinct forms, and in others take the masculine forms. In Biblical Greek you can see this when there's no distinct feminine form: 3rd declension case endings, interrogative pronouns, and some adjectives.
    – curiousdannii
    Jun 24 at 9:19
  • @curiousdannii - this is all true but I did not want to over-complicate the story beyond what those unfamiliar with such subtleties could grasp.
    – Dottard
    Jun 24 at 10:18
  • If it was Tekno then I think it would be hard to argue against the reading of children but Huios is certainly debatable and leans more toward sons. Even if sons was to be applied to both genders (And based on all the evidence it shouldn’t), it still should be translated as sons with the general understanding that it applies to both genders. It would be like replacing the expression “mankind” with “humankind” . If the record had sons it should remain transmitted that way because anything else is an inference.
    – Bunny7
    Jun 24 at 16:02
2

With the plural, such as υἱοὶ θεοῦ, as opposed to the singular, the translation sons is not so clear cut. For example (Gal. 3:26-28) ends up with male and female (ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ) sons of God (υἱοὶ θεοῦ).

26 Πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ °τῆς πίστεως ⸂ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ⸃· 27 ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε,* Χριστὸν ἐνεδύσασθε. 28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην, οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος, οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ· ⸀πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς ⸂εἷς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ⸃ Ἰησοῦ.* (28th Edition, Gal. 3:26–28, NA28)

Neither is Catholic or Protestant so clear. Here is a prominent Roman Catholic translation:

26 For through faith you are all children of God in Christ Jesus. 27 † For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free person, there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. -- Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. Board of Trustees, Catholic Church. National Conference of Catholic Bishops, and United States Catholic Conference. Administrative Board. (1996). The New American Bible: translated from the original languages with critical use of all the ancient sources and the revised New Testament (Gal 3:26–28). Confraternity of Christian Doctrine.

Regardless of how one translates υἱοὶ in Gal. 3:26-28, Paul essentially indicated that there is no difference in the inheritance of Chrisian women from Christian men. That is why Paul Used υἱοὶ θεοῦ instead of τέκνα θεοῦ.

And Matt 5:9 from the same translation:

  9 Blessed are the peacemakers, 
 for they will be called children of God.
            (Matt. 5:9, NAB)

Matt. 5:9 is not as clear as Gal. 3:26-28. In Greek, Hebrew, and languages which designate gender in plural nouns and pronouns, when both men and women are involves and the language as no common form, the masculine plural is used. In Matt. 5:9 there is no reason to believe that women cannot be peacemakers.

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.