Author Archives: Dungadin

Acts 21:38; Did the Roman commander assume an Egyptian would know Greek?

Acts 21:38 οὐκ ἄρα σὺ εἶ ὁ Αἰγύπτιος

Did the Chiliarch assume an Egyptian would know Greek?
Or assume an Egyptian would not know Greek?

Many translations appear to believe that the Chiliarch assumed an Egyptian would not know Greek.
But some, like the Complete Jewish Bible, appear to believe the Chiliarch thought an Egyptian would know Greek.
Some are ambiguious or slightly implying affirmative, saying “Are you not that Egyptian?”
This is quite different from some, which say “Then you are not that Egyptian.” (See all the translations listed with their renderings, at the bottom of this post.)

But what are the rules of Greek grammar here?
The BDF grammar §440 says “οὐ is employed to suggest an affirmative answer, μή (μήτι) a negative reply; in the latter, μή with the indicative is an external indication that it is a question, since independent μή can be used in no other way than interrogatively”
So according to BDF, the correct translation here, employing οὐ, would be “Then you are that Egyptian, aren’t you.”
Combined with ἄρα DeBrunner says in §440(2) “Οὐκ ἄρα denotes astonishment in Ac. 21:38 (‘why, are you not…’), elsewhere it corresponds to ‘well’ or ‘then’. “
Hmm, why different only here, DeBrunner? I do not agree. I think the Chiliarch is saying, “Then aren’t you that Egyptian?” and assuming an affirmative answer, since that is the grammar.
BDAG says it means “are you not, then…” With ἄρα being inferential or consequential. (With οὐ suggesting an affirmative answer of course.)

I conclude that those translations which render it “then you are not that Egyptian” or, “I thought you were that Egyptian” are incorrect. And it is apparent to me, that the Roman commander assumed an Egyptian would know Greek. To read my translation of this verse, you can download my translation.

KJ21 Art not thou that Egyptian…?
ASV Art thou not then the Egyptian…?
AMP Then you are not [as I assumed] the Egyptian…?
AMPC Are you not then [as I supposed] the Egyptian…?
BRG Art not thou that Egyptian…?
CBW Are you not the Egyptian…?
CSB Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
CEB Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
CJB Say, aren’t you that Egyptian…?
CEV Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
DARBY Thou art not then that Egyptian?
DLNT Then are you not the Egyptian…?
DRA Art not thou that Egyptian…?
ERV Then you are not the man I thought you were. I thought you were the Egyptian.
EHV Are you not the Egyptian…?
EMTV Are you not then the Egyptian…?
ESV Are you not the Egyptian, then…?
ESVUK Are you not the Egyptian, then…?
EXB I thought you were [L Are you not…?] the Egyptian.
GNV Art not thou the Egyptian…?
GW Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
GNT Then you are not that Egyptian…?
HCSB Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
ICB I thought you were the Egyptian.
ISV You’re not the Egyptian…are you?
PHILLIPS Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
JUB Art not thou that Egyptian…?
KJV Art not thou that Egyptian…?
AKJV Art not thou that Egyptian…?
LAMSA Are you not that Egyptian…?
LEB Then you are not the Egyptian…?
TLB Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
MSG I thought you were the Egyptian.
MEV Are you not the Egyptian…?
MOUNCE Then you are not the Egyptian…?
MURD Art not thou that Egyptian…?
NOG Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NABRE So then you are not the Egyptian…?
NASB Then you are not the Egyptian…?
NCV I thought you were the Egyptian.
NET Then you’re not that Egyptian…?
NIRV Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NIV Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NKJV Are you not the Egyptian…?
NLV Are you not the man from the country of Egypt…?
NLT Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
NMB Are you not that Egyptian…?
NRSV Then you are not the Egyptian…?
NTE Aren’t you the Egyptian…?
OJB Then you are not the Egyptian…?
TPT Aren’t you that Egyptian…?
Recov You are not then the Egyptian…?
RSV Are you not the Egyptian, then…?
TLV Then you’re not the Egyptian…?
VOICE We thought you were that Egyptian.
WEB Aren’t you then the Egyptian…?
WE I thought you were the man from the country of Egypt.
WYC Whether thou art not the Egyptian…?
YLT art not thou, then, the Egyptian…?

Acts 20;35 support the weak

Acts 20:35 Support the Weak

I show here an example of translator discretion, how various translations have supplied this subject or that for the verb in English, or in my case have chosen not to supply a subject.  This is a common occurrence when translating the Greek New Testament into English.  Mind you that there is no Greek textual variant here, so a differing source Greek text does not explain the differences among the English translations for this clause.  The Greek verb is an INFINITIVE, preceded by δεῖ (indicates an OBLIGATION or NECESSITY), and there is NO SUBJECT.

The clause in Greek, and a formal equivalent translation:
ὅτι οὕτως κοπιῶντας δεῖ ἀντιλαμβάνεσθαι τῶν ἀσθενούντων
how with such labor it is necessary to support the weak

Tyndale         how that so laboring ye ought to receive the weak
Genev            howe that so labouring, ye ought to support the weake
KJV                  how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak
ASV                 that so laboring ye ought to help the weak
NKJV               by laboring like this, that you must support the weak
CEV                 how you should work to help everyone who is weak
NASB              that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak
MEV                how, working like this, you must help the weak

Phillips           that by such hard work, we must help the weak
GNB                that by working hard in this way we must help the weak
NIV                  that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak
TNIV               that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak
ESV                  that by working hard in this way we must help the weak
NRSV              that by such work we must support the weak
NABRE           that by hard work of that sort we must help the weak
NET                 that by working in this way we must help the weak
GW                  that by working hard like this we should help the weak

RSV                 that by so toiling one must help the weak

HCSB               that by laboring like this, it is necessary to help the weak
CSB                  that it is necessary to help the weak by laboring like this
DRP                 how with such labor it is necessary to support the weak

I originally rendered it, “how with such labor one must help the weak,” but I changed my mind for two reasons.  (1), this obligation does not apply to you if you are one of those weak ones that need the support.  So it is better not to supply any of the subjects “you,” “we,” or “one.”  (2) I want to keep an English word that couples with the English infinitive, because the δεῖ applies to the next, following phrase as well, which also begins with an infinitive, “to remember.”  It is necessary both to labor, and to remember.

NLT                  how you can help those in need by working hard

Finally, the New Living Translation is an outlier; here the NLT says “you CAN help those in need.”  That is simply 180 degrees opposite of what the Greek says.  The Greek says it is an obligation or a necessity.  The NLT is this inaccurate extremely often.  I have no tolerance for the NLT at all, and I believe it is my duty from God to urge you to throw away these following translations: The Message, the NLT, the NRSV, and the NAB.

Keep America

Don’t be mad at Honduran, Mexican etc. immigrants for wanting to escape their countries and come to America. Turn them against Democrats with my new slogan, “Keep America.” The contrast between Democrats and Republicans is now that stark. Democrats want to get rid of the border, literally, and want to get rid of our institutions such as the Senate, and the Electoral College, and get rid of basic human rights such as “Innocent Until Proven Guilty.” Appeal to the immigrants with reason and sympathy as follows: You left your home countries because they do not have such things as “Innocent Until Proven Guilty.” Why would you vote for Democrats, who do not believe in that, and who want to get rid of the border that keeps America separate and distinct from those countries you escaped? In addition, most of those Latin American immigrants are conservative Catholics or Evangelicals on social issues. If they really knew the Democrat party’s positions on things, like the official platform that people can cut up and throw away human babies just as they are being born, those immigrants would be disgusted. Many other examples. Democrats defended one of their politicians who said “America was never that great.” Well, these immigrants obviously disagree with that. Moreover, these Latin American immigrants are hard working, self-motivated, responsible people. And are business entrepreneurs. (Which Obama mocked, saying, “You didn’t build that. The government did.” Look, rather than complain or be violent toward their government, these immigrants took drastic personal responsibility and action, to move to a country that is better. But that is in sharp contrast to what the Democratic Party stands for; Democrats want people to be dependent on the government and live on handouts. It is clear fact, that most of these Latin American immigrants have nothing in common with the Democratic Party! They align with the Republican Party in almost all respects. Just point this out, with calmness and respect.

Variant Acts 20.4-5

Acts 20:4-5, NKJV:

(4) And Sopater of Berea accompanied him to Asia—also Aristarchus and Secundus of the Thessalonians, and Gaius of Derbe, and Timothy, and Tychicus and Trophimus of Asia.  (5) These men, going ahead, waited for us at Troas.  [While Paul and Luke went through Macedonia]

One immediately sees a problem with this text.  Verse 4 contradicts verse 5 and vice versa.  If they went on ahead of him to Troas (the landing port in Asia) then they did NOT accompany him αχρι – as far as Asia.

Ah, but the NA28 text does not contain the words αχρι της ασιας “as far as Asia.”

Also, the NA29 text has “δε” before “went on ahead.”  And there too, with the verb, is another variant.

20:4 txt omit ?⁷⁴ ℵ B 33 vg cop eth Or-Lat(V) NA29 ‖ αχρι της ασιας A (D μεχρι) E H L P Ψ 049 056 1175 1611 1739 1891 2464 it syr Chrys TR RP ‖ lac ?⁴¹ C

20:5 txt προσελθοντες δε ℵ A B* E Ψ 1735 1739 2464 TG SBL NA29 ‖ προελθοντες δε ?⁷⁴ B² 33 1611 1891 syr-h cop-sa,bo TD NA28 ‖ προσελθοντες H L P 049 056 1175 RP ‖ προελθοντες D latt syr-p Chrys TR AT BG ‖ lac ?⁴¹ C

The NA text makes more sense: these men accompanied him, δε, “however,” or, “except that” they went on ahead of him to Troas.

Robinson-Pierpont GNT 2018 Update

Robinson-Pierpont Greek New Testament 2018 edition

I have updated and uploaded my PDF document of the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Greek New Testament. The 2017 text was converted to Unicode in Microsoft Word by myself, David Robert Palmer, from CCAT raw text files sent to him by Dr. Maurice A. Robinson. Then DRP has now updated the Nestle-Aland textual variants to the NA28, and in Acts, to the NA29.  All old links to the RP GNT still work, and they do point to this updated edition, since I did not change the file name.

The 2026 edition of the Robinson-Pierpont text has very few, and minor, text changes from the 2005 edition, including one corrected error of reading (based on misinterpretation of Hoskier’s data) at Rev 2:17 (now omits φαγειν) and John 18:11, 32, where a marginal reading has now become the main text and vice versa. Mainly it has updates and corrections in capitalization, accentuation, and punctuation, plus some previously missing iota subscripts. The most significant changes in this 2018 edition is that the variant readings of the Nestle-Aland text are updated to the NA28 in the catholic epistles, and in the Acts of the Apostles, to the NA29.

The current edition of the Robinson-Pierpont text has the following text changes from the 2005 edition:
Matt 26:29 γεννήματος → γενήματος
John 18:11 μάχαιράν σου → μάχαιραν
John 18:32 ἤμελλεν → ἔμελλεν
Rom. 13:9 σεαυτόν → ἑαυτόν
1 Cor 7:5 μή τι → μήτι
2 Cor 1:17 μή τι → μήτι
2 Cor 12:18 μή τι → μήτι
2 Cor 13:5 μή τι → μήτι
Php 3:5 περιτομή → περιτομῇ
Phm 1:1 χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ → Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ
Rev 2:17 φαγειν → omit
Rev 11:16 ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου τοῦ θεοῦ καθήμενοι → ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ καθήμενοι
Rev 13:14 τὴν πληγὴν → πληγὴν

Now available for download by right-clicking here or going to the long list on my translations page: Robinson, Maurice A., and Pierpont, William G.: The New Testament in the Original Greek, Byzantine Textform; PDF, 13 MB. This is a free download of a single pdf. (A stripped down edition without variants or Appendix is available also, a 9 MB pdf.) This Robinson-Pierpont edition of the Greek New Testament attempts to represent the Byzantine text form archetype. This is not the same approach to textual criticism as, for example, the Hodges-Farstad Majority Text approach. Also included in this document is the Appendix, entitled, “The Case for Byzantine Priority” by Maurice A. Robinson, PhD.

I have also uploaded editions of some of my Greek-English documents, but with the Robinson-Pierpont 2018 Greek text, and the English translation thereof. You can download them right here as well. Completed are: The Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Luke,  Gospel of John, The General Epistles and Revelation.  You can get Amazon printed editions of Robinson-Pierpont Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the General Epistles as well.

Download Robinson-Pierpont 2026 NT PDF.

robinson-pierpont 2018

Share this post about the Robinson-Pierpont 2018 Greek New Testament download.

Luke 2;15 Textual Variant

Luke 2:15a txt οἱ ποιμένες ℵ B L W Θ Ξ 1 565 700 1071 1582* it-a,aur,b,β,e,f,ff²,l,r¹ vg syr-s,p,pal copsa,bo arm geo Or-lat Eus NA28 ‖ καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι οἱ ποιμένες A D E F G H K M P S U Y Γ Δ Λ Ψ Ω 053 ƒ¹³ 2 28 33 118 157 892 1009 1010 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1344 1424 1546 1582c 2148 2174 ? Lect-m it-(e),d,q syr-h Diatess-a,n,t TR RP ‖ καὶ οἱ ποιμένες 579 1365 ‖ lac ?⁴⁵ ?⁷⁵ C N Q T Π

This variant was footnoted with a [D] rating of certainty in the UBS3, and now in the UBS5 is not footnoted at all.

The Byzantine text presents an odd style, which the UBS commentary says is Lukan.  The biggest difficulty with the Byz reading is the word και.  Most of the translations from the Byz text translate και as “that,” (a Semitism?) while the KJV did not translate it at all.  The other major difference is the addition of οι ανθρωποι.  The main translations treat οἱ ἄνθρωποι οἱ ποιμένες as a pleonasm and translate it simply as “the shepherds.”  This latter is indeed Lukan style.  But και as “that,” not so much Lukan style.  I’ve seen it in John.

First the UBS text and translation:

Καὶ ἐγένετο, ὡς ἀπῆλθον ἀπ’ αὐτῶν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν οἱ ἄγγελοι, οἱ ποιμένες ἐλάλουν πρὸς ἀλλήλους

DRP: And it came about that when the angels had departed from them into heaven, the shepherds were saying to one another

Now the Byz text and some translations thereof:

Καὶ ἐγένετο, ὡς ἀπῆλθον ἀπ’ αὐτῶν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν οἱ ἄγγελοι, καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι οἱ ποιμένες εἶπον πρὸς ἀλλήλους

MLV: And it happened, as the messengers went away from them into heaven, and the men, the shepherds, said to one another,

ALT: And it happened, when the angels departed from them into heaven, that the men, the shepherds, said to one another

Geneva: And it came to passe whe the Angels were gone away from them into heauen, that the shepheards sayde one to another,

EMTV: So it was, when the angels had departed from them into heaven, that the shepherds said to one another,

KJV: And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another,

Download the Luke document containing this data in a footnote.