Category Archives: Commentary

If your brother sins

Matthew 18:15-17
¹⁵Now if your brother sins, go show him his fault, just between you and him.  If he listens to you, you have won back your brother.  ¹⁶But if he does not listen, take with you one or two others, so that ‘upon the mouths of two or three witnesses every matter be established.’  ¹⁷And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the assembly.  And if he refuses to listen to the assembly, he should be regarded by you no differently than a gentile or a revenue agent.”

I agree with the UBS textual commentary that the phrase “against you” [if your brother sins against you] might have been added in order to harmonize this verse with the “against me” of v. 21 shortly thereafter where Peter asks, “How many times shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him?”

Peter was thinking of himself, but Jesus was thinking of the whole church and church discipline.

In my opinion, when it comes to variants in the Greek text of the New Testament, this is one of the most damaging, the longer reading containing “against you,” is damaging. Here is the practical situation.  A brother is reported to have sinned, or be sinning.  But not sinning against anyone in particular in that community.  So no one goes and confronts him about it, because it was not involving them.  The result is gossip, and then inflating of the original rumor, and even ultimately progressing to people “bearing false witness against their neighbor.” I know very well this scenario personally, because there are rumors about me sinning which are false rumors, but no one has come to me to talk to me about it. The rumor just keeps spreading, and takes on the appearance of truth since so many people have heard it.

Does anyone in that scenario want to “win back your brother”?  If you have Christian love for your brother, you will go to him and talk to him about it, even if he did not sin against you in particular, because if the rumor is true, you want him to be restored.  And if the rumor is not true, you do not want people spreading untrue things about your brother. This may not be scientific textual criticism, but I believe for practical and doctrinal and ecclesiological reasons that the shorter reading must be correct.

This is a very important, and very wonderful passage in the Bible, if applied correctly. Because it nips in the bud the problem of gossip. If you cannot get one or two others to agree to be witnesses with you against this brother regarding the accusation, then the accusation is probably not true. And if you do get someone to go with you, and you confront the brother, and he asks, when and were did you see me do this sin, and neither you nor your witnesses can answer that question, then that is another indication that the rumor is false. You have just been believing a rumor, started perhaps by some jealous person who has a personal problem with the accused. Then after finding that out, you have an obligation to rebuke anyone whom you hear repeating the false rumor.

You can download my translation of the Gospel of Matthew here.

Definite Article as Possessive Pronoun

In ancient Greek, the definite article could serve as a possessive pronoun if the context so indicated. A very common variant in the Greek manuscripts underlying the New Testament is places where some manuscripts have a possessive pronoun and some have only the definite article. And usually, the early translations translating the passage would supply a possessive pronoun in their target language, even when their Greek manuscript source text did not have one.

John 19:26

ESV: When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!”
NKJV: When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold your son!”

txt τη μητρι𝔓⁶⁶ 𝔓¹²¹vid ℵ B L W it-b,e SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ τη μητρι αυτου A DS E N 054 𝔐 lat syr TR RP ‖ lac 𝔓⁶⁰ C D 065.  Here is the entire verse 26 from the Robinson-Pierpont majority text:  Ἰησοῦς οὖν ἰδὼν τὴν μητέρα, καὶ τὸν μαθητὴν παρεστῶτα ὃν ἠγάπα, λέγει τῇ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ, Γύναι, ἰδοὺ ὁ υἱός σου.  In ancient Greek the definite article, in this case τη, could serve as a possessive pronoun if the context so indicated.  The addition of the possessive pronoun αυτου, “his,” was not necessary.  All you need to do is look at the beginning of this same verse, where all Greek manuscripts have only την μητερα, the definite article with “mother” and no possessive pronoun present, yet ALL English translations supply the word “his” there.  It is a very common textual variant in the Greek New Testament for Greek manuscripts to add a possessive pronoun like this.  But this need not even be footnoted, as the presence or absence of the possessive pronoun makes no difference in how you would translate it.

Here are some other instances where the Greek texts vary on the presence or absence of the possessive pronoun.  And observe that the English translations all supply an English possessive pronoun no matter which Greek text they translate from:

John 6:52
NKJV: The Jews therefore quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?”

txt omit 𝔓⁷⁵vid ℵ C D E G H K L M S U W Y Γ Δ Θ Λ Π Ψ Ω 047 0141 0211 ƒ¹ ƒ¹³ 2 28 33 157 180 205 397 565 579 700 1006 1010 1071 1241 1292 1342 1505 l844 l2211 𝔐 Lect it-d,ff² goth Orgr Cyr½ TR RP TH ‖ αυτου 𝔓⁶⁶ B T 597 892 1243 1424 l253 (l1016) it-a,aur,b,c,e,f,j,q,r¹ vg syr-c,s,p,h,pal cop-sa,pbo,bo,ach² arm eth geo slav Or-lat Macarius/Symeon Chrys Cyr½ SBL [NA28] {C} ‖ lac A F N P Q V X 091 0233

John 18:11
ESV: So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?”
EMTV: So Jesus said to Peter, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?”

txt την μαχαιραν 𝔓⁶⁰ 𝔓⁶⁶ ℵ A B C D E L N W 047 054 𝔐 lat syr RP SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ την μαχαιραν σου vg-cl Cyr Or TR ‖ lac 𝔓⁷⁵ 𝔓¹⁰⁸.  Almost all the English translations which translate the RP / NA28 text read “your sword.”  (Not ASV, NASB)

John 5:10b
NKJV: The Jews therefore said to him who was cured, “It is the Sabbath; it is not lawful for you to carry your bed.”

txt σου 𝔓⁶⁶ 𝔓⁷⁵ ℵ C* D L N Ws Θ Λ Π Ψ 0211 0233 ƒ¹³ 69 579 892 1071 1241 lat syr cop arm SBL NA28 {/} ‖ omit A B C³ E F G H K M S U V Xsupp Y Γ Δ Ω 047 063 0141 ƒ¹ 2 28 124 157 397 565 700 1424 𝔐 it-e,δ TR RP TH ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ P Q T Xtxt 070 078 33 346 788

Matthew 15:2a χειρας αυτων C D E L N P W Σ Φ 𝔐 lat syr TR RP SBL ΤH NA28 [αυτων] {\} ‖ χειρας ℵ B 073 it-f,g¹ arm Or Cyr Chr ‖ lac A Z 0233 0281.

Matthew 23:5b txt τα κρασπεδα ℵ B D cop-sa,mae¹ eth? SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ τα κρασπεδα αυτων itb vgmss copsa? eth ‖ τα κρασπεδα των ιματιων L ‖ τα κρασπεδα των ιματιων αυτων E O W Σ 0102 0107 it-f,ff²*,h,q syr arm Bas TR RP ‖ lac A C N P Z Φ 0233 0281.

Luke 23:2 txt το εθνος ημων 𝔓⁷⁵ ℵ B D L N T lat syr SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ το εθνος A E W 𝔐 it-a,r¹ MarcionE TR RP ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ C P Q.

Mark 3:5a txt την χειρα B E Φ SBL NA28 {\} ‖ την χειρα σου ℵ A C D L P W Σ TR RP TH ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ N 064 072.

Mark 14:46 txt τας χειρας αυτω ℵ² B D L it-(a,k),q syr SBL TH NA28 {\} ‖ τας χειρας αυτων ℵ* C W 0233 ‖ αυτω τας χειρας αυτων N Σ ‖ επ αυτον τας χειρας αυτων E Φ 𝔐 (lat) TR RP ‖ τας χειρας αυτων επ αυτον A ‖ lac 𝔓⁴⁵ P 083.

1 Peter 3:10b txt αυτου L P 049 0142 307 lat-s,v,t cop-sa,bo syr-p arm eth TR AN BG RP ‖ omit 𝔓⁷² 𝔓⁸¹vid ℵ A B C K Ψ 33 623 1175 1243 1735 1739 2464 2805 syr-h geo SBL TH NA28 ‖ lac 𝔓⁷⁴ 048 093 0206 0247 0285 ℓ1575.

2 Peter 2:20 f- κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ B K 049 307 2423 ps-oec it-z lat-v-mss TR AN BG RP SBL ECM2 TH NA28 ‖ a- κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 𝔓⁷² ℵ A C P Ψ 048vid 0142 5 33 623 1175 1243 1448 1735 1739 1852 2298 2464 lat-v,t syr-h arm (eth) geo slav pelag aug ECM1 ‖ b- κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος (ἡμῶν) cop-sa syr-ph-mss ‖ c- κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 94 104 syr-ph-mss ‖ d- κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος ὑμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 1241 ‖ e- κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ L 459 anast-s copbo ‖ g- κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ 6 2805 ‖ a/c copv ‖ e/g syrphmss ‖ lac 𝔓⁷⁴ 048 0156 0209 0247 665. 

1 John 3:21a txt ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν ℵ C K L 049 056 0142 18 81 88 104 181 326 330 424* 451 614 629 630 1175 1243 1292 1505c 1611 1844 1852 1877 1881 2138 2298 2412 2464 2492 𝔐 Lect it-ar,q,r,t,w,z vg-cl,ww syr-p,h Cllat Orpt Did TR AN BG RP NA28 {C} ‖ ἡ καρδία A B Ψ 33 322 323 424c 436 945 1067 1241 1409 1735 1739 2344 vg-st Orgr⅓,lat2/4 (Methodius); Aug½ SBL TH ‖ ἡ καρδία ὑμῶν 1505* pc ‖ lac 𝔓⁹ 𝔓⁷⁴ P 048 0245 0296.

Change of Rendering John 9:33

The verse John 9:33 has bothered me as long as I can remember.  In the King James Version it says:

“If this man were not of God, he could do nothing.”

The ESV, NIV, NRSV, NASB etc, all the mainstream translations say the same thing, or use the word “anything” rather than “nothing.”

This bothered me, because it is not true.  Men who are not from God CAN do something, including miracles.  For example, in Exodus 7:10-11, Pharaoh’s magicians turned a wooden staff into a snake.

The context of this verse, the verse immediately before this in John, is the man who was blind from birth, who after having been healed by Jesus, told the Pharisees, “Since time began, reports have not been heard that someone opened the eyes of one born blind.”

So first of all, the man is saying Jesus would not have been able to do THAT PARTICULAR miracle if he were not from God.  This is clearly what he meant, but most conservative translations are too afraid to say this, even in italics.  However, I want to give credit to those translations who at least rendered this part correctly:

(Williams)  If this man had not come from God, He could not have done anything like this.”
(Phillips) If this man did not come from God, he couldn’t do such a thing!”
(GW)  If this man were not from God, he couldn’t do anything like that.”
(ISV)  If this man were not from God, he couldn’t do anything like that.”
(ERV) This man must be from God. If he were not from God, he could not do anything like this.”
(AMPC) If this Man were not from God, He would not be able to do anything like this.
(NOG) If this man were not from God, he couldn’t do anything like that.”
(NLV) If this Man were not from God, He would not be able to do anything like this.”
(NLT) If this man were not from God, he couldn’t have done it.”
(WE) If this man did not come from God, he could not do anything like this.’

Plus the translations of the Syriac Peshitta say:
“If this man were not of God, he could not do this thing.”

This leaving of the object of the verb unsaid is not uncommon in New Testament Greek, I can tell you.  It is proper to supply in your target language something like, “this” or “that,” or “it.”  And there is no need to put those in italics.

Now, those translations above to did supply an object for the verb, still did not render the word οὐδέν correctly.  The verse in Greek is: εἰ μὴ ἦν οὗτος παρὰ θεοῦ, οὐκ ἠδύνατο ποιεῖν οὐδέν.

Both the LSJ and BDAG lexicons say that the neuter form, οὐδέν, in the accusative is an adverb.  See BDAG p. 735, 2 (b) γ- “in no respect, in no way.  This is an “adverbial accusative,” see BDF § 160, where DeBrunner points out another place that John used an adverbial accusative, 8:25 – τὴν ἀρχήν, “at all.”  “Why am I speaking to you at all?”  For οὐδέν here see also LSJ:  III  1. neut. οὐδέν as Adv., not at all.

So, I have revised my translation of John 9:33 here.  I render the οὐδέν as an adverb.  The LSJ says “not at all,” the BDAG says “in no way.”  This healed blind man was very street colloquial in his speech.  I rendered this “Since time began, reports have not been heard that someone opened the eyes of one born blind.  If this man were not from God, no way could he have done this thing.” You can download my translation here.

John Ch 7 verse 39

John 7:39 πνευμα “the spirit was not yet present’ 𝔓⁶⁶c 𝔓⁷⁵ ℵ N* T vg-st arm eth geo¹ Or-grk,lat1/6 Ps-Dion Cyr3/9 Hesych Rebap SBL NA28 {A} ‖ πνευμα αγιον “the holy spirit was not yet present” 𝔓⁶⁶* E L Nc W 047 𝔐 eth Or-lat4/6 Marcellus Did-dub Chrys Cyr6/9 Thod Tyc TR RP TH ‖ πνευμα δεδομενον “the spirit was not yet given” it-a,aur,b,ff²,l,r1 vg-cl,ww syr-c,s,p Eus Vict-Rome Ambrosiaster Ambrose Gaud Jer Aug ‖ πνευμα αγιον δεδομενον “the holy spirit was not yet given” B it-e,q vg-mss (syr-h δεδομενον with *) syr-pal geo² Or-lat1/6 ‖ το πνευμα αγιον επ αυτοις “the holy spirit was not yet upon them” D* ‖ το πνευμα το αγιον επ αυτους”the holy spirit was not yet upon them” D¹it-f ‖ lac A C P Q 0233.

Codex Vaticanus reads: ··ουπω γαρ ην πνευμα αγιον δεδομενον οτι ις̅ ·· (umlauts)

Note: The Tyndale House going against an A reading of the UBS. The NIV, ESV, NET, CSB follow the πνευμα δεδομενον reading, and the KJV and NASB put “given” in italics. Whereas Tyndale reads “For the holy goost was not yet there because that Iesus was not yet glorifyed.”

It should also be noted that the versions such as Latin which read “not yet given” may have had a source text without δεδομενον but the translators supplied “given” just like many English translations do.

John 3:34 Translation Issues

John 3:34- 
ὃν γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ θεοῦ λαλεῖ, οὐ γὰρ ἐκ μέτρου δίδωσιν τὸ πνεῦμα.”
For he whom God has sent speaks the words of God; because to him God gives the Spirit without measure.”

 txt το πνευμα 𝔓³⁶ 𝔓⁶⁶ 𝔓⁷⁵ 𝔓⁸⁰ ℵ B¹ C* L Wsupp 083 it-b,e,fc,l Or-grk Cyr Vict-Pett½ SBL TH NA28 {B} ‖ ο θεος το πνευμα A C² D E 047 086 𝔐 it-a,aur,(d),f*,j,π,q,r¹ (itff² του θεου) vg syr-p,h cop arm eth geo Or-lat Did-dub Chrys Vict-Pett½ Greg-Elvvid Jer Aug TR RP ‖ ο πατηρ τω υιω αυτου syr-c,Diatess-Eph ‖ ο θεος ο πατηρ syrs ‖ omit B* ‖ lac Ν P Q T 0233

The Bible translator confronts two questions here: (1) whether to include ο θεος “God” or not; and (2), whether the verb δίδωσιν has an implied direct object, i.e., the person who is the subject being discussed, “he whom God has sent,” the Son.

On the first question, we cannot tell which text the translations are following, since they could have, like I did, even though following the Greek text not containing ο θεος, felt a need to clarify who was doing the giving, and added the word “God” anyway.  Note in the critical apparatus that indeed the Curetonian Syriac and the Diatessaron supplied τω υιω αυτου, “to his Son.”  That does not mean that their Greek exemplar contained those words.)

Following are he translations which we presume follow the UBS/NA text, which nevertheless supply the word “God” for clarification:

Weym   for God does not give the Spirit with limitations.”
CBW      for God continues to give Him the Spirit without measure.
AMP      for God gives the [gift of the] Spirit without measure [generously and boundlessly]!
CEB        because God gives the Spirit generously.
CJB         For God does not give him the Spirit in limited degree —
ERV        God gives him the Spirit fully.
EHV?     for God gives the Spirit without measure.
GW        After all, God gives him the Spirit without limit.
GNT       because God gives him the fullness of his Spirit.
ICB         . God gives him the Spirit fully.
ISV         because God does not give the Spirit in limited measure to him.
MOUNCE    for God does not give the Spirit in a limited measure.
NCB       for God gives him the Spirit without measure.
NCV       because God gives him the Spirit fully.
NIV        for God gives the Spirit without limit.
NLT        for God gives him the Spirit without limit.

On the 2nd question, whether a direct object is implied as to whom the Spirit is given without measure, the following translations supply “him” or some other stand-in for the Son:

CBW      for God continues to give Him the Spirit without measure.
Bishops       For God geueth not the spirite by measure vnto hym.
CJB         For God does not give him the Spirit in limited degree —
CEV        and he has been given the full power of God’s Spirit.
DLNT     For He does not give Him the Spirit from a measure.
ERV        God gives him the Spirit fully.
Genev  for God giveth him not the Spirit by measure.
GW        After all, God gives him the Spirit without limit.
GNT       because God gives him the fullness of his Spirit.
ICB         God gives him the Spirit fully.
ISV         because God does not give the Spirit in limited measure to him.
PHILLIPS    and there can be no measuring of the Spirit given to him!
KJV         for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
NCB       for God gives him the Spirit without measure.
NCV       because God gives him the Spirit fully.
NLT        for God gives him the Spirit without limit.

And those which do not supply an object:

Weym   for God does not give the Spirit with limitations.”
AMP      for God gives the [gift of the] Spirit without measure [generously and boundlessly]!
Tyndale     For God geveth not the sprete by measure.
ASV        for he giveth not the Spirit by measure.
CSB        since he gives the Spirit without measure.
CEB        because God gives the Spirit generously.
EHV        for God gives the Spirit without measure.
ESV        for he gives the Spirit without measure.
HCSB     since He gives the Spirit without measure.
MOUNCE    for God does not give the Spirit in a limited measure.
NAB       He does not ration his gift of the Spirit.
NASB95     for He gives the Spirit without measure.
NET        for he does not give the Spirit sparingly.
NIV        for God gives the Spirit without limit.
NKJV     for God does not give the Spirit by measure.
NRSV     for he gives the Spirit without measure.
RSV        for it is not by measure that he gives the Spirit;

Now a conclusion I make about which was the true early Greek text, is that it was the reading without ο θεος, as in the 3rd centruy 𝔓⁸⁰, and that the Byzantine text, coming out of Syria, had to acknowledge the prior popularity of all the Syriac language translations that were already popular, including the Diatessaron which was more popular than the individual Greek gospels.  The Syriac translators I say, supplied “God” or “the Father” for clarification just as many modern translations do even though their translations were based on a Greek source text that doid not include ο θεος.  Fortunately, the addition of ο θεος in the text does no harm, since that is who is doing the giving clearly from context.

1 Timothy 3 Verse 16

There is a famous Greek textual variant in 1 Timothy 3:16, where the “critical text,” SBL TH NA28 reads

 Ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί  “Who/he was manifested in the flesh.” (relative pronoun)

and the “majority text,” TR RP reads

θεὸϛ ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί  “God was manifested in the flesh.”

The difference originally in the most ancient manuscripts was much less clear in appearance.  Because there was a custom of contracting or abbreviating sacred names and concepts, by shortening them to fewer letters and putting a line over the whole group of letters, as can be seen in the correction in Codex Claromontanus (D- 06).  (These contractions were called “Nomina Sacra” or NS for short.)  Observe that the two-letter NS for God ΘΕΟC, which is just ΘC with a line over it, as seen in the correction of Codex Claromontanus, looks very similar to the relative pronoun OC in Codex Sinaiticus.  Note that Sinaiticus did not have an overline originally, and a late third hand made a correction toward the majority text.

What could have contributed to the problem is that scribes such as the one for Codex A used a caligraphy type pen tip, which was wide in a down stroke and very thin in a horizontal stroke. Thus the cross-bar in the capital letter Theta, Θ, could be very faint and therefore look like a capital Omicron, Ο.

Codex Claromontanus (D – 06) below:

Codex Sinaiticus (01) below:

Codex Alexandrinus (02) below:

Pericope of the Adulteress

In the Pericope of the Adulteress, John 8:6 has the most significant and interesting variant in the passage.  In the part where Jesus bends down and writes in the ground, about half of the majority text manuscripts add the words μη προσποιουμενος, see below.

εις την γην D Μ S U Γ Λ Ω 047 0233 2c 7 8 9 28 65c 115sup 118 700 892 1049 1071 1203 1216 1243 1514 2722 lat TR-Eras,Beza,Elz,Steph AN HF BG [NA28]

εις την γην       προσποιουμενος 1194

εις την γην μη προσποιουμενος E G H K 2* 18 27 35 65* 346 475 532 579 682 1212 1505 1519 2561-mg 2253 2907 geo-mss TR-Scriv RP

  lac  F P Q V Π

The John 8:6 passage it translated into English like this: “But Jesus bent down and was writing in the earth with his finger, taking no notice.”

But what was Jesus writing?  Messianic Rabbi Zev Porat (and Jerome before him) has a good answer to this.

Just prior to this in John 7:38, Jesus had declared himself to be the fountain of living waters.  And now that the Jewish leaders had turned away from that fountain, Jeremiah 17:13 was being fulfilled in two ways: they were put to shame, and their names were being written in the earth. Jeremiah 17:13 says, “Thou hope of Israel, Yahweh! All that forsake Thee shall be ashamed; they that turn away from Thee shall be written in the earth, because they have forsaken Yahweh, the fountain of living waters.”

This is in contrast to those who believe in the Son of God and are born again.  Their names are written in heaven, not in the earth which will be destroyed.  Luke 10:20; Hebrews 12:23; Phil 4:3; Rev. 13:8; 17:8;20:12,15; 21:27; Psalm 69:28.

The above material can be read in my translation of the gospel of John, in PDF and in Print, and in Kindle.

Angels, Messengers, Priests

We can make angels happy or offended.  Translations compared.

Luke 15:10
“In just the same way, I tell you, rejoicing breaks out among the angels of God over one sinner repenting.”

1 Corinthians 11:10
“for this cause ought the woman to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels.”

Ecclesiastes 5:6
“Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thy hands?”

Daniel 4:17
“The sentence is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones; to the intent that the living may know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever he will, and sets up over it the lowest of men.”

ECCLESIASTES 5:6

ASV
Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thy hands?

ISV
Never let your mouth cause you to sin and don’t proclaim in the presence of the angel, “My promise was a mistake,” for why should God be angry at your excuse and destroy what you’ve undertaken?

KJV
Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?

CSB
Do not let your mouth bring guilt on you, and do not say in the presence of the messenger that it was a mistake. Why should God be angry with your words and destroy the work of your hands?

CEB
Don’t let your mouth make a sinner of you, and don’t say to the messenger: “It was a mistake!” Otherwise, God may become angry at such talk and destroy what you have accomplished.

ESV
Let not your mouth lead you into sin, and do not say before the messenger that it was a mistake. Why should God be angry at your voice and destroy the work of your hands?

GW
Don’t let your mouth talk you into committing a sin. Don’t say in the presence of a ⌞temple⌟ messenger, “My promise was a mistake!” Why should God become angry at your excuse and destroy what you’ve accomplished?

HCSB
Do not let your mouth bring guilt on you, and do not say in the presence of the messenger that it was a mistake. Why should God be angry with your words and destroy the work of your hands?

NASB1995
Do not let your speech cause you to sin and do not say in the presence of the messenger of God that it was a mistake. Why should God be angry on account of your voice and destroy the work of your hands?

NIV
Do not let your mouth lead you into sin. And do not protest to the temple messenger, “My vow was a mistake.” Why should God be angry at what you say and destroy the work of your hands?

NLT
Don’t let your mouth make you sin. And don’t defend yourself by telling the Temple messenger that the promise you made was a mistake. That would make God angry, and he might wipe out everything you have achieved.

NRSVA
Do not let your mouth lead you into sin, and do not say before the messenger that it was a mistake; why should God be angry at your words, and destroy the work of your hands?

OJB
Suffer not thy mouth to lead thy basar into chet (sin); neither say thou before the Malach [of G-d], that it was a mistake. Wherefore should HaElohim be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?

RSV
Let not your mouth lead you into sin, and do not say before the messenger that it was a mistake; why should God be angry at your voice, and destroy the work of your hands?

NET
Do not let your mouth cause you to sin, and do not tell the priest, “It was a mistake!” Why make God angry at you so that he would destroy the work of your hands?

1 Corinthians 11:10

ASV
for this cause ought the woman to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels.

AMP
Therefore the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head, for the sake of the angels [so as not to offend them].

CSB
This is why a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

ESV
That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

HCSB
This is why a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

MOUNCE
For this reason a woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels.

NABRE
for this reason a woman should have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels.

NASB1995
Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

NET
For this reason a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

NKJV
For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

NRSVA
For this reason a woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

CJB
The reason a woman should show by veiling her head that she is under authority has to do with the angels.

CEV
And so, because of this, and also because of the angels, a woman ought to wear something on her head, as a sign of her authority.

ERV
So that is why a woman should have her head covered with something that shows she is under authority. Also, she should do this because of the angels.

GW
Therefore, a woman should wear something on her head to show she is under ⌞someone’s⌟ authority, out of respect for the angels.

GNT
On account of the angels, then, a woman should have a covering over her head to show that she is under her husband’s authority.

PHILLIPS
For this reason a woman ought to bear on her head an outward sign of man’s authority for all the angels to see.

KJV
For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

NLT
For this reason, and because the angels are watching, a woman should wear a covering on her head to show she is under authority.

RSV
That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels.

CEB
Because of this a woman should have authority over her head, because of the angels.

ISV
This is why a woman should have authority over her own head: because of the angels.

NIV
It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels.