Matthew 1:1

[Timothew]

Matthew 10:41

ο δεχομενος προφητην εις ονομα προφητου μισθον προφητου ληψεται και ο δεχομενος δικαιον εις ονομα δικαιου μισθον δικαιου ληψεται

The receives (a) prophet in name prophet wage prophet will-receive and the receives (a) just-person in name (of the) just-person wage (of the) just-person will-receive

The one who receives a prophet in the name of the prophet will receive the prophet's wage and the one who receives a just person in the name of the just person will receive the just person's wage.

 

[he-man]

Mat 10:40 ο δεχομενος υμας εμε δεχεται και ο εμε δεχομενος δεχεται τον αποστειλαντα με
Mat 10:40 He that receives you receives me, and he that receives me receives the One that sent me.

Matthew 10:41

ο δεχομενος προφητην εις ονομα προφητου μισθον προφητου ληψεται και ο δεχομενος δικαιον εις ονομα δικαιου μισθον δικαιου ληψεται

The receives (a) prophet in name prophet wage prophet will-receive and the receives (a) just-person in name (of the) just-person wage (of the) just-person will-receive

The one who receives a prophet in the name of the prophet will receive the prophet's wage and the one who receives a just person in the name of the just person will receive the just person's wage.

Mat 10:41 ο δεχομενος προφητην εις ονομα προφητου μισθον προφητου λημψεται και ο δεχομενος δικαιον εις ονομα δικαιου μισθον δικαιου λημψεται

Mat 10:41 He that receives a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's just recompense; and he that receives the just man in the name of the just man shall receive the just man's just recompense.

 

[Timothew]

Matthew 10:42

και ος εαν ποτιση ενα των μικρων τουτων ποτηριον ψυχρου μονον εις ονομα μαθητου αμην λεγω υμιν ου μη απολεση τον μισθον αυτου

and whoever if he-would-give-water-to one the little-ones these cup cold alone in name disciple amen I-tell you not not lose the wage his

I tell you most solumnly that whoever would give a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple will definitely not lose his wage.

 

[he-man]

Matthew 10:42

και ος εαν ποτιση ενα των μικρων τουτων ποτηριον ψυχρου μονον εις ονομα μαθητου αμην λεγω υμιν ου μη απολεση τον μισθον αυτου

and whoever if he-would-give-water-to one the little-ones these cup cold alone in name disciple amen I-tell you not not lose the wage his

I tell you most solumnly that whoever would give a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple will definitely not lose his wage.

Mat 10:42 και ος αν ποτιση ενα των μικρων τουτων ποτηριον ψυχρου μονον εις ονομα μαθητου αμην λεγω υμιν ου μη απολεση τον μισθον αυτου

Mat 10:42 And whoever should give a single cup of cool water to one of the least of these in the name of a disciple, Indeed, I tell you not one* will lose his just recompense.”
*a double negative where English idioms use only one so translate it as not one

 

[Timothew]

The double negative in greek seems to be an intensifier, so I put an english intensifier in, "definitely". I like how you put "a single cup", I wasn't sure how to get this in, but you did it nicely. I really like your translations. Not every time, but most of the time. Almost all of the time.

 

[Radagast]

The double negative in greek seems to be an intensifier, so I put an english intensifier in, "definitely".

Spot on!

The double negative οὐ μὴ is indeed an intensified negative -- specifically, with the aorist subjunctive verb ἀπολέσῃ, this forms an emphatic negative future tense, stronger than the ordinary future tense with οὐ (at least, that's the majority view; a few people argue that it's just a simple negative).

Most translations render the μόνον ("only a cup") with "even a cup." The 1984 NIV, for example: And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward. I think any minimising phrase would work, e.g. he-man's "a single cup."

The noun μισθὸν can mean "wage" or "reward" -- I think the later is more appropriate here.

And, since the verb ἀπολέσῃ is the aorist subjunctive of ἀπόλλυμι, which we discussed before, you might wish to intensify the "lose." Perhaps something like "will certainly not miss out on his reward."

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Matthew 10:42

και ος εαν ποτιση ενα των μικρων τουτων ποτηριον ψυχρου μονον εις ονομα μαθητου αμην λεγω υμιν ου μη απολεση τον μισθον αυτου

and whoever if he-would-give-water-to one the little-ones these cup cold alone in name disciple amen I-tell you not not lose the wage his

I tell you most solumnly that whoever would give a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple will definitely not lose his wage.

The double negative in greek seems to be an intensifier, so I put an english intensifier in, "definitely". I like how you put "a single cup", I wasn't sure how to get this in, but you did it nicely. I really like your translations. Not every time, but most of the time. Almost all of the time.

Very interesting.
I used the greek interlinear at this bible site to show what it looks like word for word in the greek.

Search for 'Genesis 1:1' in the version

Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT) Matthew 10:42 kai <2532> {AND} oV <3739> {WHO} ean <1437> {SO EVER} potish <4222> (5661) {SHOULD BE GIVING DRINK TO} ena <1520> {ONE} twn <3588> {OF THE} mikrwn <3398> {LITTLE ONES} toutwn <5130> {OF THESE} pothrion <4221> {A DRINK CUP} yucrou <5593> {OF COOL [WATER]} monon <3440> {ONLY} eiV <1519> {INTO} onoma <3686> {NAME} maqhtou <3101> {OF A DISCIPLE,} amhn <281>
{AMEN} legw <3004> (5719) {I AM SAYING} umin <5213> {TO YE} ou <3756> {NOT} mh <3361> {NO} apolesh <622> (5661) {SHOULD BE LOSING} ton <3588> {THE} misqon <3408> {WAGE} autou <846> {OF HIM.}

Spot on!

The double negative &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; is indeed an intensified negative -- specifically, with the aorist subjunctive verb &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#8131;, this forms an emphatic negative future tense, stronger than the ordinary future tense with &#959;&#8016; (at least, that's the majority view; a few people argue that it's just a simple negative).

Most translations render the &#956;&#972;&#957;&#959;&#957; ("only a cup") with "even a cup." The 1984 NIV, for example: And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward.

I think any minimising phrase would work, e.g. he-man's "a single cup."

The noun &#956;&#953;&#963;&#952;&#8056;&#957; can mean "wage" or "reward" -- I think the later is more appropriate here.

And, since the verb &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#8131; is a form of &#7936;&#960;&#972;&#955;&#955;&#965;&#956;&#953;, which we discussed before, you might wish to intensify the "lose." Perhaps something like "will certainly not miss out on his reward."

 

[Radagast]

I used the greek interlinear at this bible site to show what it looks like word for word in the greek.

That can be helpful, but it's hard to interpret the interlinear properly without some knowledge of how Greek works -- such as the double negative being emphatic.

 

[Timothew]

Spot on!

The double negative &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; is indeed an intensified negative -- specifically, with the aorist subjunctive verb &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#8131;, this forms an emphatic negative future tense, stronger than the ordinary future tense with &#959;&#8016; (at least, that's the majority view; a few people argue that it's just a simple negative).

Most translations render the &#956;&#972;&#957;&#959;&#957; ("only a cup") with "even a cup." The 1984 NIV, for example: And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward. I think any minimising phrase would work, e.g. he-man's "a single cup."

The noun &#956;&#953;&#963;&#952;&#8056;&#957; can mean "wage" or "reward" -- I think the later is more appropriate here.

And, since the verb &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#8131; is the aorist subjunctive of &#7936;&#960;&#972;&#955;&#955;&#965;&#956;&#953;, which we discussed before, you might wish to intensify the "lose." Perhaps something like "will certainly not miss out on his reward."

Yes, I was torn between "lose" and "destroy", but being unable to travel both roads and remain one man, I chose "lose" this time. The same with "wage" and "reward". "will certainly not miss out on his reward" is good, I think. Will not forfeit his reward?

 

[Timothew]

That can be helpful, but it's hard to interpret the interlinear properly without some knowledge of how Greek works -- such as the double negative being emphatic.

That's true, I have a lot of the greek vocabulary, which interlinears also give you. But the greek grammar and word usage customs can trip me up.

 

[Timothew]

Very interesting.
I used the greek interlinear at this bible site to show what it looks like word for word in the greek.

Search for 'Genesis 1:1' in the version

Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT) Matthew 10:42 kai <2532> {AND} oV <3739> {WHO} ean <1437> {SO EVER} potish <4222> (5661) {SHOULD BE GIVING DRINK TO} ena <1520> {ONE} twn <3588> {OF THE} mikrwn <3398> {LITTLE ONES} toutwn <5130> {OF THESE} pothrion <4221> {A DRINK CUP} yucrou <5593> {OF COOL [WATER]} monon <3440> {ONLY} eiV <1519> {INTO} onoma <3686> {NAME} maqhtou <3101> {OF A DISCIPLE,} amhn <281>
{AMEN} legw <3004> (5719) {I AM SAYING} umin <5213> {TO YE} ou <3756> {NOT} mh <3361> {NO} apolesh <622> (5661) {SHOULD BE LOSING} ton <3588> {THE} misqon <3408> {WAGE} autou <846> {OF HIM.}

Hi LLOJ, I'm glad to see you commenting here. I like your threads.

 

[Radagast]

Yes, I was torn between "lose" and "destroy", but being unable to travel both roads and remain one man, I chose "lose" this time. The same with "wage" and "reward". "will certainly not miss out on his reward" is good, I think. Will not forfeit his reward?

I don't like "forfeit," because it has inappropriate implications. In the same way I thought of, but rejected "will certainly not be deprived of his reward."

One could say "will certainly not go unrewarded," but that starts to lose something.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus I used the greek interlinear at this bible site to show what it looks like word for word in the greek.

That can be helpful, but it's hard to interpret the interlinear properly without some knowledge of how Greek works -- such as the double negative being emphatic.

Generally the emphatic in greek is used with an "!" mark. I will search for some examples once I get some time.
FWIW, this interlinear does show when hebrew/greek words are used in the emphatic

Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software

.....

 

[Radagast]

Generally the emphatic in greek is used with an "!" mark. I will search for some examples once I get some time.
FWIW, this interlinear does show when hebrew/greek words are used in the emphatic

That may help, but understanding Greel cases and tenses is important too.

The combination &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#8131;, being a 3rd person singular emphatic future negative, probably should be in the interlinear as HE WILL CERTAINLY NOT LOSE.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That may help, but understanding Greel cases and tenses is important too.

The combination &#959;&#8016; &#956;&#8052; &#7936;&#960;&#959;&#955;&#941;&#963;&#8131;, being a 3rd person singular emphatic future negative, probably should be in the interlinear as HE WILL CERTAINLY NOT LOSE.

The greek word used is a combination of 2 greek words.
The prefix #575 and root word #575. It could also signify not be destroyed according to the lexicon meaning of the root word. Thoughts?

ou <3756> {NOT} mh <3361> {NO} apolesh <622> (5661) {SHOULD BE LOSING}

ap-olesh <622> (5661) {SHOULD BE LOSING}

vs aortist active 3 singular

622. apollumi ap-ol'-loo-mee from 575 and the base of 3639; to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively:--destroy, die, lose, mar, perish.
575. apo apo' a primary particle; "off," i.e. away (from something near), in various senses (of place, time, or relation; literal or figurative):--(
3639. olethros ol'-eth-ros from a primary ollumi (to destroy; a prolonged form); ruin, i.e. death, punishment:--destruction.

 

[he-man]

I don't like "forfeit," because it has inappropriate implications. In the same way I thought of, but rejected "will certainly not be deprived of his reward."One could say "will certainly not go unrewarded," but that starts to lose something.

It is annoying to me that anyone would translate it as "reward". WE do our homage to Christ out of our veneration to him and not for any reward. None is good enough to be given the high honor of a reward which we cannot earn. The just recompense which we might receive is a gift and NOT a reward for the deeds which we should be carrying out anyway.

How can you be humble and serve if all you want is a reward. I would rather die than to think of my efforts as deserving of a wage. I sin and repent but that is no excuse for compensation, it is only through the gift of God, that you may be allowed to enter His Kingdom.

As a matter of fact, when I thought about entering the ministry, that was the first question that I asked myself, How could I ever be good enough to minister/" The answer, of course is, No one is good enough, it is only by the Grace of God freely given to us as a guerdon, and not a wage or a reward that we could ever earn.
guerdon ME: from OFr., from med. L. widerdonum, alt. (by assoc. with L. donum 'gift')© Oxford University Press, 2004

Mat 10:42 And whoever should give a single cup of cool water to one of the least of these in the name of a disciple, Indeed, I tell you not one* will lose his just recompense.&#8221;

 

[Timothew]

What do you guys think of this translation?
&#952;&#945;&#961;&#961;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#948;&#8050; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#959;&#954;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#956;&#8118;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#954;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#963;&#974;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#957;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#957;.
We are of good courage and prefer rather to be away from home from the body and to be at home with the Lord.

Is this way off? Mockworthy in some way?

 

[he-man]

What do you guys think of this translation?
&#952;&#945;&#961;&#961;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#948;&#8050; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#959;&#954;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#956;&#8118;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#954;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#963;&#974;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#957;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#957;.
We are of good courage and prefer rather to be away from home from the body and to be at home with the Lord.

Is this way off? Mockworthy in some way?

2Co 5:8 &#952;&#945;&#961;&#961;&#959;&#965;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#948;&#949; &#954;&#945;&#953; &#949;&#965;&#948;&#959;&#954;&#959;&#965;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#956;&#945;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#957; &#949;&#954;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#949;&#954; &#964;&#959;&#965; &#963;&#969;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#953; &#949;&#957;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#960;&#961;&#959;&#962; &#964;&#959;&#957; &#954;&#965;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#957;

2Co 5:8 But we are bold, and &#921; think well rather to be out of the country and from the body to be native with regard to the Lord.


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]&#949;&#957;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#959;&#965;&#957;&#964;&#949;&#962; &#949;&#957;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#953; be endemic adj. native, local, indigenous[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Radagast]

The greek word used is a combination of 2 greek words.

575. apo apo' a primary particle; "off," i.e. away (from something near), in various senses (of place, time, or relation; literal or figurative):--(
3639. olethros ol'-eth-ros from a primary ollumi (to destroy; a prolonged form); ruin, i.e. death, punishment:--destruction.

It's not a combination of two words, it's a compound verb (there is a difference). The two parts are apo and ollumi (not what you said -- see LSJ) but ollumi does not occur on its own in the NT. Also apo in this context acts only as an intensifier.

 

[Radagast]

What do you guys think of this translation?
&#952;&#945;&#961;&#961;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#948;&#8050; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#959;&#954;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957; &#956;&#8118;&#955;&#955;&#959;&#957; &#7952;&#954;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#7952;&#954; &#964;&#959;&#8166; &#963;&#974;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#962; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#7952;&#957;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; &#960;&#961;&#8056;&#962; &#964;&#8056;&#957; &#954;&#973;&#961;&#953;&#959;&#957;.
We are of good courage and prefer rather to be away from home from the body and to be at home with the Lord.

Is this way off? Mockworthy in some way?

Extremely good. The ESV has: Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord.

The word &#948;&#8050; (normally "but") links the sentence to the previous one, and some kind of linking word is probably needed in English too.

I like your "prefer" for &#949;&#8016;&#948;&#959;&#954;&#959;&#8166;&#956;&#949;&#957;.

I also really like how you're capturing the &#7952;&#954;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; versus &#7952;&#957;&#948;&#951;&#956;&#8134;&#963;&#945;&#953; wordplay, but "away from home from the body" is a little clumsy in English. Perhaps "away from our bodily homes" would read better.