NRSV Jas 2:1

[CatRandy]

I have a question for the scholars here.
James 2:1 in the NRSV is translated:
“My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?”

The NRSV is the only translation that I can find that translates this as a question. What little Greek I know is nowhere near good enough to see if there is something in the text itself that led them to translate it like this. Are there any scholars out there that can explain if this was due to translation issues? Literary reasons? Stylistic reasons?

I haven’t been able to find any articles that explain why they chose to translate it this way, but there had to be a reason that seemed solid to the committee at the time.

 

[HTacianas]

I have a question for the scholars here.
James 2:1 in the NRSV is translated:
“My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?”

The NRSV is the only translation that I can find that translates this as a question. What little Greek I know is nowhere near good enough to see if there is something in the text itself that led them to translate it like this. Are there any scholars out there that can explain if this was due to translation issues? Literary reasons? Stylistic reasons?

I haven’t been able to find any articles that explain why they chose to translate it this way, but there had to be a reason that seemed solid to the committee at the time.

No scholar here, but it seems to be stylistic. The "lesson" continues at 2:4-7 in the form of questions also. Asking questions was at the time, and still is, a style of teaching. The translators likely wanted consistency from 2:1 through 2:7.

After 2:7 the writer returns to direct statements to more or less answer his own questions.

 

[Ken Rank]

I have a question for the scholars here.
James 2:1 in the NRSV is translated:
“My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?”

The NRSV is the only translation that I can find that translates this as a question. What little Greek I know is nowhere near good enough to see if there is something in the text itself that led them to translate it like this. Are there any scholars out there that can explain if this was due to translation issues? Literary reasons? Stylistic reasons?

I haven’t been able to find any articles that explain why they chose to translate it this way, but there had to be a reason that seemed solid to the committee at the time.

This is a reasonable translation.

James 2:1 My brothers, do not with partiality have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. (LITV)

The next verses confirm this as it begins to give detail as to how we might respect one person over another. So verse one is a statement of fact, not a question.

 

[paul1149]

No scholar here, but I would say that according to the TR, it is stylistic. The negation is there (do not), the "hold" is there (exete) and critically, it is in the imperative mood. So a straightforward "do not hold" seems accurate.

The other questions in this passage, in vss. 4, 5, and 7, all also contain the negation, but the verb is in simple indicative mood, so the sense of the verse demands a rhetorical question.

The preponderance of translations seem to see it this way. And several of the exceptions are related to each other: jas 2.1 - Bible Gateway

 

[CatRandy]

Thanks for the info. I like the NRSV, but couldn’t understand their position on this one.