|
|
Post by brianwagner on Dec 29, 2014 15:53:06 GMT -6
Why do all major translations of Romans 10:10 translate the passive verbs in active voice? After all the research I have done so far, I am inclined to think this weak translation is a left over of the influence from the Latin Vulgate's translation.
Would it not be more literal and Christ-honoring to see the Lord Jesus, or the facts about Him, from verse 9 as the subject of the passive verbs in verse 10?
Here’s my word for word translation - “for by the heart He (the Lord Jesus) is being trusted for righteousness, and by the mouth He (the Lord Jesus) is being confessed for salvation.”
The idea that is usually proposed by Greek grammarians that I have researched is that these verbs should be understood in an impersonal sense. They think the emphasis becomes what man does generally for salvation, that he believes and that he confesses. But I think Paul was pointing to the Lord Jesus specifically, that He is being trusted, He is being confessed, or at least pointing to the specific facts about Jesus mentioned in 10:9, that God raised Jesus from the dead is being believed, that Jesus is Lord is being confessed.
I just don’t understand why only here this verb – pisteuo, is translated as if it was active in voice. The passive voice is used here. In the other seven instances, listed below, of passive usage in the NT for this verb, the translation is always indicating the passive sense. I am wondering if the Latin Vulgate translation has influenced the early English translations and that the modern English translations have followed suit.
the word believe – the only other instances of passive voice in NT other than Rom 10:10 –
Notice that the subject in six instances is the specific person(s) of the context. I give my own translation of the relevant phrase in each, but modern translations agree in these passages and they keep the personal subject of these passive verbs, which they do not only in Rom. 10:10.
1) Rom 3:2 γὰρ ὅτι ἐπιστεύθησαντὰ λόγια for that they were trusted (with) the messages
2) 1Co 9:17 οἰκονομίαν πεπίστευμαι I have been trusted (with) an administration
3) Gal 2:7 ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον seeing that I had been trusted (with) the gospel
4) 2Thess 1:10 πιστεύσασιν ὅτι ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον by the ones who trusted because the testimony was trusted
5) 1Tim 1:11 ὃ ἐπιστεύθην ἐγώ (with) which I was trusted
6) 1Tim 3:16 ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ he was trusted in the world
7) Titus 1:3 ὃ ἐπιστεύθην ἐγὼ (with) which I was trusted
the word confess – instances of passive – only Rom 10:10
The context of Rom 10:10 has the overall subject of Christ from verse 4 on, so it would be more natural to make Him the subject of the passive verbs in 10:10, much like I believe He should also be the subject of the passive verb in 1Pet 4:6 since He is the overall subject of the context started back in 1Pet. 3:18. This is similar also to how the “body” is the main subject of the context in 1Cor 15:35f and would be naturally understood as the subject of the passives in 15:42-44.
The Lord Jesus is certainly the main point of 10:9 and 10:11. I just think that our modern translations are missing that He is clearly the main point of 10:10, not just an inference that must be added to that verse from the context. Seeing this difference, along with the force of the present tense of these verbs, may also help to keep us from seeing 10:10 as a confessional prescription for salvation, and help return us to seeing in this verse the relational description of true salvation. It is not mere assent to a sinners prayer that saves nor a priest's sacramental confession over a christened infant or confessing layperson. But Jesus is being trusted by the personal active faith commitment of an individual heart, resulting in righteousness, and from that new heart Jesus is being confessed out of the believer's mouth, resulting in, not only salvation from his old Christ-rejecting testimony of life, but the salvation of others led to Jesus by that confession before men.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Leafe on Jan 5, 2015 22:44:25 GMT -6
Hey Brian, While I agree many translations tend to the older majority MSS, it would seem that the best Greek witnesses we have of these passages in Romans present πιστεύεται as a 3rd person present passive indicative. As such, in verse 10 the literal translation of πιστεύεται εἰς δικαιοσύνην would be "believes to righteousness". The subject is in the passive voice, so that the subject is involved in the action of the verb. You are suggesting Jesus is the subject, but I grabbed a diagram of vv. 9-10 (attached below) to trace the subject and it seems that it ties back to σου in v. 8. Thus, "the one who believes" in v. 10 is the one the word is near in both their mouth and heart. The word is the gospel Paul is preaching -- the gospel that one that believes in his/her heart results in righteousness, the gospel that one confesses with his/her mouth that results in salvation. The literal word-for-word translation seems to be, "for by heart one believes to righteousness, by mouth one confesses to salvation." I do note your examples of the use of πιστεύω. But it I don't see πιστεύω used in a propositional sense (i.e., mental assent) when it is used soteriologically. Rather, in a soteriological context the seat of belief is not the mind, but the heart -- the source of real spiritual understanding in Scriptures. So I see your word-for-word translation more as a theological construct of what Paul's overall theme here is regarding the rejection of the gospel by Israel. I agree totally with your conclusion, that Romans 10:9–10 does not mean a person must make a public confession to others in order to be saved. Instead Paul was saying that people need to confess in prayer to God that Jesus is Lord in the sense of calling “on the name of the Lord” (v. 13). We must believe that God raised Jesus from the dead, resulting in imputed righteousness (vv. 9b–10a). Our initial faith in Christ results in righteousness as our covenant standing with God. Then, from the stance of covenant loyalty, we confess Christ—a confession which has as its end point eschatological salvation. Rom 10_9-10_diagram.pdf (32.49 KB) In His Grip, Scott Leafe |
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Jan 6, 2015 10:54:19 GMT -6
Thanks Scott for your input. We are saying the same thing at times, especially when you pointed to the gospel, or to the word "word", from verse 8 as being the subject of these passive verbs. But, if I may, I must disagree with your "literal word-for-word translation", for you replace the idea of the subject being the gospel, or the word, with the idea that the subject is a person who does the believing and confessing. You then translate those passives as actives, as all English translations have done. And therein lies the problem, such a change from passive to active brings a de-emphasis of what should be believed and brings an unhelpful emphasis on the person who is doing the believing.
A literal word-for-word translation was given in my post above, correctly translating the passives as passives which must have a "being" verb included with the action of the main verb to show that the subject is receiving that action, not doing that action. (Granted, these verbs could be seen as middle voice in form also, both receiving and doing the action, but I have not read a Greek grammarian that takes them as in the middle voice). So let me use your possible subjects, which I would not dispute as possible, and give again a literal translation -
“for by the heart it (the Word or the Gospel) is being trusted for righteousness, and by the mouth it (the Word or the Gospel) is being confessed for salvation.”
And since the Word and the Gospel are synonymous with the Person and Work of Jesus Christ, I believe the Lord Jesus could just as plausibly be the subject of these passive verbs. And that would be the emphasis that Paul is trying to make. Your last paragraph re-emphasizes your view that this verse emphasizes once-and-done actions (prayer and faith) that a man must do to experience a once-and-done salvation (imputation). I really think that ignores the emphasis brought from the passive voice discussed above, but it also ignores the emphasis brought by the present tense. Believing and confessing Jesus are continual actions in a truly regenerated person. I see that as Paul's teaching here... not any once-and-done formula for getting salvation.
Please take my evaluation of what you have written in a spirit of brotherly love! I hope it will be of some help.
Thank you for the diagrammed sentences! Well done!
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Leafe on Jan 6, 2015 14:30:27 GMT -6
Iron does sharpen iron. As you have observed, we are close, but it seems that theologically we may not be landing in entirely the same place at the end (or maybe I am just misconstruing your emphasis and we are actually in agreement). I did find and interesting Q&A regarding the syntax of v. 10. You might find it so as well. Explains the possiblity of the middle voice, as you have also noted, but also concludes no damage is done to Paul's emphasis in the context whether passive or middle (translate active). Notwithstanding the syntactical ambiguities introduced in the various English translations, I would tend to agree with Constable on Paul's emphasis here. "Belief in Jesus Christ in one's heart results in acceptance by God (i.e., imputed righteousness, justification, and positional sanctification). Testimony to one's belief in Jesus Christ normally follows and normally is verbal. Paul was describing the normal consequence of belief.... the confession is to God. One's confession that Jesus is Lord would be to God initially (i.e., expressing trust in Christ to the Father), but most interpreters have believed that the confession in view goes beyond God and includes other people as well. This seems to be a reasonable conclusion since the confession is to be made with the mouth." Truly believing in one's heart, then, is truly once-and-done, as you have characterized my thoughts. Confessing Jesus should be a continual action in a truly regenerated person as a reflection of their on-going sanctification. However, while confession is a natural, anticipated, and certainly expected outpouring of imputed righteousness, justification, and positional sanctification, I would never presume to suggest that not continually confessing Jesus to others in such a way as to suggest a measurement could be made is in someway a sign that a person is not truly saved. That, in the end, is between them and the Lord. Thank you for the feedback and I am enjoying the dialogue. In His Grip, Scott |
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Jan 7, 2015 12:12:30 GMT -6
I am enjoying the dialog also, Scott! And perhaps I am making a mountain out of a mole hill! I agree with your theological perspective of salvation. I do believe salvation begins when personal faith is expressed in Christ and the Father sees that expression of faith and grants salvation (regeneration, imputation, etc). I just do not think that is what Paul is trying to teach here in verse 10. That is probably what he means in verse 9 though, which the Aorist subjunctives in that verse would help indicate. But in verse 10 and then 11, I think Paul is making sure that his readers do not fixate on what they do, but what should result, that is, a continuous testimony of believing and confessing the person and work of Christ.
Having helped in a church planting work in Ireland, among Roman Catholics, I have seen how RC sacramental understanding puts the emphasis on what is said or what is done by the individual (or by the priest for the individual) to gain salvation, and I think some of that has resulted from the Vulgate's poor translation of 10:10. That emphasis continues in our circles (and translations) in the form of people trusting the "sinners prayer" instead of trusting only Jesus, a trust that begins before any a prayer (cf. Acts 10, Cornelius' conversion), and will continue in the heart and from the lips.
I agree that confessions may sometimes be hard for others to accurately recognize what truly is in the heart, but I believe they must be measured against clear statements in God's Word, those that a true believer would never deny, as witnessed in the teaching of 1John and elsewhere.
I hope my words do not sound combative, but encouraging instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Leafe on Jan 8, 2015 23:38:48 GMT -6
Hmmm, well I may have introduced another theological dilemma here into our discussion regarding the ordo salutis. It would appear that from my responses you are hearing me say/imply that faith precedes regeneration. I would not intentionally expound such so my apologies if I have been ambiguous in my dialogue. Rather, salvation begins when by grace a person's eyes are opened to reception of the gospel (effectual calling and regeneration) by the Father, after which personal faith is expressed in Christ, repentance is made, and the Father sees that expression of faith and grants salvation by means of justification, God's imputation of Christ's righteousness. Also, I am not a grammarian, so my simplistic responses to the syntax issues should be viewed from that perspective. Though I must say I have spent a reasonable amount of time in the past few days since we began this discussion and I cannot find any dispute in commentaries, journals, or Greek grammar texts/tools regarding the prevailing English translation of vv. 9-11. I often consult the New English Translation (NET) syntactical notes on trouble passages as I have over the years associated with Dan Wallace who was one of the editors of the NT translation. The NET generally shows most areas where there is any disagreement on voice, tense, aspect, etc. and explains why the Greek text was translated that way they did. Here, there is no syntactical issue addressed regarding the English translation(s). I particularly like Wallace's conclusions in a great article he wrote some years ago entitled, " Why So Many Versions." Wallace writes, " Except for the NKJV, virtually all modern translations are following the most ancient MSS. So, the textual basis (though different in a few particulars) is largely the same. And even here, no cardinal doctrine is at stake in any of these textual differences. God has preserved his word in such a way that a person could get saved reading the KJV, Tyndale, Bishops’, RSV, NIV, REB or NET." On that note, I would not characterize this discussion as making a "mountain out of a mole hill"; rather, perhaps "splitting hairs" would be a more appropriate analogy. Notwithstanding, I am in agreement that in the context of addressing Israel's rejection, Paul is stressing not "what they do, but what should [and should have] result[ed]." I too hope my words do not sound combative. Seldom outside of educational circles do we get an opportunity to sharpen our skills and understanding of God's Word in a manner such as this. Blessings to you Brother, Scott |
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Jan 9, 2015 17:58:46 GMT -6
Hahaha! It probably is true, Scott, that salvation can not be discussed without leading into the subject of Calvinism. You'll have to get that one on the ordo salutis, or if regeneration proceeds personal faith, started in another section of this forum. In fact, I think Calvinism should probably have a section all on its own for various related discussions. I'll keep my powder dry until then! :-)
I have been working on this verse, Rom. 10:10, for about a year now, off and on. I had personally contacted Wallace, (with the same question as stated in the first post above) and he kindly replied - "Brian, you make an excellent point. Off-hand, I think you may be right." But my guess is that was just a reaction without any investigation. I have also looked at other ancient versions to determine how they translated these passive verbs, and I checked what the Grammars by Robertson, Moule, and Blass had to say. And I have been approaching other Greek scholars and getting replies from some with varying results. I thought posting it here in this forum may help further, and it has! Thanks for your input.
|
|
|
|
Post by CowboysDad on Jan 10, 2015 0:05:33 GMT -6
I appreciate the spirit of the discussion thus far. This is precisely the tenor that should mark any discussion of Scripture between brothers in Christ. Like Scott I make no claims to being a Greek grammarian, particularly when my strength is Hebrew, but I'm not uncomfortable with the prevailing modern translations nor am I uncomfortable with the translation that you are presenting, Brian: “For by the heart He (the Lord Jesus) is being trusted for righteousness, and by the mouth He (the Lord Jesus) is being confessed for salvation.” Certainly there is no dispute that this translation communicates truth and that it is a reasonable option (arguably the most common option) for the passive voice. But to amplify the translation we could certainly write as well, “For by the heart He (the Lord Jesus) is being trusted for righteousness [by the one who trusts], and by the mouth He (the Lord Jesus) is being confessed for salvation [by the one who confesses],” which is precisely what v. 9 says, "if YOU confess ... and believe." Likewise, we could amplify the passage to read, "For with the heart one believes [in what Jesus did] unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made [of who Jesus is] unto salvation," which is precisely what v. 9 says, "confess ... the LORD JESUS and believe ... that GOD HAS RAISED HIM." I don't see any appreciable difference in either attempt at translation. My grammar does speak about the "impersonal means" of the passive voice, but it wouldn't seem to fit the verse here in question because the "impersonal means" is generally marked by the use of en or ek, neither of which are present here, but perhaps the modern translators not unlike me see no tension here and so choose what for me (and perhaps for them) is simply a smoother translation--"one believes" rather than "he is being trusted."
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Leafe on Jan 10, 2015 11:05:38 GMT -6
Chuckle....Brian, yes, I agree on your "discussion of salvation" suggestion. Was not my intent to steer the discussion toward a treatise on the ordo salutis. I just wanted to clarify my statements or any inference to them, as this is a public arena of sorts. I would suggest that on this Romans 10 discussion those participating, thus far, land in nearly the same place when accounting for what Paul is emphasizing. Thus, I stand sharpened, which is the goal. I, and others close to me, have tried to pin down grammarians on other syntactical issues in the past, as you have also experienced, and it is often met with a similar response..."you could be right!" So from an non-grammarian I will leave you with this, "you could be right!"  I'd appreciate if they would keep this thread alive so you can update us as your research continues. As a humble servant I have many nicks that still need sharpening, and you have helped remove some in this discussion. Blessings Brother, Scott |
|
|
|
Post by CowboysDad on Jan 10, 2015 13:04:14 GMT -6
Well, that's what I particularly like about this forum, namely, that you can come back again at any time and build on previous discussions with a permanent record of everything that's been said thus far. Sometimes I get in discussions with friends via e-mail, but then I have to wade back through all my e-mails to re-read them (if I've kept them at all) and sometimes the material is cluttered with other unrelated personal information. I love this format!
- Daniel
|
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Nov 27, 2015 19:01:11 GMT -6
I thought I would add some more to this dialog, since I am republishing these discussions on my academia.edu page and hope it might attract more to our site and these discussions. Then it would only be a matter of updating an newer edition at the other site from time to time!
The Peshitta translation (per Lamsa) appears to read – “For the heart which believes in him shall be declared righteous and the mouth which confesses him shall live.” I would love someone who can actually read Syriac to confirm this. And the Sahadic Coptic translation appears to read – “For with the heart they believe him unto righteous but with their mouth they confess him unto salvation.” Again, if someone who can read Coptic script could confirm this as a literal rendering, that would be great! Both the Syriac and the Coptic translations of this verse seem to have understood that Jesus is not only inferred but clearly seen as the understood subject of the passive verbs.
Commentator John Murray said - "But the subjects can be taken over from the preceding verse and so the resurrection would be the subject of "is believed" and the lordship of Christ of "is confessed". This would particularize the tenets believed and confessed as in verse 9" (56).
|
|
Julie Pace from San Antonio
Guest
|
Post by Julie Pace from San Antonio on Jul 25, 2016 7:14:42 GMT -6
Romans 10:10
For the heart is persuaded into righteousness (persuaded by God through the word of faith)
and the mouth is confessed into salvation (the mouth is made to confess by the heart's persuasion.
So God through the word persuades the heart and the persuaded heart moves the mouth to speak.
Notice righteousness comes before salvation. Righteousness is REQUIRED for salvation.
|
|
Julie Pace from San Antonio
Guest
|
Post by Julie Pace from San Antonio on Jul 25, 2016 9:40:41 GMT -6
We have two passive verbs. Therefore the action on the heart and mouth is passive - initiated by someone or something else. Try this:
For the heart is "persuaded" into righteousness (persuaded by God through the Word of faith)
and the mouth is "confessed" into salvation (the mouth confesses, not under its own power, but it is "forced" into confession by the heart, because the heart has been persuaded.
So I believe this is the proper translation of this verse.
On a slightly different topic, notice in verse 1 of this chapter that Paul's desire is that Israel be saved. Then he immediately begins to speak about the righteousness of Israel. Why? He wants Israel to be saved, but Israel cannot be saved because they are not righteous. They go about trying to get their own righteousness through the law, but of course they cannot get it through the law. But they refuse to get the righteousness obtained through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore they cannot obtain righteousness either way - by law or by grace. Therefore they are not saved.
At this point Paul moves into explaining how to obtain salvation. He attributes salvation to God. God, through the word, persuades the heart of a person about Christ and they become righteous. Then the persuaded heart moves the mouth to speak to confess Jesus Christ. This is their salvation.
Notice righteousness comes before salvation. Righteousness is REQUIRED for salvation.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianwagner on Jul 25, 2016 19:01:53 GMT -6
Hi Julie! Welcome to this site and our conversation on this important verse! The two verbs are passive. They are also present tense, indicating continuing action. They are also third person singular in form, which points to the subject being a he, she, or it found in the nominative case in the sentence somewhere. Since there are no subject nouns in this sentence for either of these verbs, the he, she, or it needs to be supplied in the translation. "He, she or it is being believed in or with the heart unto righteousness, and he, she or it is being confessed in or with the mouth unto salvation." The words "heart" and "mouth" are dative in form, and therefore they cannot be the subjects of their respective verbs. They are either datives of means "with" or datives of sphere "in".
You made very good observations that Paul wanted Israel to be saved, and that their zeal for God was misplaced, since they were trusting in their own righteousness through the law and not in God's righteousness being offered to those who trust in Jesus. I would say that righteousness does not come before salvation, but that righteousness is the salvation, and it is given to those who trust in Jesus!
|
|
|
|
Post by dan Lash on Aug 23, 2021 23:18:02 GMT -6
How about translating pisteuw in a passive nature which would be "pursuaded" I think this eliminates the issue. For in the heart one is persuaded unto righteousness. After all, at least 10 other times in the NT Paul we see Paul's evangelistic method spoken of in terms of persuastion.
|
|
