NGRK 505
Page 1 of 8
Scripture
Reference: Romans 8:1-8
Formal
Equivalent: KJV Dynamic
Equivalent: CEV Paraphrase: MSG
Enter Text in the Box
Below
Enter Text in the Box
Below
Enter Text in the Box
Below
1There is therefore now no
condemnation to them which
are in Christ Jesus, who walk
not after the flesh, but after
the Spirit.
2For the law of the Spirit of
life in Christ Jesus hath made
me free from the law of sin
and death.
3For what the law could not
do, in that it was weak
through the flesh, God
sending his own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh, and
for sin, condemned sin in the
flesh:
4That the righteousness of the
law might be fulfilled in us,
who walk not after the flesh,
but after the Spirit.
5For they that are after the
flesh do mind the things of
the flesh; but they that are
after the Spirit the things of
the Spirit.
6For to be carnally minded is
death; but to be spiritually
minded is life and peace.
7Because the carnal mind is
enmity against God: for it is
not subject to the law of God,
neither indeed can be.
1 If you belong to Christ
Jesus, you won't be
punished.-2The Holy Spirit
will give you life that comes
from Christ Jesus and will
set you[a]-free from sin and
death.-3The Law of Moses
cannot do this, because our
selfish desires make the Law
weak. But God set you free
when he sent his own Son to
be like us sinners and to be a
sacrifice for our sin. God
used Christ's body to
condemn sin.-4He did this, so
that we would do what the
Law commands by obeying
the Spirit instead of our own
desires.
5People who are ruled by
their desires think only of
themselves. Everyone who is
ruled by the Holy Spirit
thinks about spiritual
things.-6If our minds are
ruled by our desires, we will
die. But if our minds are
ruled by the Spirit, we will
have life and peace.-7Our
desires fight against God,
because they do not and
cannot obey God's laws.-8If
we follow our desires, we
cannot please God.
1-2With the arrival of Jesus,
the Messiah, that fateful
dilemma is resolved. Those
who enter into Christ’s being-
here-for-us no longer have to
live under a continuous, low-
lying black cloud. A new
power is in operation. The
Spirit of life in Christ, like a
strong wind, has
magnificently cleared the air,
freeing you from a fated
lifetime of brutal tyranny at
the hands of sin and death.
3-4God went for the jugular
when he sent his own Son. He
didn’t deal with the problem
as something remote and
unimportant. In his Son, Jesus,
he personally took on the
human condition, entered the
disordered mess of struggling
humanity in order to set it
right once and for all. The law
code, weakened as it always
was by fractured human
nature, could never have done
that.
The law always ended up
being used as a Band-Aid on
sin instead of a deep healing
of it. And now what the law
code asked for but we
couldn’t deliver is
accomplished as we, instead
of redoubling our own efforts,
NGRK 505
Page 2 of 8
8So then they that are in the
flesh cannot please God.
simply embrace what the
Spirit is doing in us.
5-8Those who think they can
do it on their own end up
obsessed with measuring their
own moral muscle but never
get around to exercising it in
real life. Those who trust
God’s action in them find that
God’s Spirit is in them—
living and breathing God!
Obsession with self in these
matters is a dead end;
attention to God leads us out
into the open, into a spacious,
free life. Focusing on the self
is the opposite of focusing on
God. Anyone completely
absorbed in self ignores God,
ends up thinking more about
self than God. That person
ignores who God is and what
he is doing. And God isn’t
pleased at being ignored.
NGRK 505
Page 3 of 8
1. What are the general differences between the translational strategies
of the three translations, and where are the specific places in your
passage where these differences are most evident?
The general differences between the translational strategies are as follows:
The (KJV) within the formal equivalence spectrum focuses its attention on
the reproduction of the words within the “original grammatical structure”
whenever possible, and can be used for those who wish to study the Bible
more in-depth (Thornhill 2016, 139, 142). The (CEV) works within the
parameters of Functional or Dynamic Equivalence and seeks to convey the
main idea of the message without much concern for the grammatical
structure (Thornhill 2016, 139). The (MSG) is of course a paraphrase
translation and Thornhill renders paraphrase translations as a “culturally
appropriate form of English vernacular” (Thornhill 2016, 139). The
following areas reflect differences between the translations for Romans 8:1-
8:
Yellow Section – In (v. 1), the (KJV), reads “There is therefore now no
condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh,
but after the Spirit…”, the (CEV) reads, “If you belong to Christ Jesus you
won’t be punished.”, and the (MSG) reads “With the arrival of Jesus the
Messiah, the fateful dilemma is resolved, those who enter into Christ’s
being-here-for-us no longer have to live under a low lying black cloud…”. If
one is in Christ then one belongs to him. Reading the (MSG) translation
could lead one to think that Christ is here and not the Holy Spirit whom
Christ sent here when he returned to heaven. The (KJV) leans toward a
fuller explanation of the condemnation as opposed to the (CEV) which does
not indicate the “flesh” or “Spirit “as a choice to the Christian. A Christian
can operate in carnality.
Blue Section – The (KJV) mentions the “law of the Spirit of life” and “the
law of sin and death” in (v. 2); however, in (v.2) of the (CEV) and the (MSG)
law is not used in reference to the Spirit of Life or Sin and Death. The
reader has no indication of the legal terminology when reading both the
(CEV) and (MSG) from (v.2).
NGRK 505
Page 4 of 8
Green Section – In (v.3), the (KJV) states “law”, whereas in the (CEV) the
translation identifies the law as, “Law of Moses”, yet in the (MSG) the term
“law” is mentioned towards the end of the verse. Additionally, the (KJV)
reads, “…God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for
sin…” and the (CEV) reads,”… But God set you free when he sent his own Son to be like
us sinners and to be a sacrifice for our sin.” The reader of the (CEV) will ask what Christians are
free from. The (MSG) reads, “…In his Son, Jesus, he personally took on the human condition,
entered the disordered mess of struggling humanity…” There does not appear to be clarity about
the 2nd person of the triune Godhead, and the term “sin” is not utilized only the phrase
“disordered mess of struggling humanity” is mentioned.
Purple Section – In (v.4) the (KJV) reads,” …righteousness of the law
fulfilled in us” and the (CEV) reads,” He did this, so that we would do what the Law
commands”. The (CEV) points to the work Christ has done by using “He did this”. The (MSG)
does a much better job than both the (KJV) and (CEV) regarding part of this verse by explaining
the law’s inability to resolve the sinful nature of humanity but does not make a clear distinction
between the natures.
Red Section – The (MSG) does not fully convey the consequences of a
person who has chosen to live for Christ i.e. Life and peace or not for Christ
i.e. death in (vs.5-7) as does the (KJV) and (CEV); in addition, the (MSG)
simply uses the term “ignores” in (vs. 7-8) instead of terms that reflect
man’s inability to please God. The reader will be confused as to whether or
not he or she can please God. The (KJV) and (CEV) capture the authorial
intent of the writer within these verses best and leave the reader with the
correct idea that mankind cannot please God in a sinful condition.
Finally, at first glance of the (MSG), one can see that the passage is quite
lengthy in comparison to the (KJV) and (CEV). The (MSG) uses a total of 301
words for Romans 8:1-8, while the (KJV) uses 182 words and the (CEV) uses
178 words for the same passage. I think short laconic statements would be
helpful in terms of the (MSG)
2. Although some differences might not impact the meaning or clarity of
the passage, others might. What are the significant differences
between the three translations? How could these differences impact
one’s interpretation of the passage?
The significant difference between all three translations is in (v.3). In the (KJV) translation,
the text reads, “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God
sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh”
and the (CEV) translation, the text reads,” The Law of Moses cannot do this, because our
selfish desires make the Law weak. But God set you free when he sent his own Son to be
NGRK 505
Page 5 of 8
like us sinners and to be a sacrifice for our sin. God used Christ’s body to condemn sin.”
As I mentioned in my response to the first question, a reader would become confused with
the phrase,” But God set you free when he sent his own Son to be like us sinners and to be
a sacrifice for our sin.” The question arises as to what a Christian is set free from? The law,
sin, condemnation, or all three? The (MSG) adds more confusion by rendering the text as
such,” God went to the jugular when he sent his own Son. He didn’t deal with the problem
as something remote and unimportant. In his Son, Jesus, he personally took on the Human
condition, entered the disordered mess of struggling humanity in order to set it right once
and for all”. This verse in the (MSG) translation does not bring clarity to the role of Christ,
as to which person in the triune Godhead is at work here. Jesus, is God come in the flesh,
but the (MSG) translation does not appear to increase the idea of trinitarianism but rather
detracts from it. All translations are not equal is to be understood but there should be some
uniformity as it relates to the “Son” and the work he did by condemning “sin” through his
body. This idea is seen in the (KJV) and (CEV); however, the (MSG) translation does not
convey a crystal-clear picture of Christ’s role. The reader should first acquaint himself or
herself with a formal or functional equivalence translation before reading a paraphrased
translation. The lynchpin in this passage is how Jesus is viewed. There is not condemnation,
punishment or dominance of sin in a believer’s life because of Jesus. This is important
because how one sees Jesus is how one will see themselves (cf. 1 John 4:17). Another
significant difference is in (vs.5-8). There is similar language, with minor variations,
between the (KJV) and the (CEV) translations as follows:
(KJV) - the text reads,” For they that are after the Flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but
they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death, but to
be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it
is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”
(CEV) - the text reads, “People who are ruled by their desires think only of themselves.
Everyone who is ruled by the Holy Spirit thinks about spiritual things. If our minds are ruled
by our desires, we will die. But if our minds are ruled by the Spirit, we will have life and
peace. Our desires fight against God, because they do not and cannot obey God's laws. If we
follow our desires, we cannot please God.”
The words “flesh”, “death” “die” “Spirit” “desires”, and “ruled” are minor variations, but the
reader arrives at the same conclusion, unlike the (MSG) translation below:
(MSG) – the text reads,” Those who think they can do it on their own end up obsessed with
measuring their own moral muscle but never get around to exercising it in real life. Those
who trust God’s action in them find that God’s Spirit is in them—living and breathing God!
Obsession with self in these matters is a dead end; attention to God leads us out into the
open, into a spacious, free life. Focusing on the self is the opposite of focusing on God.
Anyone completely absorbed in self ignores God, ends up thinking more about self than God.
That person ignores who God is and what he is doing. And God isn’t pleased at being
ignored.
The consequences of the choice to live a life against God are viewed as a dead end as
NGRK 505
Page 6 of 8
opposed to death; in addition, both the (KJV) and (CEV) in (v.8) point out the inability of
anyone who is not in Christ to live for God and be pleasing to him, but the (MSG) uses the
term “ignores” as if the person can decide to change from their inattentiveness of God when
God draws the person anyway (cf. John 6:44).
3. For one of the significant differences you noted in the previous
question, find the Greek text in an interlinear that is giving rise to the
English translations/differences. Write the Greek word(s) in your
response below, and then look up the potential meaning of the word(s)
in a lexicon. Based on the rest of your selected passage, which of the
options for the word(s) listed in the lexicon fits best in this particular
context? Why?
The words “death”, “die”, and “dead” are used to illustrate the significant difference in the
English translations of the (KJV), (CEV), and (MSG); in addition, the (MSG) and how it uses the
word “ignores” dramatically changes the contextual meaning of the later verses of the (MSG)
translation. The English word for “death” in the Greek language is θάνατος and transliterated as
Thanatos. The term means death and according to Thayer’s lexicon, it has in “…the widest
sense, death comprises all the miseries arising from sin, as well physical death as the loss of a
life consecrated to God and blessed in him on earth” (Thayer’s Lexicon, 2024) The Greek word
θάνατος is used in the (KJV) translation and the (CEV) translation. Regarding the word “dead”
in the (MSG) translation I am not sure what Greek word this may be, if it is translated as a word
or phrase. However, the context overall is obscured by the word “end” and the remaining verses.
The word “death” and “die” fits the context of the passage in the (KJV) and the (CEV). Again,
though I was unable to discover the Greek word for the English word “dead” the (MSG)
translation contextual setting repudiates the idea of “death”.
NGRK 505
Page 7 of 8
1. If you had to recommend one change to the translation committees of
each of the three translations, what would you recommend and why?
For the (CEV), and (MSG) translations committees I would reiterate the
importance of authorial intention and the contextual settings of the text.
This should not be forsaken for the sake of modernity. For the (MSG) short
laconic statements, if possible, would be helpful to the translation
committee, due to the volume of words selected. In the attempt to be
“culturally sensitive” the meaning can become “lost in translation”. I say
this because Thornhill points out as one dives deeper into the Greek text
one will depart from many paraphrase translations (Thornhill 2016, 148).
This would be my recommendation to both translation committees of the
(CEV) and (MSG). The (KJV) has two primary weaknesses, the first is in its
outdated language, and the second is in the textual manuscript that it uses;
however, most of the antiquated language concerns was resolved with the
translation of the New King James Version (Bloomberg 2010, 53). Though
Chadwick Thornhill identifies the textual manuscript used to translate the
(KJV) as the Byzantine text (Thornhill 2016, 139), the second primary
problem is the textual manuscript itself. I would recommend the (KJV)
translation committee possibly consider borrowing from eclectic texts
relating to difficult passages of scripture,” …by evaluating the text critical
data on a case-by-case basis” (Thornhill 2016, 139).
References:
1. Thornhill, A. Chadwick.-Greek for Everyone: Introductory Greek for Bible Study and
Application. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, (2016).
2. "G2288 - thanatos - Strong's Greek Lexicon, (Thayer) (kjv)." Blue Letter Bible.
Accessed 16 May, 2024. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g2288/kjv/tr/0-1/
3. Blomberg, Craig L., and Jennifer F. Markley.-A Handbook of New Testament Exegesis.
Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, (2010).
