# Need help with Calvin's Latin, please.



## Jerusalem Blade (Nov 29, 2006)

Would/could anyone please help me by translating Calvin’s Latin of Romans 7:6? 

Nunc vero soluti sumus a Lege, mortui ei in qua detinebamur; ut serviamus in novitate spiritus, et non in vetustate literæ.​
I desire to see which reading he is using.

Thanks much, 

Steve


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 29, 2006)

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Would/could anyone please help me by translating Calvin’s Latin of Romans 7:6?Nunc vero soluti sumus a Lege, mortui ei in qua detinebamur; ut serviamus in novitate spiritus, et non in vetustate literæ.​



Steve,

Here is a quick translation of the Latin - trying not to look at or remember my English Bible:

"Now in truth (or but now) we are released (freed/dissolved) from the Law, having been dead to it (that thing) in which we used to be detained (held in check); so that* we might serve in newness of the spirit (Spirit) and not in the oldness of the letter."

* without a grammar handy, I can't recall whether this is a purpose or result clause. It is clear that the verb of the clause is in the present subjunctive. For what it is worth, the vulgate translates it:

"Nunc autem soluti sumus a lege morientes in quo detinebamur ita ut serviamus in novitate spiritus et non in vetustate litterae


Notice:
1. small difference in particle (autem/vero)
2. present tense for dead - "being now dead" instead of "having died"
3. the attraction of "law" to neuter (quo for qua) in the relative clause
4. the use of ita makes the second clause more parallel to the first than Calvin would have it


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Nov 30, 2006)

Thanks, Fred.

Specifically what I am seeking to find is did he translate from a Greek text which read, in 7:6b, the singular, ajpoqanovntoß (apothanontOS), or the plural, ajpoqanovnteß (apothanontES).

The difference in translation comes out, if the singular, that which "died" is _the law_, if plural, then it is _we_ who died.

Thus his Latin is quite significant. He would be an attestation for that reading.

Thanks for your help,

Steve


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 30, 2006)

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Thanks, Fred.
> 
> Specifically what I am seeking to find is did he translate from a Greek text which read, in 7:6b, the singular, ajpoqanovntoß (apothanontOS), or the plural, ajpoqanovnteß (apothanontES).
> 
> ...



Steve,

It is clearly plural. "Mortui" is the masculine plural nominative past participle of the verb "morior" (to die). "detinebamur" is the imperfect 1st person passive plural of "detineo." It is clearly "we having died..." The law is referred to be "ei" which is a demonstrative pronoun "died to it (i.e. the law). This is clearer because the relative that correlates to the demonstrative (that...which) is in the feminine (qua) and it can only refer back to "law." It is possible (although unlikely) to get another reading from the Vulgate, since it has "quo" instead of "qua." But I view this as an attraction to the neuter, not unlike the Greek in Ephesians 2:8-9.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Dec 2, 2006)

Thank you again, Fred.

Never let it be said a classical education is not of great value, even in this 21st century!

Steve


----------



## fredtgreco (Dec 2, 2006)

Jerusalem Blade said:


> Thank you again, Fred.
> 
> Never let it be said a classical education is not of great value, even in this 21st century!
> 
> Steve



Steve,

I would never say that! I regularly tell my boys that Latin is "morally uplifting!"


----------



## turmeric (Dec 2, 2006)

fredtgreco said:


> Steve,
> 
> I would never say that! I regularly tell my boys that Latin is "morally uplifting!"



And it builds character too!


----------

