# Acts 23:6: NIV translation of 'kai'



## KMK (Oct 30, 2012)

Acts 23:6

KJV: But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope *and* resurrection of the dead I am called in question. 

ESV: Now when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is iwith respect to the hope *and* the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial."

NIV: Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, "My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. I stand on trial because of my hope *in* the resurrection of the dead."

Every standard version I have checked translates 'kai' as 'and' except the NIV which translates it 'in'. What gives?


----------



## The Apologetic Thomas (Oct 30, 2012)

They probably thought that it would make more sense saying "in". It does.
That doesn't mean it's right, but literal translations such as the NASB or the ESV don't always make perfect sense in English.
Actually technically most of the sentences in the ESV aren't even grammatically correct in English.


----------



## KMK (Oct 30, 2012)

The Apologetic Thomas said:


> They probably thought that it would make more sense saying "in". It does.
> That doesn't mean it's right, but literal translations such as the NASB or the ESV don't always make perfect sense in English.
> Actually technically most of the sentences in the ESV aren't even grammatically correct in English.



I don't see how the grammar is improved by the change. There are theological implications to changing 'and' to 'in', especially to the Jews whom Paul is addressing.


----------



## JohnGill (Oct 30, 2012)

KMK said:


> The Apologetic Thomas said:
> 
> 
> > They probably thought that it would make more sense saying "in". It does.
> ...



Maybe the NIV translators didn't see any difference between (the hope) and (the resurrection) of the dead. It looks like they saw only one thing in the phrase instead of two.


----------



## KMK (Oct 30, 2012)

JohnGill said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > The Apologetic Thomas said:
> ...



But doesn't the word 'kai' necessitate two things? Isn't 'and' the most common translation of 'kai'?


----------



## JohnGill (Oct 30, 2012)

KMK said:


> But doesn't the word 'kai' necessitate two things? Isn't 'and' the most common translation of 'kai'?



I agree with you and yes it is. But this is the only reason I could think of to translate 'kai' as 'in' instead of 'and'. The CEB has 'in' as well, but the HCS and NRSV have "hope *of* the resurrection of the dead!" Looks like the understanding of the verse changed. I would think the hope of the dead in Christ is just as important as their resurrection. Especially since all of the dead will be resurrected on the day of judgment. The NIV/CEB/HCS/NRSV seem to be ignoring the hope of the dead and only focusing on the resurrection of the dead.


----------



## KMK (Oct 31, 2012)

Perhaps newer translators consider the two nouns conjoined by 'kai' to be a hendiadys and therefore see 'resurrection' as describing 'hope'.


----------



## KMK (Oct 31, 2012)

It appears that is the case.

J.A. Alexander:



> By hope and resurrection many understand the hope of such a resurrection, by the figure called hendiadys (see above, on 2:42). More probably, however, one is a generic and the other a specific term, the hope (of Israel) and (as a necessary part of it, or necessarily connected with it, that of the) resurrection of the dead.


----------



## JimmyH (Oct 31, 2012)

In case there are any other uneducated louts, like me, on this board, this page here give a good account of hendiadys.


----------

