In my previous post, Biblish, I mentioned a church sign that was displaying the cryptic message:
“If any man love God the same is known of him.” 1 Co. 8:3
This is a direct quote from the King James translation.
In the comments on that post, Peter had some good things to say about the wrong meaning given by the KJV and NIV translations of this verse.
One of the most interesting things about this verse to me is that it is ambiguous as to who knows whom. Does “God” know “man” or does “man” know “God?” Most translations seems to have chosen the first option but I think you can make a strong argument for the other option.
We always begin analysis of a particular word or verse by looking at the context. And the context of 1 Corinthians 8:3 goes back to verse 1. In the first three verses of this chapter, Paul uses a “knowing” word seven times. The first instance is the Greek word OIDA, but all the others are GINOSKO. So it is safe to assume that the use of “know” in verse 3 is related to its use throughout this section. Paul is using the theme of “knowledge” to make a rhetorical point. That point is this: You Corinthians might think you are really smart and have the subject of food sacrificed to idols figured out. But true knowledge is loving God. If you love God then you know God.
With that interpretation in mind, this section could be translated like this:
Now regarding food sacrificed to idols, everybody thinks they’re an expert. Knowledge makes us proud but love makes us strong. You may think you know something, but that doesn’t mean you have it all figured out. If you love God then you really can say you know something.
If it could be shown that OUTOS in verse 3 grammatically cannot be referring to God then of course this is not a possible translation. But in the context I think it is a possible option that man knows God and not the other way around in this verse.
Now think again about that church sign. Were they using this verse properly? No! This is a teaching about food sacrificed to idols. Not a very meaningful topic for church signs! But they were probably using it to make a statement about it being important to love God.
Update: I was wrong! See the comments to find out why.
I suspect that to understand this verse properly we need to understand better the rules for pronoun reference in Koine Greek. I’m sure someone has studied this, but I don’t have any data to hand. But the rather rare pronominal use of the word οὗτος houtos, usually translated “this” and masculine singular, is significant. A very literal translation of the verse would be “If but anyone loves the God, this has been known by him/it”. But what does the “this” refer to? Can this Greek word mean “the latter” as in some languages, which would support the sense “this person knows God”? As “this” is masculine, it cannot refer back to the impersonal “something” or “what he ought to know” of v.2, although this might seem to give a good sense. But to find the answer I think we would really need to study all the NT uses of οὗτος houtos as a pronoun. I don’t have time to do this in detail. But here are some examples in which οὗτος houtos in a main clause refers back to the subject of a preceding subordinate clause: Mark 3:35 (13:13), Romans 2:12, 8:9 (this one is a close parallel), 8:14, Galatians 6:12, Philippians 1:22, James 1:23,25, 3:2, 2 John 9. This relatively common pattern suggests that the correct meaning in 1 Corinthians 8:3 is probably how most translations take it: this person is loved by God.
In fact my best explanation for the odd sentence structure is that Paul originally omitted the final “by him”, as in some of the earliest manuscripts. In fact papyrus P46 and Clement read simply “but if anyone loves, this (one) has been known”, or perhaps “… this (one) (truly) knows”, with the verb either a rather standard divine passive or a middle voice. But as this short version was rather too cryptic, some copyist added “by him” with the intention of removing the ambiguity – but in fact adding to the confusion. I note that while the UBS Greek NT editors consider the shorter reading here certainly incorrect, Gordon Fee tends to prefer it.
So, Lingamish, I come back to your suggested translation, about which you wrote “If it could be shown that OUTOS in verse 3 grammatically cannot be referring to God then of course this is not a possible translation.” I disagree. I consider that οὗτος houtos almost certainly refers to the “anyone” and not to God. But even on this understanding I am tempted to follow Fee’s translation of the shorter text “…this one truly knows“, which is very similar to your “…then you really can say you know something.
Thanks for this information, Peter. I’m going to study the verses you’ve listed and also try to find some information on pronominal reference.
Gotta go. My boys are shooting off rockets this evening at church. That’s my immediate plan of action!
Peter,
Having looked at the use of houtos in the NT, albeit in a very superficial way, I have become convinced that it is referring to the “anyone” of the previous clause. Key examples for me include several you have listed: Romans 8:9, James 1:25, and 2 John 9.
This seems a perfectly prototypical use of a demonstrative pronoun, referring to the most recently activated subject.
Therefore I think it is reasonable to assert that “OUTOS in verse 3 grammatically cannot be referring to God” and thus my translation is wrong.