Romans 7:7 - Revision history

Beza 1598 at 16:18, 23 February 2017

2017-02-23T16:18:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:18, 23 February 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	* '''[[Romans 7:7 Greek NT: Beza's Textus Receptus (1598)\| ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥΣ 7:7]]''' Τί οὖν ἐροῦμεν ὁ νόμος ἁμαρτία μὴ γένοιτο· ἀλλὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἔγνων εἰ μὴ διὰ νόμου· τήν τε γὰρ ἐπιθυμίαν οὐκ ᾔδειν εἰ μὴ ὁ νόμος ἔλεγεν Οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις		* '''[[Romans 7:7 Greek NT: Beza's Textus Receptus (1598)\| ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥΣ 7:7]]''' Τί οὖν ἐροῦμεν ὁ νόμος ἁμαρτία μὴ γένοιτο· ἀλλὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἔγνων εἰ μὴ διὰ νόμου· τήν τε γὰρ ἐπιθυμίαν οὐκ ᾔδειν εἰ μὴ ὁ νόμος ἔλεγεν Οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις

	~~<small>''([[~~Textus Receptus (1598~~)\|Textus Receptus]], [[Theodore Beza]], [[1598 AD\|1598]])''</small>~~		{{Textus Receptus 1598 Footer}}

	* ''' Romans 7:7 ''' What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.		* ''' Romans 7:7 ''' What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

	~~<small>''([[~~King James Version~~]], [[~~Pure Cambridge Edition~~]] [[1900 AD\|1900]])''</small>~~		{{King James Version Pure Cambridge Edition Footer}}

	* '''[[ Romans 7:7 ~~(TRV)~~\|Romans 7:7]]''' What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. Because I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”		* '''[[ Romans 7:7 King James Version 2016\|Romans 7:7]]''' What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. Because I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”

	~~<small>''([[Textus Receptus~~ Version~~]])''</small>~~		{{King James Version 2016 Edition}}

	==Interlinear==		==Interlinear==

Beza 1598: /* Theodore Beza */

2017-01-04T10:16:56Z

Theodore Beza

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:16, 4 January 2017
Line 49:		Line 49:
	* [[1590 AD\|1590]] (Beza Octavo 4th)		* [[1590 AD\|1590]] (Beza Octavo 4th)
	* [[1598 AD\|1598]] (Beza 4th)		* [[1598 AD\|1598]] (Beza 4th)
	''See Also [[~~Matthew 1~~:1 Beza 1598]] ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])''		''See Also [[Romans 7:7 Beza 1598]] ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])''
	* [[1604 AD\|1604]] (Beza Octavo 5th)		* [[1604 AD\|1604]] (Beza Octavo 5th)

Beza 1598: /* External Links */

2016-03-12T11:22:40Z

External Links

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:22, 12 March 2016
Line 285:		Line 285:

	==External Links==		==External Links==

			{{Donate}}

Beza 1598: /* English Translations */

2014-06-03T10:35:47Z

English Translations

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:35, 3 June 2014
Line 171:		Line 171:
	* [[1982 AD\|1982]] ([[New King James Version]])		* [[1982 AD\|1982]] ([[New King James Version]])

	* [[1984 AD\|1984]] What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” ([[New International Version]])		* [[1984 AD\|1984]] ([[New International Version]])

	* [[1995 AD\|1995]] What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, “You shall not covet.” ([[New American Standard Bible]]) (©1995)		* [[1995 AD\|1995]] ([[New American Standard Bible]]) (©1995)

	* [[1999 AD\|1999]] ([[American King James Version]])[[AKJV]]		* [[1999 AD\|1999]] ([[American King James Version]])[[AKJV]]
Line 180:		Line 180:

	* ([[BBE]])		* ([[BBE]])
	* What should we say then? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin if it were not for the law. For example, I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, Do not covet. ([[Holman Christian Standard Bible]])		* ([[Holman Christian Standard Bible]])
	* ~~What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid! Nay, I would not have known sin, but through the law; for I would not have known lust, except that the law had said, “Thou shalt not covet.”~~ ([[21st Century King James Version]])		* ([[21st Century King James Version]])
	* So what are we going to say? That the Law is sin? Absolutely not! But I wouldn’t have known sin except through the Law. I wouldn’t have known the desire for what others have if the Law had not said, Don’t desire what others have. ([[Common English Bible]])		* ([[Common English Bible]])
	* What should we say, then? Are the laws in Moses’ Teachings sinful? That’s unthinkable! In fact, I wouldn’t have recognized sin if those laws hadn’t shown it to me. For example, I wouldn’t have known that some desires are sinful if Moses’ Teachings hadn’t said, “Never have wrong desires.” ([[GOD’S WORD Translation]])		* ([[GOD’S WORD Translation]])
	* Does this mean that the Law is sinful? Certainly not! But if it had not been for the Law, I would not have known what sin is really like. For example, I would not have known what it means to want something that belongs to someone else, unless the Law had told me not to do that. ([[Contemporary English Version]])		* ([[Contemporary English Version]])
	* Well then, am I suggesting that the law of God is sinful? Of course not! In fact, it was the law that showed me my sin. I would never have known that coveting is wrong if the law had not said, “You must not covet.” ([[New Living Translation]])		* ([[New Living Translation]])
	* What then do we conclude? Is the Law identical with sin? Certainly not! Nevertheless, if it had not been for the Law, I should not have recognized sin or have known its meaning. [For instance] I would not have known about covetousness [would have had no consciousness of sin or sense of guilt] if the Law had not [repeatedly] said, You shall not covet and have an evil desire [for one thing and another]. ([[Amplified Bible]])		* ([[Amplified Bible]])
	* But I can hear you say, “If the law code was as bad as all that, it’s no better than sin itself.” That’s certainly not true. The law code had a perfectly legitimate function. Without its clear guidelines for right and wrong, moral behavior would be mostly guesswork. Apart from the succinct, surgical command, “You shall not covet,” I could have dressed covetousness up to look like a virtue and ruined my life with it. ([[The Message]])		* ([[The Message]])
	* What should we say then? That the law is sin? Not at all! I wouldn’t have known what sin was unless the law had told me. The law said, “Do not want what belongs to other people.” If the law hadn’t said that, I would not have known what it was like to want what belonged to others.([[New International Reader's Version]])		* ([[New International Reader's Version]])
	* ([[Wycliffe New Testament]])		* ([[Wycliffe New Testament]])

Beza 1598: /* Aramaic */

2013-07-21T12:08:33Z

Aramaic

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 21 July 2013
Line 197:		Line 197:

	====[[Aramaic]]====		====[[Aramaic]]====
	* <big></big>(Aramaic Peshitta)		* ܡܢܐ ܗܟܝܠ ܐܡܪܝܢܢ ܢܡܘܤܐ ܚܛܝܬܐ ܗܘ ܚܤ ܐܠܐ ܠܚܛܝܬܐ ܠܐ ܝܠܦܬ ܐܠܐ ܒܝܕ ܢܡܘܤܐ ܠܐ ܓܝܪ ܪܓܬܐ ܝܕܥ ܗܘܝܬ ܐܠܘ ܠܐ ܢܡܘܤܐ ܕܐܡܪ ܕܠܐ ܬܪܓ <big></big>(Aramaic Peshitta)

	====[[Basque]]====		====[[Basque]]====

Beza 1598: /* Arabic */

2013-07-21T12:08:17Z

Arabic

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 21 July 2013
Line 194:		Line 194:

	====[[Arabic]]====		====[[Arabic]]====
	* <big></big>(Arabic Smith & Van Dyke)		* فماذا نقول. هل الناموس خطية. حاشا. بل لم اعرف الخطية الا بالناموس. فانني لم اعرف الشهوة لو لم يقل الناموس لا تشته. <big></big>(Arabic Smith & Van Dyke)

	====[[Aramaic]]====		====[[Aramaic]]====

Beza 1598: /* Bulgarian */

2013-07-21T12:08:00Z

Bulgarian

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 21 July 2013
Line 205:		Line 205:
	====[[Bulgarian]]====		====[[Bulgarian]]====

	* [[1940 AD\|1940]] (Bulgarian Bible)		* [[1940 AD\|1940]] Тогава що? Да речем ли, че законът е грях? Да не бъде! Но [напротив], не бих познал греха освен чрез закона, защото не бих познал, че пожеланието [е грях], ако законът не беше казвал: "Не пожелавай". (Bulgarian Bible)

	====[[Chinese]]====		====[[Chinese]]====

Beza 1598: /* Basque */

2013-07-21T12:07:49Z

Basque

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 21 July 2013
Line 201:		Line 201:
	====[[Basque]]====		====[[Basque]]====

	*		* Cer erranen dugu beraz? Leguea bekatu da? Guertha eztadila. Aitzitic bekatua eztut eçagutu vkan Legueaz baicen. Ecen eznuqueen eçagutu guthiciá baldin legueac erran ezpalu, Eztuc guthiciaturen.

	====[[Bulgarian]]====		====[[Bulgarian]]====

Beza 1598: /* Latin */

2013-07-21T12:05:09Z

Latin

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:05, 21 July 2013
Line 241:		Line 241:
	====[[Latin]]====		====[[Latin]]====

	* [[Latin Vulgate]]		* quid ergo dicemus lex peccatum est absit sed peccatum non cognovi nisi per legem nam concupiscentiam nesciebam nisi lex diceret non concupisces [[Latin Vulgate]]

	* [[1527 AD\|1527]] (Erasmus 1527)		* [[1527 AD\|1527]] (Erasmus 1527)

Beza 1598: /* German */

2013-07-21T12:04:58Z

German

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:04, 21 July 2013
Line 223:		Line 223:
	====[[German]]====		====[[German]]====

	* [[1545 AD\|1545]] (Luther 1545)		* [[1545 AD\|1545]] Was wollen wir denn nun sagen? Ist das Gesetz Sünde? Das sei ferne! Aber die Sünde erkannte ich nicht ohne durchs Gesetz. Denn ich wußte nichts von der Lust, wo das Gesetz nicht hätte gesagt: Laß dich nicht gelüsten! (Luther 1545)

	* [[1871 AD\|1871]] (Elberfelder 1871)		* [[1871 AD\|1871]] Was sollen wir nun sagen? Ist das Gesetz Sünde? Das sei ferne! Aber die Sünde hätte ich nicht erkannt, als nur durch Gesetz. Denn auch von der Lust hätte ich nichts gewußt, wenn nicht das Gesetz gesagt hätte: "Laß dich nicht gelüsten". (Elberfelder 1871)

	* [[1912 AD\|1912]] (Luther 1912)		* [[1912 AD\|1912]] Was wollen wir denn nun sagen? Ist das Gesetz Sünde? Das sei ferne! Aber die Sünde erkannte ich nicht, außer durchs Gesetz. Denn ich wußte nichts von der Lust, wo das Gesetz nicht hätte gesagt: "Laß dich nicht gelüsten!" (Luther 1912)

	====[[Italian]]====		====[[Italian]]====

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:16, 4 January 2017
Line 49:		Line 49:
	* [[1590 AD\|1590]] (Beza Octavo 4th)		* [[1590 AD\|1590]] (Beza Octavo 4th)
	* [[1598 AD\|1598]] (Beza 4th)		* [[1598 AD\|1598]] (Beza 4th)
	''See Also [[~~Matthew 1~~:1 Beza 1598]] ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])''		''See Also [[Romans 7:7 Beza 1598]] ([[Theodore Beza\|Beza]])''
	* [[1604 AD\|1604]] (Beza Octavo 5th)		* [[1604 AD\|1604]] (Beza Octavo 5th)