Luke 22:70, Ye say that I am

[Christian2]

Luke 22:70Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. (KJV)

Luke 22:70 70And they all said, "Are You (A)the Son of God, then?" And He said to them, "(B)Yes, I am."

Someone is telling me that "Yes" is not found in the original Greek.

This is what he is saying:

Luk 22:70 eipon de panteV su oun ei o uioV tou qeou o de proV autouV efh umeiV legete oti egw eimi

The verb eipon (ei)`pon is regularly used as the second aorist of lego, “to utter words, speak, say, tell. panteV translates as proclaim/proclomation. su translates as you. so far this gives us "Words spoken by you in proclomation..." yes = ναι, μάλιστα, nai, malista and is NOT found in this verse. That is to say the word 'Yes' is not found in the Original Greek.

I have a feeling this they guy translated the KJV in English back into Greek and that is why he is not finding the word "Yes" but I am not sure.

Thank you for your help.

[YLTYLT]

Christian2,
Youngs Literal Translation translates the verse as follows:

And they all said, `Thou, then, art the Son of God?' and he said unto them, `Ye say [it], because I am;'


"oti" can be translated as: that, because, since


I think that the word "Yes" is not there. But if "oti" translates as "because or since", then it is an affirmative statement, even though there is no affirmative word such as "YES".

[Christian2]

Christian2,
Youngs Literal Translation translates the verse as follows:

And they all said, `Thou, then, art the Son of God?' and he said unto them, `Ye say [it], because I am;'


"oti" can be translated as: that, because, since


I think that the word "Yes" is not there. But if "oti" translates as "because or since", then it is an affirmative statement, even though there is no affirmative word such as "YES".

Youngs goes back to the Greek? Great. Is this online?

There is some guy named Alexander who fancies himself somewhat an expert in ancient Aramaic and he translates it as:

70. "They all said then, "Are you such the Son of God?" Jesus said to them, "You say yourself that I am he."

I don't use Alexander much because I'm not sure he is an expert.

Thank you.

Beyond that it is evident that within the context -- see reaction of the Jews -- it is obvious that Jesus answered in the affirmative.

[Judah]

C2, you can read Youngs Literal Translation online here.

[August]

"Yes" is not found in the Greek.

Here is the exact word-for-word translation:
70: THEY-say yet all you then are the son of the God the yet toward them He-AVERred you are-saying that I am.

The "are-saying" seems to be the key here: http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons ... ersion=nas

[ruthrush]

"Christian2"

Christian2,
Youngs Literal Translation translates the verse as follows:

And they all said, `Thou, then, art the Son of God?' and he said unto them, `Ye say [it], because I am;'


"oti" can be translated as: that, because, since

oti is Strong's # 3754. You are right.
Ruth

[Christian2]

C2, you can read Youngs Literal Translation online here.

Great. I've bookmarked it. Thanks Judah.

[Christian2]

Thank you to all who have answered.

[Jac3510]

Uhm . . . I wanted to comment on the hoti clause you all keep mentioning. Yes, hoti can be translated "because," but that's not really the idea. It is broader than that--if you want to be technical, it can be used in an adverbial, appositional, causal, declarative, epexegitcal, or recitative sense. Y'all are focusing on the causal aspect. The NIV, NASB, and NKJV all take that sense, but the ESV, KJV, and HCSB don't. Personally, I don't think we should take this as causal. It should be taken as declarative. Concerning the declarative:

This is a specialized use of the direct object clause after a verb of perception. The hoti clause contains reported speech or thought. This contrasts with hoti recitativum, which involves direct speech. It is a very common use of the hoti clause. When the hoti introduces indirect discourse, it should be translated "that"

From Wallace, GGBB, 456.

As for the Greek, my translation is as follows: "And they all said, 'Are you, then, the Son of God?' And He says to them, 'You say that I am.'" The bold here captures the emphasis in the Greek. It also shows the "you/you" contrast . . . What actually is going on here is that the Pharisees were attacking Him: "Are you, of all people, the Son of God???" Jesus turns it back on them, "YOU, of all people, are the ones saying it." It's hard to Jesus' emphasis of "you" in English. In Greek, you don't have to supply the person (he/she/it/they/you/etc.). It is built into the verb. So when it is expressed, it is emphatic. But not only that, Jesus places it at the beginning of His reply, doubling up the emphasis (in Greek, word order helps show emphasis rather than meaning, as it does in English).

Anyway, I wouldn't make a big deal out of the present tense of "you say" by rendering it "you are saying" in Jesus' reply. It's very, very common for the gospel authors to use the present tense in both narrative and speech for the purpose of bringing the story to life. We do that every day when we are telling a story. "So I go to the store, and this lady says to me . . ."

In answer, then, to the question, "Is "yes" found in the Greek?" the answer is "No, it is not." What you have to decide is whether or not to take hoti as causative or declarative. If the former, then translating it, "Yes, because I am" is a good enough translation. If the latter, then that translation would be incorrect.

Hope that helps.