{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03936688311688312, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010146103896103896, 'mean_word_length': 4.706018518518518, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Romans 4.5 in Tev: A Plea for Consistency

The twentieth century has witnessed a completely new departure in the approach to translating dikaiosune and cognates in English versions of the New Testament. In essence it abandons the traditional approach which utilises two word-families ("righteousness" and cognates, "justify" and cognates) in favour of a one word-family approach ("right" and cognates) in which the stress is on establishing a right relationship with God. This translational approach is traceable in the first instance to Charles B Williams' The New Testament: A Private Translation in the Language of the People (1937). It is echoed in a number of subsequent English versions, I among them the TEV. The enormous popularity of TEV (over 50 million paperback copies sold between 1966 and 1975)" has ensured a wide dissemination of this new translation approach. Inevitably, such consideration raises the issue as to whether this approach (or, for that matter, the alternatives offered!) is accurate. That issue, however, is beyond the scope of this article. For the present purposes it is assumed to be the most viable means of rendering into English what Paul had in mind by his use of dikaiosune and cognates'. Our interest is focused rather on the way Rom. 4.5 is rendered in the TEV. As this view has been subject to revision in the several different editions, for convenience I have set them out in Table I, together with the Greek text. The colometric arrangement is intended to facilitate comparison. It will be observed that the phrase tou dikaiounta ta asebe which is the particular concern of our enquiry, is consistently rendered in the several editions "who declares the guilty to be innocent". There are three compelling reasons for abandoning this rendering: 1. On the grounds that the Greek cannot be understood in this way from (1) Paul's usage in Romans; (2) Paul's usage elsewhere; (3) Usage elsewhere in the New Testament; (4) the Old Testament, with particular reference to the LXX; (5) Greek literature in general. Rather, the context is such that it has to mean here what it means in similar contexts elsewhere in the Epistle. Let us, for convenience, refer to these as "justificatory" contexts [= f-contexts], i.e., contexts in which Paul discusses "justification by faith". 2. Such a statement, "God ... declares the guilty to be innocent", with the underlying concept it implies, does not have support anywhere in any of the