Here we have two translations? Which is correct, if either?

And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God… (Rom 8:28 NKJV)
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God… (Rom 8:28 NASB)

Do all things work together for good to those who love God, etc.? Or does God work everything together for good to those who love God, etc.

I am amazed at how many translations render it similar to the NKJV. I believe that rendering is false for two reasons. Let’s first examine the Greek text of Textus Receptus from which the King James Version (and the New King James Version) was translated:

οιδαμεν— δε-- οτι τοις----- αγαποσιν τον θεον παντα— συνεργeι ---------εις αγαθον
We know now that to those loving— the God all things works together into good

Now here’s the problem with translating this as “all things work together for good.” That is the order of the words, but παντα (all things) is plural, whereas συνεργeι (works together) is singular. It would be like saying in English, “The boys works together,” instead of “The boys work together.”

Now the word παντα cn be either an nominative plural (subject of a verb) or accusative plural (direct object of a verb). Most translators have considered it to be the subject of the verb συνεργeι (works together). But again, it cannot be, because παντα is plural but συνεργeι is singular. So παντα would have to be the direct object of συνεργeι and since the latter has no word which is the subject, the two words would have to be translated as “he works together all things.”

We find an interesting variation when we examine papyrus 46, which may have been copied shortly after the year 100 A.D. but if not, very likely prior to 150 A.D. It is believed to be the oldest manuscript of any part of the New Testament. In that manuscript the words o θεος (the God) appear immediately after συνεργeι. Now o θεος is in the nominative case, and so it is the subject of a verb, and that verb is none other than συνεργeι.
So it gives the true reading, “God works everything together.”

I am showing below a copy of a photocopy of the page of Papyrus 46 which contains Rom 8:28. As usual all word are in capitals with no spaces between words and no punctutation marks. All sigmas were printed with a character which resembles a capital “C”. So θεος, if it were written in full would look something like ΘΕΟC However, to save papyrus (relatively rare), the scribes in those days shortened the word to just the first and last letter with an overstroke above the letters. So it would be just ΘC with a stroke above.

One more little problem: the ancient page was torn just between the “Θ” and the “C”. But the overstroke is clearly visible. In the photocopy below, please look at the very end of line 4. There you will seee the “Θ” and the overstroke.

Either translation God is still sovereign and in control. Moreover,

Could it be that the many and varied (plural) “all things” is encapsulated within the greater whole of the (singular) “work together”

Cole, I was only indicating which one was gramatically correct. The application of the verse is quite another matter. But since you addressed the application, I will make this comment in response. The verse as well as all the verses you quoted do not show that God meticulously controls every event on earth—that every event occurs according to His will. The following sentence in “the Lord’s Prayer” contradicts that idea: “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” For if God’s will is presently being done on earth in every respect, why pray that it would be done?

Here we have two translations? Which is correct, if either?

And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God… (Rom 8:28 NKJV)
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God… (Rom 8:28 NASB)

Obviously God causes all things

Paidion,

The paradoxical mystery of the infinitely complex heart and mind of God is such that there are at least two aspects to His will. Some say three but I will give two. In the first sense God’s will is His decision about what will happen by either direct causation or permission. This is where He works all things according to the counsel of His will. This is His hidden will for we don’t know it until it comes to pass or until God reveals it to us. The second aspect of God’s will is His revealed will. This is also known as His will of command on how we should behave. Jesus laid down this example in His life. It is rooted in His holy character. Holy here is being understood in the sense of moral purity. The moral law of Christ is God’s kingdom on earth as it is in Heaven. The task of Christians is to make the kingdom visible on earth through faithful Christian living. This is the Gospel of Christ of holiness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Christians are to manifest the reality of kingdom life and pray for it.

Buying any translation Is like buying a car. Some warranty problems are likely to arise in a complicated product. Thankfully there are some good mechanics around for people like me . Of course there is also the problem of spin though that may be streaching the issue a bit; or maybe not!
Thanks Mr P

Yes, that is typical Calvinistic explanation. But the Bible never speaks of “two wills of God.” God either wants a thing, or He doesn’t. It isn’t the case that He wants something according to one will, and doesn’t want it according to the other.

Yes. Biblical verses establish that God accomplishes all that he desires, e.g., Job 42:2, Isaiah 46:10b and 11b, and Isaiah 55:11. That means God’s desire is a sufficient condition of what happens. That is, everything God desires to happen will happen, sooner or later.

But these verses do not establish that God’s desire is a necessary condition of what happens. That is, as you said, not everything that happens is what God desires to happen.

God’s desire is a sufficient, but not a necessary condition of what happens. A very succinct summary of the matter, Lancia. Thank you.

I gave a whole list of scriptures that speak of God’s sovereign will. His will of command comes from the lips of Christ in the Gospels. You reject it because you don’t accept the mysterious paradox that God is. It doesn’t fit with your finite and limited mind. Jesus trusted in a sovereign God for it was by the joy set before Him that He endured the cross. In the garden He prayed to the Father: not my will but yours be done. If we are to follow in His footsteps we will do likewise.

But it does fit with yours.

Yep. That’s because I accept paradox and mystery. Jesus is God and the Father is God. Before His brutal torture in the Garden Jesus wanted to be released from the torture that lay ahead. Yet He prayed to the Father: Not my will but Yours be done.

I just thought about this. What if when we die and make it to heaven, we ask God, “which bible translation was 100% correct?” God then replies, “none of them - does it really matter?”

Yep I think it’s probably true… we quibble over what we don’t know more than simply doing what we do know e.g., “love thy neighbour.”

Randy, no one has been posing this question in this thread. Why bring it up as part of the thread?

The original post asked which of two translations had correctly rendered one particular verse. It was a very specific question and not a general one. Furthermore there was nothing in it about 100%.

Randy was just sharing his thought. That’s all. It may of haven’t answered the topic question, but for me, I thought it was an interesting thought.