Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
Matthew XXII.21.

(tunc ait illis reddite ergo quae sunt Caesaris Caesari et quae sunt Dei Deo)

(τότε λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τῷ θεῷ.)

And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.
Mark XII.17.

(respondens autem Iesus dixit illis reddite igitur quae sunt Caesaris Caesari et quae sunt Dei Deo et mirabantur super eo)

(ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Τὰ Καίσαρος ἀπόδοτε Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τῷ θεῷ. καὶ ἐξεθαύμαζον ἐπ' αὐτῷ.)

And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.
Luke XX.25.

(et ait illis reddite ergo quae Caesaris sunt Caesari et quae Dei sunt Deo)

(ὁ δὲ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς, Τοίνυν ἀπόδοτε τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τῷ θεῷ.)

My Latin, never more than shaky, has not improved with half a century's hibernation. But don't the Latin sentences used the same word - which the translators have rendered differently in different passages?

I can't comment about the Greek since I know only modern Greek - and precious little of that.

Yes, the translators took quae and rendered it unto King James in many ways.

As arnie points out, the Latin translation of the Koine Greek has quae, which is translated variously by: the things which and the things that. In the original Greek, which theoretically is what the KJV of the New Testament was translated from, the word is ta (τὰ) 'the (things that/which)'.

I was looking at the history of that, which, and who in English, and I have listed them in their relative age. Until the 14th century, that was the only conjunction English had. At that time, which came into the language as another choice, followed in the 15th century by who(m). Examples of that for who:

a. Out father that art in heaven ... (Pater noster prayer)

b. Fleance his son, that keeps him company. (Macbeth III.i.134.)

Interestingly enough, that almost went extinct, but by the 18th century it was making a comeback. It was during the latter half of that same century and during the 19th that the usage of that for restrictive clauses and which for unrestrictive clauses came into being. Before that time, as the KJV verses above illustrate, the two conjunctions were pretty much in free variation.

quote:

Until the 14th century, that was the only conjunction English had. At that time, which came into the language

Very interesting. Any notion why and from where?

which is from the Old English pronoun hwilc. It wasn't used as a conjunction until the Middle English period. I guess.

It wasn't used as a conjunction until the Middle English period. I guess.

Yes, gooofy is right, shu, and my sentence was ambiguous at best. Which was in English from its beginnings, but it wasn't used as a conjunction until the 14th century. Sorry.