Koine is imaginary.
No Greek ever used it. It is the result of using the Septuagint as a “Rosetta stone” to effect the translation of Hebrew into Greek. It exists only in texts translated from Hebrew to Greek by using the phrases taken from the Septuagint. Koine’s grammar is Hebrew
There is so much wrong here. First, the information on Koine (Common) Greek being "imaginary" is an old misconception that has long been discarded:
For a long time Koine Greek confused many scholars. It was significantly different from Classical Greek. Some hypothesized that it was a combination of Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. Others attempted to explain it as a "Holy Ghost language," meaning that God created a special language just for the Bible. But studies of Greek papyri found in Egypt over the past one hundred years have shown that this language was the language of the everyday people used in the writings of wills, private letters, receipts, shopping lists, etc.
|
See Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar, Chapter 1.
Second, if the Septuagint is a Rosetta Stone for anyone, it's us moderns, because it was constructed by scholars who knew both Hebrew and Greek. It was NOT a Rosetta Stone to them, as in a key to translating Hebrew into Greek. Again, they already knew both, and that's why it has value to us. For example, when we see 223 instances of Iesous as transliterations for Yehoshua and Yeshua, we get that Iesous is a completely acceptable way to translate Jesus' name from Hebrew to Greek.
Third, where you got the idea that Koine's sole existence is in extractions from the Septuagint I have no idea. I would actually love to see your source on that, because it is as wrong as it can be. As Mounce points out in the quote above, Koine/Common Greek was .. wait for it ..
common! It shows up everywhere, not in the ivory towers of classical Greek scholarship, but in the ordinary business of everyday life in the Mediterranean world and beyond. Granted, that wasn't always known. But now it is, so there's no excuse for getting that wrong anymore.
Fourth, to say that "Koine's grammar is Hebrew" is completely wrong. I have studied both languages in earnest, to the point of tears at times. I would have loved it if they had the same grammar. I can handle Greek much better than I can handle Hebrew grammar. They are worlds apart. Greek feels a lot more familiar than Hebrew. It is well equipped for handling long chains of complex, abstract thought, whereas Hebrew is more concrete. The inflection patterns and the word order patterns are significantly different as well. Koine, on it's own, does NOT reflect Hebrew grammar per se.
That is not to say a Hebrew writer writing in Greek wouldn't tip his hand by using Hebrew idioms. Certainly that would happen. But idioms are not grammar, and even idioms must fit into the grammatical mold of the target language, in this case the Common (Koine) Greek, just to be understood by the target language's readers. So again the idea that Koine was fabricated out of the Septuagint Hebrew with a Hebrew grammar is completely wrong, idiomatic usage notwithstanding. Such beliefs are necessarily the product of imagination and not fact.
Peace,
SR
Good info, Reformer. Should be good enough for ES, however, he seems to be hung up on the “Nicolaitans.” Anybody ever called you that before? Get ready.
I think you are probably going to have to explain the true meaning of “Nicolaitan” next...for him, and for me. I’d like to hear your explanation of it.
>> “ For example, when we see 223 instances of Iesous as transliterations for Yehoshua and Yeshua, we get that Iesous is a completely acceptable way to translate Jesus’ name from Hebrew to Greek.” <<
.
For those (the majority, I’m sure) that wish to project the curse, of course that is true.
Ever watch network TV? They live by the same kind of logical rupture as your statement represents.
The “If you wish it to be true it must be true” approach has led the majority into the ditch since the beginning.