Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: kawaii; HarleyD
"If you'l recall the New Testament original language is Greek; it's not a translation."

That's not entirely correct. Matthew was first written in Hebrew then Aramaic and then translated into Greek. Papias, Irenaeus, Eusebius and Origen all attest to the fact that it was first written in Hebrew and there is a large body of experts who say it was also in Aramaic as they say of the Gospel of Mark and Jude's letter. There is also the different forms of Greek used by Luke, Paul, James and the writer of Hebrew, with the use of different idioms and Hebraisms and Aramaic sayings; all having to be translated according to the scrivener's particular bias.

The Greek was not consistent throughout the original letters and the Old Testament references had to be translated from the Hebrew thought into the Greek language which didn't have words or thought forms to accurately translate the original ideas..
10,166 posted on 02/12/2007 6:25:50 PM PST by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10129 | View Replies ]


To: blue-duncan; kawaii; HarleyD
The Greek was not consistent throughout the original letters and the Old Testament references had to be translated from the Hebrew thought into the Greek language which didn't have words or thought forms to accurately translate the original ideas

Your comment is spot on, since Hebrew relied also heavily on numerology (i.e. someone's name had a numerical meaning as well, and then the number was significant for various reasons), just as Japanese and Chinese cannot be fully translated into alphabetical languages because, in addition to each character having a set of pronounceable sounds, it also has a pictorial meaning.

Thus in a typical kabuki play (where all men are men and 'women' are too), one two actors may have the same sounding name but a different kanji (Chinese character) with pictorial meaning that says a lot about their different personalities, who is a hero and who is a villain.

I often thought about the numerology issue regarding the Septuagint (LXX). Balancing this is the fact that in Mishna and 6th century revisions, the Hebrew Bible underwent further 'corrections' to eliminate any Christian bias in addition to vowels which can completely change the meaning of the words.

All this points to vulnerability and bias that has invaded the Scripture, where it is impossible to ascertain which is the 'original' and which is an addition or subtraction. It is rather fascinating that none of the 'originals' survived although one would think the holiest articles would be guarded against all odds (examples: the Tablets, the original books of Moses, the true cross, Christ's robes, the original Gospels and Epistles, etc.). Instead, all we have are descriptions in copies of copies.

Dead Sea Scrolls cast a lot of light on various types of Jewish canon that existed in the 1st century AD, which is significant because they are not identical with the Masoretic Text (the Protestant OT "Hebrew Bible").

10,167 posted on 02/12/2007 8:39:06 PM PST by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10166 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson