Replies

"If a paragraph in English is what is needed to explain a single phrase in Greek, then why not just do it? I would SCREAM for that as an English speaking Orthodoxer. :)"

If you became an Orthodoxer, FK, we'd see to it you learned Greek! Trust me on this one! :)

Alex and I had a long chat the other day, off this forum, about how knowing a language lets one get "inside" the mind of a culture and leads to a fuller understanding of that culture. As it happens we were both speaking about Greek, but its a pretty obvious observation no matter what the language. Its implications are, however, huge if one's religious belief is going to be based solely in writings done 2000+ years ago in a language one doesn't understand, or understand well and set in a culture which bears virtually no likeness to the one the believer lives in. Most non-Orthodox Christians live in such a world, but the majority of them, Roman Catholics and traditional Anglicans, worship liturgically and the centrality of the various liturgies in their lives provides a context for the translated words they read in scripture. The greater part of Protestantism is not liturgical and thus even that aid to understanding is missing.

Most non-Orthodox Christians live in such a world, but the majority of them, Roman Catholics and traditional Anglicans, worship liturgically and the centrality of the various liturgies in their lives provides a context for the translated words they read in scripture. The greater part of Protestantism is not liturgical and thus even that aid to understanding is missing

That is the essence of the whole issue. For the Protestants who are "their own popes," a thorough understanding of the Scripture in context and culture and language in which they were written would be a requirement. Plus, one would have to come up with all the arguments and counterarguments accumulated over the past 2,000 years — all on one's own and all in one's limited lifetime!

It's like trying to be your own master electrician, carpenter, architect, builder and computor programmer, speak three languages and hold six doctoral degrees all in one!

Liturgical Churches have retained the collective knowledge and understanding of the Scriptures which one single person can only approach at best with extraordinary effort.

We know that Catholics/Orthodox do not read the scripture as much as the Protestants. But their participation in the liturgical life is scriptural, without being formally theological, and without creating a 'personal religion' our of a personal relationship with God. We can always go back and check how the Church handled a particular issue, in context and in the cultural milieu of the times.

Protestants, on the other hand, search and pick here and there, trying to piece together the puzzle, often confusing, as jo kus aptly pointed out recently, personal opinions with the Holy Spirit. In fact, so many of them seem to equate, personal opinion with the word of God.

knowing a language lets one get "inside" the mind of a culture and leads to a fuller understanding of that culture

I was fortunate to have an exposure to both Hebrew and Greek, and consider myself very lucky, especally since both times the reasons for studying the language were somewhat frivolous.

This being said, there is a big difference between, figuratively speaking, sitting in the lap of the Church, and taking potshots at it from the outside. Most American Catholics (Orthodox are different as they tend to be more closely connected to their ethnic culture) do not know even the language of their own church, Latin, let alone Greek, and they do just fine insofar as they have trust in what the Church teaches them. I am sometimes asked how come the translation used in the English liturgy, NAB, is so bad -- or at least so bad for analytical scripture study. Well, but we do not get our theology from the NAB, or from any other scripture in a raw form. We get it from the priest, Catholic literature, magisterial teaching, etc. I am not saying it is altogether good, -- I would rather see literacy in Latin and liturgical use of Latin, or at least the faithful to Latin Douay translation -- but it is a tolerable situation. What is not tolerable is using particular translations in order to find fault with the doctrine, -- something that is the main substance of this and similar threads. Once you are one that path, a degree of fluency in Greek, -- not even in Latin -- becomes necessary.

If you became an Orthodoxer, FK, we'd see to it you learned Greek! Trust me on this one! :)

Not only do I believe you, but I'd Want to do it! :)

Alex and I had a long chat the other day, off this forum, about how knowing a language lets one get "inside" the mind of a culture and leads to a fuller understanding of that culture. As it happens we were both speaking about Greek, but its a pretty obvious observation no matter what the language. Its implications are, however, huge if one's religious belief is going to be based solely in writings done 2000+ years ago in a language one doesn't understand, or understand well and set in a culture which bears virtually no likeness to the one the believer lives in. (emphasis added)

I echo Quix's comments about transcendence. I agree with him that the Holy Spirit has made sure that core Christian doctrine has survived time and languages. Regarding what I underlined, I would only add that my beliefs are not based on a language I do not understand. They are based on translations of that language which I trust. You have your own translations of that language that you trust.

That is fine, but what I always object to is the monopoly of truth claimed, even in the translations. I maintain that it's the interpretation that is the difference, not the translations. 98% of the time I have been perfectly fine with any quotes from "Apostolic-favored" translations.

When you all say that you have an appreciation because you know Greek, I take that to mean that you have an agreement with others who have taught you to read Greek in a certain way, and translate it in a certain way. That's not bad, that's good. You have more freedom than I do to decide certain things for yourself, and I envy and respect that. AND, yet the major points and true direction of your personal theology have absolutely nothing to do with your knowledge or appreciation of Greek. That is driven by the Church, and translators and interpreters that have been accepted by the Church. Again, this is no criticism. I just see it as both of us relying on different people for the interpretation and translation of the Greek language. I might be at a personal disadvantage as respecting you, but the people we trust for our respective theologies were all heavyweights.

I don't have any problem in acknowledging the interconnection. However, this same interconnection does not help to refute traditional Protestant arguments (positions) concerning the assertion that error did enter the Church.