ChristiansUnite Forums

Theology => Debate => Topic started by: acedia on August 07, 2005, 12:42:11 AM



Title: reading the "original" Bible
Post by: acedia on August 07, 2005, 12:42:11 AM
I have a friend who, at her church, is learning to read, write, speak, etc. Koine Greek, which is the language the New Testament was written in.  I found it very interesting that when read in Greek, and then read in English, some details or the overall feeling of a passage can be changed.  She feels that learning to read this language has helped her understand the Bible much better than before.  

Anyone else had an experience like this?  I'm interesting in learning this too, along with learning to speak Hebrew (Old Testament), to see what more I can draw from the original texts.  


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Soldier4Christ on August 07, 2005, 12:57:13 AM
Hi dientamin,

No I don't get a difference in "feeling" when I read the Greek version of the NT.



Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Compatriot on August 07, 2005, 01:34:09 AM
I am loving this place. I got linked here by a friend and I can't help feeling a Strong and Loving presence here ;D . I just wanted to ask Acedia why the idea that the word of God would change through language cyphers ever occured to him? God wouldn't let His text truely lose His meaning simply from a change in wording or language.

Again, hello and thank you for existing. Finally an oasis from the rest of the sinful internet.


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: acedia on August 07, 2005, 01:49:30 AM
I am loving this place. I got linked here by a friend and I can't help feeling a Strong and Loving presence here ;D . I just wanted to ask Acedia why the idea that the word of God would change through language cyphers ever occured to him? God wouldn't let His text truely lose His meaning simply from a change in wording or language.

Again, hello and thank you for existing. Finally an oasis from the rest of the sinful internet.

Man translated it, not God, and man is fallible.  


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Compatriot on August 07, 2005, 02:06:25 AM

Man translated it, not God, and man is fallible.  

But God is omnipotent and everpresent. Do you believe that our Lord would let man fail in tranfering His word to the world and it's peoples? No, faith in the divine spirts ability is what you are lacking. The Bible was placed into this world by God and through man. Man could never write such a perfect text.


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: acedia on August 07, 2005, 02:13:52 AM

Man translated it, not God, and man is fallible.  

But God is omnipotent and everpresent. Do you believe that our Lord would let man fail in tranfering His word to the world and it's peoples? No, faith in the divine spirts ability is what you are lacking. The Bible was placed into this world by God and through man. Man could never write such a perfect text.

God gave us free will.  I'm free (as are billions of others) to translate my own rough version of the original texts, however faulty, and give it to someone, and they may never know the difference.  I feel that only the original texts can be trusted totally.  Those are the texts that were "placed into this world by God and through man," not the translations.  


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Compatriot on August 07, 2005, 02:24:11 AM
But God would protect His Book from such "alterations" from occuring, or at least make sure a true definition of Christianity still flourished somwhere. In the begining all Bible's were writen down by hand. Every time they were writen and re-writen a chance for "human" error could always occur. Yet, when looking from modern to ancient copies of the text the differences are so minute it begs to womder how. If not through Divine protection of the Word of God, then what? Luck? I don't honestly think a true Christian would believe that God left his Book's integrity and truth to luck. To go back to your original point, if The Bible was in essence re-writen hundreds of times before the printing press and we still honor it's words as the Binding Gospels, then why would a shift in language change a thing?


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Tabitha on August 09, 2005, 02:10:49 PM
I, as of yet, have not had the privelege to study Hebrew, but I hope to have the opportunity to do so in the near future for the same reasons that you are studying it.

But God would protect His Book from such "alterations" from occuring, or at least make sure a true definition of Christianity still flourished somwhere. In the begining all Bible's were writen down by hand. Every time they were writen and re-writen a chance for "human" error could always occur. Yet, when looking from modern to ancient copies of the text the differences are so minute it begs to womder how. If not through Divine protection of the Word of God, then what? Luck? I don't honestly think a true Christian would believe that God left his Book's integrity and truth to luck. To go back to your original point, if The Bible was in essence re-writen hundreds of times before the printing press and we still honor it's words as the Binding Gospels, then why would a shift in language change a thing?

I don't think that was Acadia's orginal point at all. When dealing with languages, sometimes something as simple as a tense of a verb can change the meaning of a sentence. I do believe that the Bible, with a few deviations from the orginal text to compensate for different languages, is the True Word of God. You can see that through the application of the Bible to your life, through the development with your relationship with Christ, and the fact that the vast majority of Biblical text is the same. I think what his/her point was that the tone can change with language. I think to better get idea of what is trying to be said, especially regarding the letters to churches, you have to consider the author and the audience like in any work of literature.


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: BlessedX2 on August 09, 2005, 10:52:05 PM
Yes, I agree, changing languages you can have a change in the feel of what is being said.  I read the bible in english and in spanish and there are many places where the "feel" is different.  I also agree that God can and does protect His word.  If we can't trust the translation then the word of God is not for the common person... isn't that who He came for?


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Shammu on August 10, 2005, 12:55:43 AM
Yes, I agree, changing languages you can have a change in the feel of what is being said.  I read the bible in english and in spanish and there are many places where the "feel" is different.  I also agree that God can and does protect His word.
AMEN!

Seeing that you are new here, BlessedX2, welcome to Christians Unite forums. Theres a great bunch of Christians here.

Blessed is the being, that follows the Lord.
Bob

Luke 11:28 But He said, Blessed rather are those who hear the Word of God and obey and practice it!


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: ollie on August 12, 2005, 09:44:29 PM
I am loving this place. I got linked here by a friend and I can't help feeling a Strong and Loving presence here ;D . I just wanted to ask Acedia why the idea that the word of God would change through language cyphers ever occured to him? God wouldn't let His text truely lose His meaning simply from a change in wording or language.

Again, hello and thank you for existing. Finally an oasis from the rest of the sinful internet.

Man translated it, not God, and man is fallible.  
Then why is the Greek and Hebrew not fallible?


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: cris on August 12, 2005, 10:00:23 PM
I am loving this place. I got linked here by a friend and I can't help feeling a Strong and Loving presence here ;D . I just wanted to ask Acedia why the idea that the word of God would change through language cyphers ever occured to him? God wouldn't let His text truely lose His meaning simply from a change in wording or language.

Again, hello and thank you for existing. Finally an oasis from the rest of the sinful internet.

Man translated it, not God, and man is fallible.  
Then why is the Greek and Hebrew not fallible?

Just my opinion..............the Hebrew was the original language spoken and written...............OT; it was/is infallible because God spoke those words directly to Moses, the first 5 books, that is.

The Greek would be fallible if it was translated from Hebrew....OT.

Do I believe God preserved His word in every translated language?  Yep, I do.  Even though the translations vary somewhat, I believe God has written His word in our hearts.  When the heart condition is right, I believe God will make it very clear what He wants us to know.



Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Shammu on August 12, 2005, 11:00:30 PM
Quote
Even though the translations vary somewhat, I believe God has written His word in our hearts.  When the heart condition is right, I believe God will make it very clear what He wants us to know.
AMEN, I agree 100% cris.


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: curious on August 13, 2005, 12:51:15 AM
Hello everyone:
   Not all the New Testament was written in Greek.Matthew was written in Hebrew.John was written with Aramaic influence,& either Mark or Luke was written in Latin.The rest were written in Hebrew.They were put into Greek after awhile.
   All the Old Testament was written in Hebrew.It was also written in Chaldean & I believe a little in Aramaic,& alot that was written in Hebrew was written in different styles of Hebrew too.
                 
                 
                 Yours in Yeshua
                 curious


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: curious on August 19, 2005, 06:16:20 AM
My mistake in the last one in the first paragraph the rest were written in Greek in the NT


            Yours in Yeshua,
             curious


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: one sheep on August 27, 2005, 07:49:42 AM
Hello all-

This is in response primarily to Acedia, the one who started the thread. I agree with this person, and I encourage you to keep studying the koine Greek.
There is a huge difference between the Kione Greek, and the English. People that deny this are not even thinking logically. Just look at how much English changes, our street language is acceptable. Words like bootylicious, phat, and a plethora of other so-called words, violate English consistantly, even though it's not proper English at all. It's the gradual dumbing down of society. But it has become acceptable to talk like an idiot.
Koine, was the common (street language) of the 1st century Church and the general public. And Jesus, used their expressions, vernacular, and so on. To communicate with them, yet without sin.

Touching on the brief comment that someone made  on the word love, or agapeo in the Kione;
English tranlates this word into one general definition, when in fact there are at least 24 different meanings for this word in the Koine Greek. The same is true of many, many other words in the Bible.
We (English) use two of the 24 words for "love". And people interpret them both to mean the basic same thing, and they are not at all the same.
Proof is also in the context, not just the word itself.

Example: And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. II Jon 1:6

This is the agape that God demands of the true believer. Allegance to Him is commanded by Him, regardless of what others say, do, think, or teach.

Do we (all professing Christ) have this kind of love? Clearly, NO.

If we did, there wouldn't be over 250 + denominations, and splinter groups of them.

Jesus, taught the apostles to not phileo the world. Or show affection for it. Churchianity says that we must 'phileo' everyone, God doesn't say this at all, but it has become accepted as what God said. He didn't teach "agreeing to disagree" That is a false teaching incorporated into the faith.

So yes, there is a difference in the translations. And this is only one example. If I am wrong, then someone will have to disprove it from the bible.

For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. Gal 1:10

This scripture also alludes to the meaning of true love.

There are many mistranlated words in the English versions, even the AV (KJV) because half of the translators where Catholic. So their imputations have greatly impaired the true meanings of words. Because their theology was opposing the protestant translators. The result was a compromised text which had to be approved by King James.

I applaud Acedia for wanting to study the koine Greek, it does make a difference in understanding the word of God, if it didn't the great scholars of the past would not have bothered compiling a Concordance, or a parsing guide.

God has hidden things in plain sight, and tells us to dig for them. If you don't desire truth, you will not bother with original definitions of words.

And look at the difference in their teaching, and understand, compared to today?
Again, if this is wrong, you need to disprove it.

A mathetes of The Lord


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: nChrist on August 27, 2005, 08:11:00 AM
Hello One Sheep,

I see this is your first post, so WELCOME!!

(http://www.sirinet.net/~blkidps/welcome.gif)

I sincerely hope that you enjoy the Christian fellowship here.

Real Bible Study takes considerable time, and it's worth every second of it. The common things that I like to stress is putting everything into context, identifying the speaker, identifying the audience, identifying the purpose, and following all links to references and comparisons. YES! - a good concordance is a must. Word studies from the ancient languages clear up many misunderstandings.

I would like to make one Scripture comment about your references to love:

Matthew 22:36 ASV  Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?
Matthew 22:37 ASV  And he said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Matthew 22:38 ASV  This is the great and first commandment.
Matthew 22:39 ASV  And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
Matthew 22:40 ASV  On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets.

The greatest example of Love in the Holy Bible is the Love JESUS had for us in dying on the CROSS for us. I obviously believe this is the greatest example of Agape Love.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Psalms 139:13-14 NASB  For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother's womb.  I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well.


Title: Re:reading the "original" Bible
Post by: Phil121 on August 27, 2005, 05:14:31 PM


Real Bible Study takes considerable time, and it's worth every second of it. The common things that I like to stress is putting everything into context, identifying the speaker, identifying the audience, identifying the purpose, and following all links to references and comparisons. YES! - a good concordance is a must. Word studies from the ancient languages clear up many misunderstandings.


Very sound advice, blackeyedpeas.

It's a good idea to understand the history of the times as well, especially when studying the Old Testament.

Also, one of the most useful resources of the interent, are concordences which allow you to look up the actual Greek or Hebrew word. That allows the reader to make his own decision on how accurately the passage is translated into English.