Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178767 | ||
Hi Mark. You said. "Do you believe that the Greek New Testament was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and as such, is an accurate record of what happened, and what Jesus said, and taught?" With the possible exception of Luke and Acts, I believe that all the other NT, autographs were, as I have allready said written in Aramaic, and that the Greek version of these is a translation. I have several versions of the Bible, some of them I consider to be better than others in rendering into English what God wrote in Hebrew, and Aramic, however, I would without hesitation say that all the different versions that I posses including the Watchtower one to be the Word of God. I have been told that there are thoes who have been converted as a result of what the Holy Spirit has said to them when that person has only had the JW version, or should I say perversion to hand. Our God is in no way limited, and is able to use any version in any language of His Word to bring about Salvation. I feel that this topic has just about been exausted, If you wish to discuss it any further, then I suggest you let me have your phone number, as I am able to phone you 24/7 at no cost for up to 70 mins. The Lord bless you Steve. Edwin. |
||||||
2 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | srbaegon | 178771 | ||
Hello Edwin, The only manuscript I know of that has been disputed concerning original language is Matthew. Your position is well outside the norm. I cannot understand why you would consider Paul's epistles to be written in Aramaic. The receiving churches and individuals would have been Gentile or mixed. Greek would have been the normal method of communication in order to be easily understood. Steve |
||||||
3 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178780 | ||
Hi Steve. You say. "The only manuscript I know of that has been disputed concerning original language is Matthew. Your position is well outside the norm. I cannot understand why you would consider Paul's epistles to be written in Aramaic. The receiving churches and individuals would have been Gentile or mixed. Greek would have been the normal method of communication in order to be easily understood." My reply. Of all the writers of the NT, the only one who was not a native Jew was Luke, his native language would have been Greek. The others would have written in their own language Aramaic. As this language was only spoken by a small minority of the world's population at that time, it was most important that it be translated into Greek for publication, so that a majority of people would be able te read it, or have it read to them. New Testament Greek is not the same as the classical Greek of Plato and Homer, nor it is the same as "market place Greek" spoken by most people at that time. I will give you three examples, the conjunction "and", is used with far more ferequency that is the case in Greek, the expression "truly truly" is not normal in Greek. "Jesus answered and said", is not normal in Greek. it would have been, Jesus said, or He said, or He answered, or He said. You can see this even in the English translation never mind going back to the Greek. Anyone reading the Greek NT, would be able to see straight away that it was a very literal word for word translaion of onother language, in this case the Aramic autographs where this type of usage is the norm. Edwin. |
||||||
4 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | srbaegon | 178781 | ||
Hello Edwin, Would Paul have naturally written in Aramaic? That is a non sequitur based on your presuppositions. The apostle was well-versed in Greek language and culture. We know this from his use of the Greek poet while preaching in Athens (Acts 17). If he knows Greek, there is nothing to prevent writing his epistles to the common-use language of the empire--Greek. I know there is a difference between Classical and Koine Greek. I acknowledge Hebrew idioms to be in the Greek text, but that is hardly conclusive. Nor are your examples which are given from the gospels and would deal almost exclusively with Jews. Again, we would expect Hebrew idioms in the Greek text because the setting would warrant it. You are making sweeping claims based on circumstantial evidence. I await your response to Tim Moran concerning the hard evidence. Steve |
||||||