My Greek professor, on the pronunciation aspect of koine, used to say, "hey there are no 1st cent. Greek speakers around for us to know how we ought to pronounce the koine (i.e. long or short pronunciation of omicron or omega--no one really knows :).

I agree NT Greek is valuable to know--but its not that easy to learn--it's a "dead" language after all. Once you do learn, like anything, you either use it or loose it--and I would say most people I went to school with, "loose it" sadly. Btw, even if someone learns the NT Greek or Hebrew or both that person or translation board still has to make "theological" interpretive decisions at various syntactical junctures--so it's still not that cut and dry!

Good post!

In Christ,
Bobby

 

You're quite right Bobby - surely there are times when the text is ambiguous, and one has to apply to the immediate, and sometimes the overall context - and such choices are more often than not decided according to the theological presumptions of the translator.

True as well, if the language is not used, it will be forgotten.

My point is that it -is- and easy language to learn, such that those who handle it poorly are without excuse.

I appreciate your comment.

 

That bugs me as well, Daniel.

 

Here's a good book on pitfalls to avoid when interpreting, specifically pertaining to problems with interpretation at the 'Greek level'.
http://www.bestwebbuys.com/books/search.jsp?isrc=b-home-search&N=0&Ntt=exegetical+fallacies&x=0&y=0&Ntk=P_Title

 

I have that book - it is "the" standard exegetical handbook, and more people would do well to read it.

In fact, when I first began to study Greek, it was highly recommended to me, and so I got it quick as a fiddle. Great read, even if you aren't going to study Greek.

 

I agree that people need to be careful when understanding a word differently than it is usually given. However, without examples, it is hard for me to tell what limits you have on this principle of taking a word as given.

Most pertinently, what about the words which everyone knows are not translated? Every scholar of Greek agrees that the word given as "church" is in Greek the word for "assembly." All Greek scholars also know that the word given as "Christ" is in its plain English sense closest to the word "annointed." And there's baptism, and deacon, and pastor, and bishop.

Why are these words left untranslated? I think it is because their Latin or Greek form has been invested with a meaning the original word (and its translations) does not fully support--so we make a new word where one is not needed or warranted.

The other thing you did not mention, which is much easier to simply bicker about, is contextual understanding. When someone is really learning a language, not out of a book but among people who use it, the words take their definition by the context in which they are used. Is there any place at all for a person who knows only English to guess at better meanings, when (and [b]only[/b] when) it would seem to provide a more scripturally-consistent sense?

As a student of English, I know how much the meanings of words can be fought over. You notice that people generally don't agree on what any seminal author meant, down to the last letter. In whatever field, in whatever language, different schools of followers find different meanings in the exact same text--even if the language is modern and native!

I wouldn't go against the Spirit-inspiration of the Scriptures by saying that their misunderstanding was the fault of the authors. But I would be careful about taking the meaning of a passage however the translators give it. By all indications, the majority of Old Testament experts in Christ's time understood scripture differently than He did.

I try not to be dogmatic in any alternative readings of passages unless and until I find some textual basis, as a text note or in a Greek-English dictionary. Sometimes I have had to check the drift of my argument when I actually go to look up a word. More often I find that my interpretation is odd or generally unaccepted because of the predisposition of the translators, not the language itself.

Of course none of that contradicts your invitation to free online and relatively inexpensive printed aids. Still, it's unclear who you might consider offending in this area and what you might consider reasonable skepticism of the translators. Care to elaborate?

 

δανιελ, ιτς αλ γρικ τυ μι, τυ.

That's as proficient as I get.

 

Arlen - Hello, and thanks for commenting! You said, Still, it's unclear who you might consider offending in this area and what you might consider reasonable skepticism of the translators. Care to elaborate?

When I speak of translators, I am not speaking of a committee of hand picked linguistic experts, assembled together to ply their prowess to collectively culminate a new translation of scripture.

I was/am speaking of the "non-experts" - those who themselves are not really qualified to competently handle the original languages - who, armed with [1] an online lexicon and [2] a Greek dictionary, and of course [3] a detailed exegesis written by some freakish, fringe "Greek grammar contortionist" - and although finding no real respect amongst scholars, this novel twist is hailed in by those who benefit from it - as the one "true" rendering of a verse or passage.

It is the people who quote questionable quackery that I quip about.

David - your transliteration threw me for a few seconds.

Susan, google "free biblical Greek resources" and I am sure you will find more than enough stuff. Also there is a free program called the "interlinear scripture analyzer" that is pretty nice if you don't have an interlinear translation at home.