@boonon saidGod does not require anyone to read anything, far less to learn Greek. Some of the most unlearned, and uneducated people will be in the Kingdom of God because they are 'Good Samaritans'. They feed, help, clothe, assist, anyone they can and often they do it to angels and to Jesus Christ, without wanting or expecting anything in return.
@FMF
One of my sons went to College to become a minister. He was required to learn greek, and latin. He said it was very hard. The school required this. I personally don't think God requires us to do anything. As far as reading or understanding the Bible that is up to each person individually whether they want to or not. Also you can just read the bible, like a book. Or you ...[text shortened]... d I really only read and pray. I would myself never have time to learn greek, nor really the desire.
@fmf saidNo. This thread is about you getting lost in the weeds questioning the veracity, authenticity and reliability of whatever translation it is you intend to disfigure.
This thread is not about "weeds"; it's about translations into English.
Oh the irony of it all that the one that claims to be agnostic(no nothing) should think what he has to say regarding the reliability and trustworthiness of any particular translation of the Greek has any credibility.
@josephw saidYou are mistaken. This thread is for people who believe in the veracity, authenticity and reliability of the "word of God" in the Bible to comment on the inspiration and infallibility issues when it is translated into other languages, in this case, English.
No. This thread is about you getting lost in the weeds questioning the veracity, authenticity and reliability of whatever translation it is you intend to disfigure.
@josephw saidThe trigger for this topic was not my perception of the Bible, but instead, it was a comment by KingDavid403 suggesting that the word "hate" in Luke 14:26 is incorrect.
Oh the irony of it all that the one that claims to be agnostic(no nothing) should think what he has to say regarding the reliability and trustworthiness of any particular translation of the Greek has any credibility.
1 edit
@josephw saidNobody is trying to "disfigure" anything. Don't be paranoid.
This thread is about you getting lost in the weeds questioning the veracity, authenticity and reliability of whatever translation it is you intend to disfigure.
About 30 years ago, I read the entire Bible from cover to cover once and the NT maybe three times or more [in the years thereafter, the early 1990s]... in Indonesian.
Here is Luke 14:26 [or Lukas 14:26 as Indonesians call it] in the Indonesian language: "Jikalau seorang datang kepada-Ku dan ia tidak membenci bapanya, ibunya, isterinya, anak-anaknya, saudara-saudaranya laki-laki atau perempuan, bahkan nyawanya sendiri, ia tidak dapat menjadi murid-Ku."
The word in question here is "membenci" which means "[to] hate".
The interesting question, for me, maybe not you, is this: is the translation of Luke 14:26 into Indonesian "divinely inspired and infallible"?
@fmf saidThen I guess you heard what I had to say.
You are mistaken. This thread is for people who believe in the veracity, authenticity and reliability of the "word of God" in the Bible to comment on the inspiration and infallibility issues when it is translated into other languages, in this case, English.
@fmf saidThere is no "question". The "words" of scripture are "inspired". They constitute "the word of God". No mistakes. No errors. In any language.
Nobody is trying to "disfigure" anything. Don't be paranoid.
About 30 years ago, I read the entire Bible from cover to cover once and the NT maybe three times or more [in the years thereafter, the early 1990s]... in Indonesian.
Here is Luke 14:26 [or Lukas 14:26 as Indonesians call it] in the Indonesian language: [i]"Jikalau seorang datang kepada-Ku dan ia tidak membenci b ...[text shortened]... t you, is this: is the translation of Luke 14:26 into Indonesian "divinely inspired and infallible"?
The real problem is with interpretation and application.
Hate means hate. The real question is why did Jesus use that term, and then how is it applied in practice.
2 edits
@fmf saidThe doctrine of the Virgin Mary is based on a mistranslation. The Hebrew word almah meant "maiden", that is, a young unmarried woman, but not necessarily a woman who had never had sexual relations. The Hebrew word denoted a social and legal status, not a physiological condition. It was mistranslated in the Gospels (in Greek) as parthenos, from which we derive the word "parthenogenesis", meaning a physiological process of non-sexual reproduction. [see Elinor Gadon, The Once and Future Goddess, Harper Collins, 1989, ISBN 0-06-250354-5, p.191.]
This thread is for people who believe in the veracity, authenticity and reliability of the "word of God" in the Bible to comment on the inspiration and infallibility issues when it is translated into other languages, in this case, English.
From the initial mistranslation into Greek, the error was passed on to subsequent mistranslations in many languages, including all the English ones which render Mary a "virgin."
Joseph and Mary, according to Hebrew custom at that time, had a kind of relationship short of marriage, a betrothal, in which sexual relations were permitted and even expected. If the "maiden" got pregnant, she was deemed nubile and the full marriage ceremony could then take place; if she proved to be "barren", the bridegroom could withdraw from the betrothal and honor was preserved (for the man at least).
Mary was not a virgin in the physiological sense; she was not yet married; that is the meaning of the original Hebrew term, mistranslated into Greek as parthenos. The obvious conclusion is that Mary was already pregnant when she was betrothed to Joseph and that she was impregnated by a very human male, but it was not Joseph.
That is why priests should be conversant not only in Greek, but in Hebrew and Aramaic as well. Important dogmas and doctrines depend on getting meanings right.
As H.L. Mencken remarked, "the documents have been tampered with."
@fmf saidμισέω miséō, mis-eh'-o; from a primary μῖσος mîsos (hatred); to detest (especially to persecute); by extension, to love less:9—hate(-ful).
What does the Greek word - that we get the English "hate" from - actually mean? What was it in Aramaic or in Hebrew?
1 edit
@fmf saidμισέω
What does the Greek word - that we get the English "hate" from - actually mean? What was it in Aramaic or in Hebrew?
Transliteration
miseō (Key)
Pronunciation
mis-eh'-o
Part of Speech
verb
Root Word (Etymology)
From a primary misos (hatred)
Greek Inflections of μισέω [?]
mGNT
40x in 22 unique form(s) TR
42x in 23 unique form(s) LXX
155x in 45 unique form(s)
ἐμίσησα — 1x
Ἐμίσησάν — 1x
ἐμίσησας — 1x
ἐμίσησεν — 2x
ἐμίσουν — 1x
μεμισήκασιν — 1x
μεμίσηκεν — 1x
μεμισημένου — 1x
μισεῖ — 7x
μισεῖν — 1x
μισεῖς — 1x
μισῇ — 1x
μισήσει — 2x
μισήσεις — 1x
μισήσουσιν — 2x
μισήσωσιν — 1x
μισούμενοι — 4x
μισοῦντας — 1x
μισοῦντες — 2x
μισούντων — 1x
μισοῦσιν — 1x
μισῶ — 3x
μισῶν — 5x
Dictionary Aids
Vine's Expository Dictionary: View Entry
TDNT Reference: 4:683,597
KJV Translation Count — Total: 42x
The KJV translates Strong's G3404 in the following manner: hate (41x), hateful (1x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]
to hate, pursue with hatred, detest
to be hated, detested
Strong’s Definitions [?](Strong’s Definitions Legend)
μισέω miséō, mis-eh'-o; from a primary μῖσος mîsos (hatred); to detest (especially to persecute); by extension, to love less:—hate(-ful).
What was it in Aramaic or in Hebrew?
That really does not matter as the New Testament was first written in Greek. The Old Testament was first written in Aramaic and Hebrew; not The New Testament.
1 edit
@moonbus saidIsaiah 7:14
The doctrine of the Virgin Mary is based on a mistranslation. The Hebrew word almah meant "maiden", that is, a young unmarried woman, but not necessarily a woman who had never had sexual relations. The Hebrew word denoted a social and legal status, not a physiological condition. It was mistranslated in the Gospels (in Greek) as parthenos, from which we derive th ...[text shortened]... nd on getting meanings right.
As H.L. Mencken remarked, "the documents have been tampered with."
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
H.L. Mencken was correct of course, the documents have been tampered with. And we'll soon see by whom.
@kingdavid403 said"By extension"?
Strong’s Definitions [?](Strong’s Definitions Legend)
μισέω miséō, mis-eh'-o; from a primary μῖσος mîsos (hatred); to detest (especially to persecute); by extension, to love less:—hate(-ful).