What's wrong with the Greek?

my gosh, i can't believe it. i actually agree with a moderator on something!!

 

my gosh, i can't believe it. i actually agree with a moderator on something!! </font>[/QUOTE]I agree as well.

Our English translations are generally very good. Sometimes the Greek or Hebrew can bring out a greater depth of meaning or reveal a play on words in the original language that adds information and meaning, but certainly God’s truth (God’s word) is clearly expressed through a quality translation.

Too many preachers use their biblical language skills as a way to inflate their prestige or a lazy and dishonest way to promote personal opinions as “God’s word”.

 

Those poor Greek- and Hebrew-speaking Christians in the early Church era were obviously shortchanged. Too bad they never had an English Bible.

 

They did have it, and we have discussed this many times before. You just refuse to believe the truth. So I'm not going to explain this to you again.

 

They did have it, and we have discussed this many times before. You just refuse to believe the truth. So I'm not going to explain this to you again. </font>[/QUOTE]This should go in the funniest quotes section of hte board. "They early church never had an English Bible." "They did have it."

English wouldn't be a language for another 1300 years or so. How did they have an English Bible??

Robert,

I do agree with you in the main. I do believe, as someone said, that the original languages can convey a depth or word play that is not apparent in English but would have been to the original reader and should be brought out. But there are those who cite Strong's or Vine's and think they have all the knowledge they need to reference the Greek. That is woefully lacking. Whatever sermons we preach, should preach from any Bible.

 

They did have it, and we have discussed this many times before. </font>[/QUOTE]This should go in the funniest quotes section of hte board. "They early church never had an English Bible." "They did have it."

English wouldn't be a language for another 1300 years or so. How did they have an English Bible??
</font>[/QUOTE]Reading that again I see why it seems funny. I didn't mean they had English Bibles. I was talking about the Greek/Hebrew manuscripts they had then.

 

As for NT Greek. The one who is not interested in NT Greek should not despise the one who has an interest in it. The one who has an interest in it must not despise the one who does not have an interest in it. The one who has some knowledge of Greek merits nothing more before Almighty God than one without knowledge of Greek. Nobody can merit anything with God.

Salvation from sin and its power and consequences does not come through searching or knowing the Greek NT, nor does it come through searching or knowing the English Bible. The Pharisees kept on searching the Scriptures because they thought to have eternal life in them, yet they came not to Christ in order that they might have life. One must know that Bible regeneration is as much heresy as gospel regeneration and decisional regeneration and baptismal regeneration.

The question concering learning NT Greek or not has nothing to do with justification and salvation and regeneration. It may make some difference in some instances or cases as for efficiency in serving God. Scholars can be both and. Some of them are more profitable than others. Some scholars say this and do just the other way. An example would be Greek grammarians with huge seminary training and merits such as D.D., Th.D. etc. etc. They may write good Greek grammar books, but when those same scholars are let loose on the Greek NT as translators of some modern version they do not practice what they preach, but adulterate the word of God for gain, 2Cor. 2:17. They are good at teaching how to parse verbs in their profitable books, but in the versions they manufacture they could not care less for the inspired forms of God's holy and infallibly inspired words. Jesus the Lord told the people to do what the Pharisees told them to, but not to do what they did. This applies well to many of today's Greek scholars. Imbibe the rudiments of NT Greek from their books, but do not do like they do when they translate the Greek NT in practice in their modern versions, corrupting it because of their faulty theological biases. Examples of this would be ALL dynamic equivalency translations and quite a few formal equivalency translations as well. This is sad, and it ought not be so.

One ought not to despise the Greek New Testament although one may not know the language, because Greek was the tongue God Almighty chose for the inspired NT. Translations are as good as they faithfully, accurately and precisely translate the inspired words of God into the receptor language. Where and when they err as compared to the Greek in those places they are not authoritative.

Harald

 

Harald, which Greek manuscript is the one God inspired?

 

I'm with all of the above on the importance of using biblical languages, but I must also agree with rlvaughn that it must be done with humility and caution. I really get annoyed when someone using an interlinear claims that all the scholars and translators have got it wrong for the last 400 years. Indeed, I usually get annoyed even when scholars think that all other scholars have it wrong for 400 years. I have been learning Greek for about 3 years and I think it is tremendous fun as well as a boon to my own spiritual life. But the Greek I know hasn't closed the book on things that have been debated for many many years, like Calvinism/Arminisiam, etc. Sometimes, it seems I have just learned enough Greek to determine that conflicting readings in different good translations both have equal claim to the greek, and it is a matter of intrpetation. The best translation would somehow bring that same ambiguity into English, but that is usually not the case.

So in conclution, study on, but please take a moment to ponder what you are saying when you claim, the KJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV, NRSV, NKJV all have it wrong, as can be easily decifered from this Green's Greek interliner!

 

To put it another way, I feel that the Greek can clarify the english, especially if the english can mean two different things, but it seems unlikely to me that something important in the Greek is completly missed in an good english translation like the ESV. I will of course accept examples where I might be wrong.

 

But in some instances it IS in the English, but not in the Greek. The doctrine of tongues often uses the word "unknown" in some English translations to prove that doctrine. If those people refuse to believe "other" English translations, showing them the Greek from which their translation came from can be helpful.

Unfortunately there are doctrines that use things that are in the English and not in the Greek as a way of perverting the gospel. I just got into a dispute this week over the word "after" that was also in English and not in the Greek. These tools can be useful, but anyone letting the Spirit lead them to rightly divide the Word should be able to get by without them. But if we have them, there is nothing wrong with using them, and yes we should use them cautiously. That point is well taken.

~Lorelei

 

Pete Richert. Each word of the Greek NT is important. God did not inspire any unimportant words. The ESV leaves out some information, sad to say. In Rom. 5:18 it says "justification and life", when the Greek and many other versions say "justification of life". Things that are different are not the same. In Eph. 2:8 it omits an inspired definite article in front of "faith", and also in front of "grace". They ought to be there, and putting them there in a version does not make a version less readable. Examples such as these could be multiplied. As compared to modern versions such as TNIV, CEV, TEV etc. the ESV may be comparatively good, but as compared to NKJV, NASB, KJV, MKJV, LITV, YLT, Geneva Bible and some other formal equivalency versions the ESV pales to a weak translation of the word of God.

Harald

 

There is no magic formula, but we are guaranteed a Spirit that will lead us into all truth, if we choose to let Him. Indeed I agree, you don't need a college degree or a knowledge of Hebrew and Greek to read or teach the Bible. That assumption too goes too far and gives the education of man more authority than the Spirit within us.

Paul didn't get his training for 3 years under the Lord, he spent several "days" with the disciples then began to preach at once. If we believe in the Spirit we profess in, He WILL guide us into all truth, not into all man-taught and man-made doctrine.

Should we then avoid the tools of learning if they are available, no, but as you said, we must certainly use them cautiously and wisely. Never let the tool become more powerful than the object in which it was tryign to benefit.

~Lorelei

 

AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!! God used the likes of Tyndale, etc. to translate the word of God into English, and he preserved their efforts in the hands of the common man. All this talk of "the Greek" all day long... Dr. Bob, I can't read Greek. So, are all my contributions in Baptist Board worthless? After all, I don't have your scholarship to read "the Greek" (whichever of the 5000+ "Greeks" you want me to read). Many of you will know that I am KJVO (and I DON'T want this to degenerate into a discussion about that), but I don't really mind if people disagree as long as they agree God preserved his word properly in the vernacular. Go to the Greek for nuances; OK. But should whole doctrines stand or fall on long-dead languages? Isn't God a ALIVE? Can't he preserve his doctrines in the tongues of common men? Or are we "unscholarly" plebs to be confined to eating the theological crumbs from the professors' tables, never knowing the truth of the matter for ourselves except for what we're told (which, even then, can be changed when they've found more "Greek")? Would Satan rather we floundered around in dead languages, whose meaning would take even bright people many years to only partially grasp, relying on the scholarly opinion to know God's true doctrines; or would he want us to read and believe the theology presented in our vernacular Bibles?

 

Bartholomew (and others):

Let's suppose you were invited to take an introductory, college-level course in New Testament Greek from either a local accredited theological school, or one that was offering courses in your community.

We will assume that you have the necessary academic prerequisites, say, a high-school diploma.

Let's also assume that your tuition is paid for. The cost to you, therefore, is in time: one three-hour evening class per week for 10 weeks, plus the time it takes for your homework assignments.

Do you take the course? Why or why not?