Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian
From: bunker!garys@decvax.uucp (Gary M. Samuelson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Seventeenth Century Language
Message-ID: 
Date: 27 Sep 89 07:17:30 GMT
Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu
Organization: ISC-Bunker Ramo, an Olivetti Company, Shelton, Ct
Lines: 55
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu


Regarding learning Greek and Hebrew in order to read the Bible
in the original languages:

Don't forget Aramaic.  And should we also learn, for example,
Syriac, so that we can verify for ourselves that some of the
questionable Hebrew passages are properly understood?

Geoff Allen writes:
>I found this to be a very convicting statement.  How many Christians do
>you know who can even read one word of Greek?  Let alone Hebrew.  I must
>confess that my Greek is pretty bad, but at least I'm working on it.

If Geoff Allen is thereby convicted that he ought to master Greek
and Hebrew, may God bless him in his studies.  But he ought not --
and I do not say that he is -- think that others should be likewise
convicted.

The moderator comments:

>In my experience, when people start referring to the
>Greek, there's a good chance it's because they're trying to sell a
>theory that isn't accepted by most scholars.  It's a sure way to end a
>discussion: "It says here in the Bible ..."  "But according to Pastor
>X, the word translated as day really means night".  What can you say?

This is a very good point.  I suppose ideally, we would all be
fluent in both the Greek and Hebrew and be equipped to handle these
situations.  My own belief is that God *wants* us to understand the
scriptures, even those who do not have a facility for learning
multiple languages.  My experience agrees with the moderator's, and
to take it a step farther, I don't think I have ever heard a compelling
argument based on the Greek that could not be made in English as well.

Two examples come to mind: That baptism should be by immersion.
One can argue that this is so because the Greek word "baptizo"
means to immerse.  Or one can argue that this is so because Paul
compares baptism with burial in Romans 6:4: "We were buried therefore
with him by baptism into death..."  Or concerning the Ethiopian in
Acts 8:38: "And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went
down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him."
They would not have needed to go down into the water if they thought
that sprinkling or pouring would suffice.

The other example I thought of is in regard to John 1:1, which
some have said should read "the word was a god" rather than "the
word was God."  Well, I know enough Greek to respond to that, but
it seems much simpler to say that if there is only one God, and the
word was a god, then the word must be that one God.

I realize that there are readers who may not hold to the interpretations
I have cited above, but the point I am making is that the arguments
are not entirely dependent on knowing Greek.

Gary Samuelson