Even though there are times that I might look at a verse in 15 different translations, I still walk away with questions. I think it’s very important to try to learn to read and study from the original language.
God did not give us scripture to make us into either students or theologians. He gave us His word to make us into DISCIPLES. Let's just OBEY what we understand, and then allow the Wonderful Counselor to open our eyes to deeper things we may have missed. It's about His glory, and us becoming conformed to the image of His Son. It is NOT about academic excellence with Bible as the subject matter.
I really appreciate your comment! ♥️ Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit, when they will have recieved Him, will lead them into the whole truth. Additionally, what about illiterates? Plus, the first Christians read the Thora and listened to the apostolic letters. It took a while until Christians all over the world could get hands on written gospels. I would like to be able to read the whole bible in its original languages though.
@@OpheliaPumpernickel - This is why the "Council of Jerusalem" affirmed that those turning to Christ (mostly illiterates) were to hear Moses (the Torah) every Sabbath: “For from ancient generations Moses has, in every city, those proclaiming him - being read in the congregations every Sabbath.” (Act 15:21) Learn what "sin" is and thus continue their walk in obedience.
Sounds: Hebrews begins with alliteration in Greek: Πολυμερως και πολυτροπως παλαι ο Θεος λαλησας τοις πατρασιν εν τοις προφηταις... I've rendered this as "In many parts and many patterns God spoke to our predecessors through prophets in the past...".
♥ Thank you for encouraging people to learn bible languages. Actually reading NT in greek gives you a deeper insight into the meaning. For example yesterday I read 1 John 3:4 in greek ' Πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν καὶ τὴν ἀνομίαν ποιεῖ καὶ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐστὶν ἡ ἀνομία'. As soon as I noticed 'τὴν' in front of 'ἁμαρτίαν' and also in front of 'ἀνομίαν' I realized a new way to understand what may be the context John points to. So for sure reading NT in greek gives us more information to consider the acutual meaning of the text.
I have studied biblical (Koine) Greek extensively at university and would have to say learning it is quite unnecessary for most Christians and doing so won't automatically give anyone a better understanding of the cultural setting or what the writers meant back then. Most Christians would be far better served by reading some good commentaries by people who are well versed in those issues. If you want to understand the Jewishness of the New Testament, for example, you might read Stern's _New Testament Commentary._ For the biblical meanings of Hebrew and Greek words, one could use something like Mounce’s _Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words,_ or its predecessor, _Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words._ Books like Fee’s _How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth_ and Fee’s and Stuart's _How to Read the Bible Book by Book_ are also helpful. And, of course, there are the companion books that give lots of detail about the different books of the Bible, their settings and authors. But, above all of this is the Bible itself, which so few Christians actually study. Avoid the 'Passion Translation' (so-called) like the plague, though. Biblical illiteracy is rampant and has led to churchgoers falling for every strange "wind of doctrine" that comes their way.
@@Berean_with_a_BTh Hi. Your last paragraph "biblical illitracy" contradicts your previous comments but also confirms the content of this video. Are you silly enough to believe God goofed up by giving us the knowledge of his will via Koine Greek? Maybe he should have chose English in the first place. What do you think? God Bless
@@nurse-j6vStupid response! It seems you didn't read my whole comment, which incuded: _But, above all of this is the Bible itself, which so few Christians actually study._ Biblical illiteracy is a common-enough term referring to the general ignorance most churchgoers have of what the Bible teaches. Your ad-hominem attack on suggests you need to learn to read English.
@@ProdigalClay While studying for a BTh, I completed four semesters of NT Greek at a fully-accredited university, including an advanced exegesis unit, the lowest result for which was a distinction and led to me being twice awarded the university's prize for Greek scholarship. I have since worked part way through a MTh degree, which has included more exegetical work in the Greek text and for which the dissertation (on which I've already done considerable work) entails working with both biblical and extra-biblical Greek texts.
Being an English reader, I look at different translations and different traditions…from the most familiar and the most preferable to the odd and uncomfortable. The important thing is to do your due diligence to the best of your ability with the knowledge and resources you have. You must trust the Holy Spirit to help you understand these things, and if you think the Spirit has given you a word, then the written word will confirm this, and vise versa. That said, just keep learning. All scripture, in whatever language you understand, is fit for your consumption and betterment. We have to trust His Holy Spirt to lead us.
Most people don't know there are two words for the English word love in the NT Greek text, agapé (the relationship of a king to his subjects or a father to his family) and phileo (a liking or affection for something or someone) and they have very different meanings. That is just one example, the definition of words is everything.
It's true that there are 2 words for love, but the myth is that they have very different meanings. They are actually mostly overlapping and just mean, "love."
@@KevinDay Just simply not true. One of the best passages that shows the difference is in the post-resurrection interchange between Jesus and Peter in John 21:15-19, when Jesus asks Peter, "Do you love (agapao) me?" And Peter responds, "Lord, you know I love (phileo) you." Jesus asks the same question again, and Peter responds the same way. Then Jesus asks a third time, but He changes the verb to "phileo, "Simone, Son of Jonas, do you love (phileo) me?" This passage clearly shows that there is a difference.
@@dooglitas The error is demonstrated perfectly by the fact that you used ONE verse to try to prove it, and it's the only one anyone ever points to as an example. That's not how lexicography works.
@@KevinDay Take note that you did not refute what I said. You simply disagreed. Yes, I did give only one passage, but it was a definitive passage. It is very clear in that passage that there is a difference in the two words. Your use of the $20 word "lexicography" is not a refutation of what I said. You have not offered a single passage or a single piece of evidence to prove your point. That being said, doing a search through scripture will validate what I said. In every case where the NT speaks of God's love or our love for God our the command that we should love one another as Christ loved us, the word "agapao" is employed (or the noun "agape"). In other situations, "phileo"is used. When Jesus said that the Pharisees "loved" praying standing in the synagogues (Mat 6:5) the word "phileo" is used. When Jesus says, "He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me," He uses the word "phileo." "Phileo" is a word the denotes a feeling of affection. The word "agapao" transcends feelings. When Jesus speaks of "loving" our enemies, He always uses "agapao." He is not telling us that we must LIKE our enemies or that we must have warm, fuzzy feeling toward them. He is speaking of an attitude and a pattern of behavior toward our enemies. While there is sometimes some overlap in the usage of the two words, it is clear that the two words are not equal. In ancient pre-Christian Greek, the most commonly used word group for love was "eran" (v.) or "eros" (n.). This was the love of romantic and sexual passion. It was highly exalted in the writings of ancient Greece. It is never used in the NT. The word group "philein" (v.)/"philos" (n.) was the word used for the affectionate love of humans to humans (i.e. friendship) and of the pagan gods toward humans. The word group "agapan" (v.)/"agape" (n.) was a rather weak word and not used much in pre-Christian Greek. It was used to mean "to prefer" or "to set one good over another." It was also often used to denote a relationship between equals. It was Christ and the Christians who took this word and elevated it to use for a concept that did not exist in pagan culture.
New translations inject new words or even phrases into the Bible for better understanding, but they can change the original meaning of the text. This can sometimes lead to subtle or even significant changes in meaning. It's as if the translators are wrapping the original Greek scriptures-written in Greek-in contemporary language. As a result, the translation is not literal, but rather conceptual, shaped by the translator's personal interpretation.
Amateur knowledge of Greek and Hebrew can puff one up and lead to dangerous pride. The wealth of good English translations is more than adequate to live a good and faithful life under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Read and reread the Bible. You don't have to understand or study everything you read. Humility is fertile ground for the Holy Spirt.
Would love if you could make a video on aionios, honestly didn't think it would be so hard to translate a word. I understand if it isn't what your channel is about but would appreciate some clarity on such an important word.
Our access to learning Koine Greek is also through relying on experts, and those experts had to rely on experts, until we get back to the era when the exact same language was still in common use. I was hoping this was going to address the potential of echo chambers reiterating misconceptions about the Greek 💔 (rather than the English), such as with hapax legomena, where academics may feel obligated to agree with past conclusions even when perhaps reevaluation is in order because past conclusions were based on limited knowledge; or also with broad semantic spectrums being applied to words such as "hina" and "hoti", in which case I am not sure if those semantic spectrums are actually that broad, or if translators broadened them in order to provide the wiggle room to make translation flow more smoothly. I think the echo chamber of the translators is keeping everyone (generally speaking, not literally every single one) too distracted to serve the laypeople as well as ought to be done. This is a deep complex topic, in terms of how to best offer the People better access to the Greek, without requiring them to learn it themselves. In an age of mass production, I would argue that educators should crack the code of offering the People that access to the Greek (that exists now, but not in a form which suits well to the general populace of laypeople), and then offer that access mass produced, eventually becoming available free-of-charge online.
So I've started to learn Greek because I'm involved in a translation project so I can definitely see the benefit. You keep being diplomatic though. Is it that every body should learn Greek or some people should learn it. Cus it can't be everybody, well you are not saying everybody. So my question is in the sub set of the "some people" who should learn it?
Here I thought I was reading it too much. Honest. I have so many translations and keep starting in one then the other etc. working my way through the Bible in a year Stanley & MacArthur Daily/read in a year Bibles…but I feel there should be times where is I just sit down and start reading. The two above are NASB95. I have all the others, even the 1560 Geneva, but only read in, not fully read at of them. Any suggestions where to start outside of the daily ones that give OT&NT every day planned out to allow the reading 100% in a year. Ty
It's appalling to me with 100 English translations I encounter so few that call themselves Christian that read the Scripture. Sixty years ago as I recall it wasn't this bad. Sorry but most Christians aren't Christian.
Hi I learned so much about this topic but I have several questions. How then a lay person who doesn't have the luxury or the opportunity to learn greek and hebrew understand the Bible? How can we reconcile the problem of gaps to what the Bible is saying "All Scripture is God-breathed"? Can we trust the copies of the original text we have are God-breathed? Are all the english translations we have are not God-breathed?
In my experience as someone who does not know Greek, but I do delve into the original word usage from Greek fairly regularly to try to discern what a passage means. Usually that's all it takes to make some reasonable sense of something that doesn't make sense at first, or may seem conflicting with something else. That, and doing a bit of historical research into what the religious/geopolitical climate was like at the time also tends to shed some light on stuff that is confusing, or seems conflicting. At the heart of ot though, I think you are right in thinking that at least to the most basic degree, translated scripture must be true enough to the original meaning for us to know what we need to know for salvation, otherwise god would kinda be failing us. This doesn't mean every translation is correct on every front,there are many modern translations that outright change parts of scripture, which is obviously wrong. But the more prolific, and older translations into a given language are generally going to be correct in the vast majority of what they say. KJV is so respected(many times to much) in part because any time it's accuracy is contrasted to the actual Greek manuscripts we have it is very very accurate. It's not perfect, especially with how the old English is different from how we use many modern English words, and phrases. One such example is the word "generation" In modern English generation means a group of people who were all born around the same time. Gen X Gen Z, millennials, boomers, that kind of thing. But this is actually a narrowing of the defintion. The old English useage of the word was more or less just a group of common people, or people that can be grouped together by some factor. It could mean the modern usage, but that was context dependent, not the inherent understanding of the word. And there are many Bible verses that have very contentious meanings because of this shift in the usage of the word, the biggest one probably being jesus usage of "this generation" in the Olivet discourse.
❤ Imagine a group of you and your ten closest friends wanting to take a trip to Paris to see the Louvre Museum and especially the Mona Lisa. You couldn't go because something came up. But when your friends got back one of them said to you, "I've hand-drawn the closest approximation of the Mona Lisa that I could so that you can experience the Mona Lisa for yourself." Your friend actually did quite an amazing job (for someone who's not DaVinci). But you still have not experienced Mona Lisa. Then another friend comes to you with their own drawing (and interpretation) because they also wanted you to experience the Mona Lisa. After all ten of your friends bring you their own drawings, which are their very best approximations and interpretations of the Mona Lisa, you still haven't experienced the Mona Lisa, even if you compare all ten drawings to one another. You'd need to take in the Mona Lisa personally to experience it for yourself. That's why comparing different English translations does not suffice for understanding God's Word, and that's why you should learn the biblical languages.
I feel like this is a bit of a fruitless contention. Because I think the only way you can fully grasp exactly how certian words, abd phrases were meant to be used and taken for certian is to truely be a native speaker of the language. Grown up speaking it, or at least used it much of your life. The problem is that just like how modern English is not the exact same in all its nuances as English 200 years ago, any modern Greek is far removed in said same nuances from the Greek useage in the new testimate. By all means Any native Greek speaker will be that much closer to having a more exact understanding of what stuff means, just as a native English speaker will far more easily pick up the nuances of old English from 200 years ago, but it will never be exact. And just the same, going out of your way to learn it as a second language will very likly not clue you in to anything more than the modern native Greek speakers, from which we do base all of our translation choices. You can indeed go and see the monalisa for yourself, but you cannot go back in time to be raised around judean first century Greek to know all its nuances.
@anthonypolonkay2681 Good point. However, do you know any non-native English speakers who are fluent and speak excellent English? Such folks are able to understand the meaning of written English just fine. We don't have the ability to time travel. But we DO have the ability to learn the ancient languages, and even through reading other historical writings in that language of that era, we can discern the common understanding because very often "usage determines meaning." So if a common idiom was used, we can understand it better by being familiar with the ways in which the idiom was used. At any rate, knowledge of the biblical languages certainly gets us CLOSER to the original intended meaning. After all, the English Bible translators obviously gained mastery of the biblical languages in order to give us our English Bibles. 👍
@@Phil_M.1987 kinda. Anyone who didn't at least grow up learning English as a second language, and instead only learned it as an adult, no matter how fluet is always missing nuance here and there. You can see ot woth people who immigrated to where I live a long time ago, and learned English and have been speaking it perfectly fluently for decades, but I'll still say stuff that isn't slang, or anything like that, and end up having to explain it to them, because the nuance just wasn't picked up.
I have a crotchet against which you offended in your video. Do not say "different to" but "different from!" (It derives from the Latin "ab eo differt.") Yes, I am an American. But my crotchet in this case is somewhat rational.
@catholictruth102 Because the Great Schism of 1054 AD, Filioque, “Papal Supremacy”, Papal Forgeries, Vatican 1 and Vatican 2 and Eastern Catholicism refuting RCC. Prelest of your saints. God bless you guys but no thanks.
100% correct. First-century Christianity is defined by the first-century Greek letters and documents from the first Christians. Everything else, including the traditions of our respective denominations, is derived from it in one way or another. None of these traditions have any value to me. Only the purest form of the good news of "Jesus Christ is Lord," as taught by the first-century church, is important. You can obtain a clearer understanding of many verses of the New Testament by reading Byzantine Greek. Also, traditions have crept into the later versions of Greek NT, such as the Textus Receptus' "Johannine Comma."
If one wants to read the Bible with no translations, one will have to not only learn ancient Greek, but ancient Hebrew, and Ancient Arameic, because that was Jesus’ spoken language and the NT is already a translation of what was said. To understand the context one has to understand the geo-political world of ancient Israel and the Roman Empire. What is every day life for those people. What did worship mean to a pagan vs a Hebrew for example, and that is only for the NT, but one cannot forget about the OT and all the different cultures and peoples in it : ancient Egypt, Babylone etc… The languages, the geo-political context, the everyday life and traditions throughtout the stories of the Bible… This is a life-time worth of study and some of us have to eat. I work over 40 hours a week, some people work 2 jobs, so while it’s nice to state that one has to learn a new language, the actual time it takes to fully understand said language to the point of understanding a pun, is years in the making. As for the « church » whatever that means to some, learning the ancient languages, yes, that is what men who consecrate their lives to the « church » are supposed to do. In all Apostolic churches, Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, the priests in formation are required to learn the ancient languages of the Bible. If one wants to get out of their echo chamber of translations and does not have the time to learn an ancient language, might I suggest looking to other denominations, the Church Fathers for example. Those might give a more fuller understanding of the text.
Because the Bible wasn't written in English is why your pastor should have a formal education in Greek and Hebrew. If your pastor doesn't have this, he's guilty of malpractice.
If one is a “Christian “ and they’re not reading scripture , It is safe to conclude that they are not hungry. If they are not hungry one must wonder if they are really alive spiritually! .
Even though there are times that I might look at a verse in 15 different translations, I still walk away with questions. I think it’s very important to try to learn to read and study from the original language.
Please encourage your viewers to down load the audio bible and listen regularly. I am now listening to the Greek New Testament.
God did not give us scripture to make us into either students or theologians. He gave us His word to make us into DISCIPLES. Let's just OBEY what we understand, and then allow the Wonderful Counselor to open our eyes to deeper things we may have missed. It's about His glory, and us becoming conformed to the image of His Son. It is NOT about academic excellence with Bible as the subject matter.
I really appreciate your comment! ♥️
Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit, when they will have recieved Him, will lead them into the whole truth. Additionally, what about illiterates? Plus, the first Christians read the Thora and listened to the apostolic letters. It took a while until Christians all over the world could get hands on written gospels.
I would like to be able to read the whole bible in its original languages though.
@@OpheliaPumpernickel - This is why the "Council of Jerusalem" affirmed that those turning to Christ (mostly illiterates) were to hear Moses (the Torah) every Sabbath:
“For from ancient generations Moses has, in every city, those proclaiming him - being read in the congregations every Sabbath.” (Act 15:21)
Learn what "sin" is and thus continue their walk in obedience.
Sounds: Hebrews begins with alliteration in Greek: Πολυμερως και πολυτροπως παλαι ο Θεος λαλησας τοις πατρασιν εν τοις προφηταις... I've rendered this as "In many parts and many patterns God spoke to our predecessors through prophets in the past...".
♥ Thank you for encouraging people to learn bible languages. Actually reading NT in greek gives you a deeper insight into the meaning. For example yesterday I read 1 John 3:4 in greek ' Πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν καὶ τὴν ἀνομίαν ποιεῖ καὶ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐστὶν ἡ ἀνομία'. As soon as I noticed 'τὴν' in front of 'ἁμαρτίαν' and also in front of 'ἀνομίαν' I realized a new way to understand what may be the context John points to. So for sure reading NT in greek gives us more information to consider the acutual meaning of the text.
Darryl, thank you for leading us in this conversation. At age 68, I totally understand what you’re saying.
I have studied biblical (Koine) Greek extensively at university and would have to say learning it is quite unnecessary for most Christians and doing so won't automatically give anyone a better understanding of the cultural setting or what the writers meant back then.
Most Christians would be far better served by reading some good commentaries by people who are well versed in those issues. If you want to understand the Jewishness of the New Testament, for example, you might read Stern's _New Testament Commentary._ For the biblical meanings of Hebrew and Greek words, one could use something like Mounce’s _Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words,_ or its predecessor, _Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words._ Books like Fee’s _How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth_ and Fee’s and Stuart's _How to Read the Bible Book by Book_ are also helpful. And, of course, there are the companion books that give lots of detail about the different books of the Bible, their settings and authors. But, above all of this is the Bible itself, which so few Christians actually study. Avoid the 'Passion Translation' (so-called) like the plague, though.
Biblical illiteracy is rampant and has led to churchgoers falling for every strange "wind of doctrine" that comes their way.
@@Berean_with_a_BTh Hi. Your last paragraph "biblical illitracy" contradicts your previous comments but also confirms the content of this video. Are you silly enough to believe God goofed up by giving us the knowledge of his will via Koine Greek? Maybe he should have chose English in the first place. What do you think? God Bless
@@nurse-j6vStupid response!
It seems you didn't read my whole comment, which incuded:
_But, above all of this is the Bible itself, which so few Christians actually study._
Biblical illiteracy is a common-enough term referring to the general ignorance most churchgoers have of what the Bible teaches.
Your ad-hominem attack on suggests you need to learn to read English.
Hello Berean with a BTh. Would you define "extensively" please?
@@ProdigalClay While studying for a BTh, I completed four semesters of NT Greek at a fully-accredited university, including an advanced exegesis unit, the lowest result for which was a distinction and led to me being twice awarded the university's prize for Greek scholarship. I have since worked part way through a MTh degree, which has included more exegetical work in the Greek text and for which the dissertation (on which I've already done considerable work) entails working with both biblical and extra-biblical Greek texts.
@@nurse-j6vWhat contradiction? I can't see any.
Being an English reader, I look at different translations and different traditions…from the most familiar and the most preferable to the odd and uncomfortable. The important thing is to do your due diligence to the best of your ability with the knowledge and resources you have. You must trust the Holy Spirit to help you understand these things, and if you think the Spirit has given you a word, then the written word will confirm this, and vise versa. That said, just keep learning. All scripture, in whatever language you understand, is fit for your consumption and betterment. We have to trust His Holy Spirt to lead us.
Most people don't know there are two words for the English word love in the NT Greek text, agapé (the relationship of a king to his subjects or a father to his family) and phileo (a liking or affection for something or someone) and they have very different meanings. That is just one example, the definition of words is everything.
@catholictruth102 Not a myth. Truth.
It's true that there are 2 words for love, but the myth is that they have very different meanings. They are actually mostly overlapping and just mean, "love."
@@KevinDay Just simply not true. One of the best passages that shows the difference is in the post-resurrection interchange between Jesus and Peter in John 21:15-19, when Jesus asks Peter, "Do you love (agapao) me?" And Peter responds, "Lord, you know I love (phileo) you." Jesus asks the same question again, and Peter responds the same way. Then Jesus asks a third time, but He changes the verb to "phileo, "Simone, Son of Jonas, do you love (phileo) me?"
This passage clearly shows that there is a difference.
@@dooglitas The error is demonstrated perfectly by the fact that you used ONE verse to try to prove it, and it's the only one anyone ever points to as an example. That's not how lexicography works.
@@KevinDay Take note that you did not refute what I said. You simply disagreed. Yes, I did give only one passage, but it was a definitive passage. It is very clear in that passage that there is a difference in the two words. Your use of the $20 word "lexicography" is not a refutation of what I said. You have not offered a single passage or a single piece of evidence to prove your point.
That being said, doing a search through scripture will validate what I said. In every case where the NT speaks of God's love or our love for God our the command that we should love one another as Christ loved us, the word "agapao" is employed (or the noun "agape").
In other situations, "phileo"is used. When Jesus said that the Pharisees "loved" praying standing in the synagogues (Mat 6:5) the word "phileo" is used. When Jesus says, "He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me," He uses the word "phileo." "Phileo" is a word the denotes a feeling of affection. The word "agapao" transcends feelings. When Jesus speaks of "loving" our enemies, He always uses "agapao." He is not telling us that we must LIKE our enemies or that we must have warm, fuzzy feeling toward them. He is speaking of an attitude and a pattern of behavior toward our enemies.
While there is sometimes some overlap in the usage of the two words, it is clear that the two words are not equal.
In ancient pre-Christian Greek, the most commonly used word group for love was "eran" (v.) or "eros" (n.). This was the love of romantic and sexual passion. It was highly exalted in the writings of ancient Greece. It is never used in the NT. The word group "philein" (v.)/"philos" (n.) was the word used for the affectionate love of humans to humans (i.e. friendship) and of the pagan gods toward humans. The word group "agapan" (v.)/"agape" (n.) was a rather weak word and not used much in pre-Christian Greek. It was used to mean "to prefer" or "to set one good over another." It was also often used to denote a relationship between equals.
It was Christ and the Christians who took this word and elevated it to use for a concept that did not exist in pagan culture.
New translations inject new words or even phrases into the Bible for better understanding, but they can change the original meaning of the text. This can sometimes lead to subtle or even significant changes in meaning.
It's as if the translators are wrapping the original Greek scriptures-written in Greek-in contemporary language.
As a result, the translation is not literal, but rather conceptual, shaped by the translator's personal interpretation.
Excellent video Daryl. Well explained 😊
Amateur knowledge of Greek and Hebrew can puff one up and lead to dangerous pride. The wealth of good English translations is more than adequate to live a good and faithful life under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Read and reread the Bible. You don't have to understand or study everything you read. Humility is fertile ground for the Holy Spirt.
Would love if you could make a video on aionios, honestly didn't think it would be so hard to translate a word. I understand if it isn't what your channel is about but would appreciate some clarity on such an important word.
Our access to learning Koine Greek is also through relying on experts, and those experts had to rely on experts, until we get back to the era when the exact same language was still in common use. I was hoping this was going to address the potential of echo chambers reiterating misconceptions about the Greek 💔 (rather than the English), such as with hapax legomena, where academics may feel obligated to agree with past conclusions even when perhaps reevaluation is in order because past conclusions were based on limited knowledge; or also with broad semantic spectrums being applied to words such as "hina" and "hoti", in which case I am not sure if those semantic spectrums are actually that broad, or if translators broadened them in order to provide the wiggle room to make translation flow more smoothly.
I think the echo chamber of the translators is keeping everyone (generally speaking, not literally every single one) too distracted to serve the laypeople as well as ought to be done. This is a deep complex topic, in terms of how to best offer the People better access to the Greek, without requiring them to learn it themselves. In an age of mass production, I would argue that educators should crack the code of offering the People that access to the Greek (that exists now, but not in a form which suits well to the general populace of laypeople), and then offer that access mass produced, eventually becoming available free-of-charge online.
So I've started to learn Greek because I'm involved in a translation project so I can definitely see the benefit. You keep being diplomatic though. Is it that every body should learn Greek or some people should learn it. Cus it can't be everybody, well you are not saying everybody. So my question is in the sub set of the "some people" who should learn it?
I might address this! Great question!
Here I thought I was reading it too much. Honest. I have so many translations and keep starting in one then the other etc. working my way through the Bible in a year Stanley & MacArthur Daily/read in a year Bibles…but I feel there should be times where is I just sit down and start reading. The two above are NASB95.
I have all the others, even the 1560 Geneva, but only read in, not fully read at of them. Any suggestions where to start outside of the daily ones that give OT&NT every day planned out to allow the reading 100% in a year. Ty
It's appalling to me with 100 English translations I encounter so few that call themselves Christian that read the Scripture. Sixty years ago as I recall it wasn't this bad. Sorry but most Christians aren't Christian.
Hi I learned so much about this topic but I have several questions. How then a lay person who doesn't have the luxury or the opportunity to learn greek and hebrew understand the Bible? How can we reconcile the problem of gaps to what the Bible is saying "All Scripture is God-breathed"? Can we trust the copies of the original text we have are God-breathed? Are all the english
translations we have are not God-breathed?
In my experience as someone who does not know Greek, but I do delve into the original word usage from Greek fairly regularly to try to discern what a passage means. Usually that's all it takes to make some reasonable sense of something that doesn't make sense at first, or may seem conflicting with something else.
That, and doing a bit of historical research into what the religious/geopolitical climate was like at the time also tends to shed some light on stuff that is confusing, or seems conflicting.
At the heart of ot though, I think you are right in thinking that at least to the most basic degree, translated scripture must be true enough to the original meaning for us to know what we need to know for salvation, otherwise god would kinda be failing us.
This doesn't mean every translation is correct on every front,there are many modern translations that outright change parts of scripture, which is obviously wrong.
But the more prolific, and older translations into a given language are generally going to be correct in the vast majority of what they say.
KJV is so respected(many times to much) in part because any time it's accuracy is contrasted to the actual Greek manuscripts we have it is very very accurate. It's not perfect, especially with how the old English is different from how we use many modern English words, and phrases.
One such example is the word "generation"
In modern English generation means a group of people who were all born around the same time. Gen X Gen Z, millennials, boomers, that kind of thing.
But this is actually a narrowing of the defintion. The old English useage of the word was more or less just a group of common people, or people that can be grouped together by some factor. It could mean the modern usage, but that was context dependent, not the inherent understanding of the word. And there are many Bible verses that have very contentious meanings because of this shift in the usage of the word, the biggest one probably being jesus usage of "this generation" in the Olivet discourse.
❤ Imagine a group of you and your ten closest friends wanting to take a trip to Paris to see the Louvre Museum and especially the Mona Lisa. You couldn't go because something came up. But when your friends got back one of them said to you, "I've hand-drawn the closest approximation of the Mona Lisa that I could so that you can experience the Mona Lisa for yourself." Your friend actually did quite an amazing job (for someone who's not DaVinci). But you still have not experienced Mona Lisa.
Then another friend comes to you with their own drawing (and interpretation) because they also wanted you to experience the Mona Lisa. After all ten of your friends bring you their own drawings, which are their very best approximations and interpretations of the Mona Lisa, you still haven't experienced the Mona Lisa, even if you compare all ten drawings to one another.
You'd need to take in the Mona Lisa personally to experience it for yourself.
That's why comparing different English translations does not suffice for understanding God's Word, and that's why you should learn the biblical languages.
I feel like this is a bit of a fruitless contention. Because I think the only way you can fully grasp exactly how certian words, abd phrases were meant to be used and taken for certian is to truely be a native speaker of the language. Grown up speaking it, or at least used it much of your life.
The problem is that just like how modern English is not the exact same in all its nuances as English 200 years ago, any modern Greek is far removed in said same nuances from the Greek useage in the new testimate. By all means Any native Greek speaker will be that much closer to having a more exact understanding of what stuff means, just as a native English speaker will far more easily pick up the nuances of old English from 200 years ago, but it will never be exact. And just the same, going out of your way to learn it as a second language will very likly not clue you in to anything more than the modern native Greek speakers, from which we do base all of our translation choices.
You can indeed go and see the monalisa for yourself, but you cannot go back in time to be raised around judean first century Greek to know all its nuances.
@anthonypolonkay2681 Good point. However, do you know any non-native English speakers who are fluent and speak excellent English? Such folks are able to understand the meaning of written English just fine. We don't have the ability to time travel. But we DO have the ability to learn the ancient languages, and even through reading other historical writings in that language of that era, we can discern the common understanding because very often "usage determines meaning." So if a common idiom was used, we can understand it better by being familiar with the ways in which the idiom was used.
At any rate, knowledge of the biblical languages certainly gets us CLOSER to the original intended meaning. After all, the English Bible translators obviously gained mastery of the biblical languages in order to give us our English Bibles. 👍
@@Phil_M.1987 kinda. Anyone who didn't at least grow up learning English as a second language, and instead only learned it as an adult, no matter how fluet is always missing nuance here and there. You can see ot woth people who immigrated to where I live a long time ago, and learned English and have been speaking it perfectly fluently for decades, but I'll still say stuff that isn't slang, or anything like that, and end up having to explain it to them, because the nuance just wasn't picked up.
❤ this is why I like interlinear Bibles.
I have a crotchet against which you offended in your video. Do not say "different to" but "different from!" (It derives from the Latin "ab eo differt.") Yes, I am an American. But my crotchet in this case is somewhat rational.
It starts with looking into Church History and ends with changing your mind on many things.
Honestly! Now I’m Inquiring to Eastern Orthodox Christianity. Lord have mercy on us all
@@FaithfulComforter Glory to God!
@catholictruth102 Because the Great Schism of 1054 AD, Filioque, “Papal Supremacy”, Papal Forgeries, Vatican 1 and Vatican 2 and Eastern Catholicism refuting RCC. Prelest of your saints. God bless you guys but no thanks.
@@shawnbrewer7 Amen bro. Just wish I could take my Baptist church with me.
@@FaithfulComforter Keep them in your prayers.
I think you forgot to give the references of the book.
Struggling to pick this accent ? Great video.
New Zealand
100% correct. First-century Christianity is defined by the first-century Greek letters and documents from the first Christians. Everything else, including the traditions of our respective denominations, is derived from it in one way or another. None of these traditions have any value to me. Only the purest form of the good news of "Jesus Christ is Lord," as taught by the first-century church, is important. You can obtain a clearer understanding of many verses of the New Testament by reading Byzantine Greek. Also, traditions have crept into the later versions of Greek NT, such as the Textus Receptus' "Johannine Comma."
Faithful exegetical preaching solves this problem.
It helps.
Interesante tema
If one wants to read the Bible with no translations, one will have to not only learn ancient Greek, but ancient Hebrew, and Ancient Arameic, because that was Jesus’ spoken language and the NT is already a translation of what was said.
To understand the context one has to understand the geo-political world of ancient Israel and the Roman Empire. What is every day life for those people. What did worship mean to a pagan vs a Hebrew for example, and that is only for the NT, but one cannot forget about the OT and all the different cultures and peoples in it : ancient Egypt, Babylone etc…
The languages, the geo-political context, the everyday life and traditions throughtout the stories of the Bible… This is a life-time worth of study and some of us have to eat. I work over 40 hours a week, some people work 2 jobs, so while it’s nice to state that one has to learn a new language, the actual time it takes to fully understand said language to the point of understanding a pun, is years in the making.
As for the « church » whatever that means to some, learning the ancient languages, yes, that is what men who consecrate their lives to the « church » are supposed to do. In all Apostolic churches, Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, the priests in formation are required to learn the ancient languages of the Bible.
If one wants to get out of their echo chamber of translations and does not have the time to learn an ancient language, might I suggest looking to other denominations, the Church Fathers for example. Those might give a more fuller understanding of the text.
❤
💚
One reason to learn NT Greek: We are ambassadors for Christ. Don't most ambassadors know two languages?
❤❤❤❤❤
❤
🐈
Because the Bible wasn't written in English is why your pastor should have a formal education in Greek and Hebrew. If your pastor doesn't have this, he's guilty of malpractice.
If one is a “Christian “ and they’re not reading scripture , It is safe to conclude that they are not hungry. If they are not hungry one must wonder if they are really alive spiritually!
.
14 mins of nothing! Wasted time
❤
💙
❤
❤❤
❤
💙
❤
❤
❤
❤