1. Hello Guest! You are browsing the forums as a guest; you will have limited permissions as a guest so we advise registering to enjoy the forums fully. Remember: we are a Christian ONLY site - any user who is not Christian will not be approved. Blessings, Christian Forum Site Staff
    Dismiss Notice

Greek Text

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by thaumasios, Nov 5, 2015.

  1. What is the best Greek text. What is, perhaps, the original Greek text. As my studies grow I look in the English and think..let me look at the Greek to further expose the meaning of this scripture to only find the Greek having multiple translations as well.

    Today I was reading my KJV and noticed a comma in a weird place that made me scratch my head.

    Revelation 20:2

    And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

    With this comma after devil.. I thought, wait what, and Satan? You mean to tell me the devil and Satan are not the same?

    καὶ ἐκράτησεν τὸν δράκοντα, ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος, ὅς ἐστιν Διάβολος καὶ Ὁ Σατανᾶς, καὶ ἔδησεν αὐτὸν χίλια ἔτη,

    Who is Devil and Satan. ( ὅς ἐστιν Διάβολος καὶ Ὁ Σαταν)

    Anyhow, I learned my answer and what I was looking for but it just irks me with all these different translations. Is nothing sacred? Thanks for your time and help.
     
  2. Its just something that as we read the Bible we have to ask the Holy Spirit to direct everything. The translaters did the best that they could, but there are a lot of instances where commas are not in the right place or even they have added an italicized word that the Holy Spirit can tell you just leave it out...it really does not need to be there.

    But the wonderful thing is that it causes us to study more and dig deeper and then rely on the Holy Spirit more to make sure we have the right meaning. I prayed about this very thing while reading and going through the strongs definitions and God just told me that, that is where the Holy Spirit will come in and tell you what is the right definition of the word.

    We are in a time where deeper meanings of the Word of God are being revealed. And if a person reads with out the direction and the help of the Holy Spirit then they only get a surface meaning of God's Word. In 1 Corinthians 2:14 says that the things of God (this includes His Word) are spiritually discerned. So before you read or study...commit your time to God and ask the Holy Spirit to be there with you to give you understanding. According to Luke 8:10 unto us it has been given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of God. Thank God always for eyes to see, ears to hear and a heart and mind that understands His Word and everything that He has in store for you.

    God Bless!
     
    thaumasios likes this.
  3. Oh by the way welcome to cfs! I pray that you will be very blessed :)
     
    thaumasios likes this.
  4. thaumasios likes this.
  5. I've been there.

    My current line of thinking, after learning about the nature of translation, is that having multiple translations is the best case scenario for having the fullest possible understanding of an original text. I'm speaking in general terms, not exclusively about the translation of scripture.

    As for punctuation in scripture, punctuation (pretty much) didn't exist until a few hundred years after the last book in the canon was written. They actually didn't even put spaces between words...

    There was a time when I used to lie awake tortured by the possible implications of such things, and others like them. Since then, I've come to understand my walk with God as a collective, rather than purely individualistic journey. Meaning, I can learn more about the way God wants me to live as His disciple from what the Spirit revealed to my brother or sister this week than what I can learn from studying ancient Hebrew for a few more hours.

    I now like that these questions about translation are messy. It means that we can't put our trust in the study of ancient languages, translation and archeology to create this perfect text by which all the mysteries of God will be revealed to us:) If something is keeping us from understanding a Truth that will lead us to living the way God wants us to live, is that "something" really the lack of a "single pure text"?

    A few years back, I worked very closely with a group of Christians who knew almost nothing about studying scripture in an academic sense, but they were truly offering their lives as living sacrifices. At one point, I wasn't serving with them as often as I'd purposed to, and I was telling one of the guys there it was because I'd been at home just reading scripture, and studying it. He just stared me down, and asked, "why?" The way he asked it, I didn't have an answer. He was serving free food to hungry people while I was learning about translating Greek. He didn't know the scriptures as well as I did, but he understood them so much better. The Spirit had revealed that "single pure text" to him in a way more profound than any academic study will ever reveal to anyone.

    I don't want to devalue the study of scripture in any way. Quite the contrary. I just think we need to take it more seriously when it says "Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says." James 1:22. Knowing truth has little worth if we do nothing about it.

    I hope that is of some comfort to you.
     
    thaumasios likes this.
  6. Actually, the Hebrew and Greek did not use punctuations. That's where a lot of misunderstands arrive. If you remove them sometimes the meanings change. Only the Holy Spirit can decipher the real meaning as He's the Author.
     
    Cturtle and thaumasios say Amen and like this.
  7. I see. Very interesting
     
  8. thaumasios likes this.

  9. The dragon, the devil, and satan are one and the same, because the pronoun "he" is in the singular.

    And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
    καὶ ἐκράτησεν τὸν δράκοντα, ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος, ὅς ἐστιν Διάβολος καὶ Ὁ Σατανᾶς, καὶ ἔδησεν αὐτὸν χίλια ἔτη,

    If the dragon, devil, and satan were more than one, the pronoun would be autous (in greek) or they in english
     
  10. One of my first posts here was a question involving several translations of I Thess 5:20-21

    KJV has those verses as separate sentences, part of a series of short succinct pieces of advice.

    5:20 Despise not prophesyings.
    5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.


    In several more recent versions, v21 provides an alternative to the problem in v20. NASB has:

    5:20 do not despise prophetic utterances.
    5:21 But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good;


    The Biblical scholars here were very helpful in answering which was the better rendering, at least in terms of the question I was looking up.

    The point is, that with multiple translations, you can come to a reasonable understanding of the meaning, but experts are available here and elsewhere when the nuances are important.

    If you wish to be a scholar of the original language texts, you will learn the provenance of the various texts, and be able to navigate between them. You should do this in your own language (English?) If, like me, you simply wish to know God's word, find one or two well regarded translations in your most fluent language.

    ... Hey, I just looked again at your Avatar... If I am not mistaken, it is a Greek flag! Are you more wanting to know which is the best translation into modern Greek? If so, I really can't help you much, but to mention that the Bible link at the top of the pages on this site does have a Modern Greek translation.

    Still, most of my post is still relevant: Using several translations helps get to the real meaning. No which is a strict translation and which is a loose translation or paraphrase. Both have approaches strengths and weaknesses. Seeing differences can lead to investigating why and finding out something wonderful.
     
    Cturtle likes this.
  11. #11 Glad4Mercy, Nov 15, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2015
    Regarding Greek Manuscripts, they fall into two families; the Byzantian text and the Alexandrian texts. The Byzantian text is what the Textus Receptus (and King James Bible) was based on. The Alexandrian texts are older and fewer in number, and disagree with one another in some places. The Alexandrian texts were also missing for centuries, until discovered in the mid-ninteenth century. Because of these facts, I am more confident with the Byzantian (Textus Receptus), but I also refer to editions based on the other as well in my studies. I think both families are useful, and the differences between them seem to be minor and do not affect any essential doctrine or teaching.
     
  12. Recent scholars using a Vidicon Camera technology can demonstrate that Vaticanus has been altered by at least two latter hands. One in the 4th century and the other in as late as the 12th century A.D.! The entire document is written in classical Platonic Greek and not the Koine Greek of the 1st century Church and is written of very expensive Vellum and not the papyrus of the early Church.

    Genesis 1.1 through Genesis 46:28; Psalms 106 through 138; Matthew 16:2,3; Romans 16:24; the Pauline Pastoral Epistles; Revelation; and everything in Hebrews after 9:14 do not appear in this collection.

    It is full of the same types of misspellings, omissions and non-scriptural grammatical assumptions that we also find in Sinaiticus (though this is not mentioned in the popularized articles about them). It omits 237 words, 452 clauses and 748 whole sentences when compared to the Byzantine textual tradition. Some later copies of the very same Alexandrian textual tradition restore some of these (Why?). Finally, the question must be begged as to why this re-versionism was NEVER used anywhere for over 1300 years by any church (East or West)?

    Now then, Sinaiticus was first found in 1844 in a trash pile at Saint Catherine's monastery in the Sinai (it was thrown away) and later in the collection found in Nag Hamadi (among a number of gnostic distortions and false gospels...like the gospel of Thomas) and unfortunately recovered from the realm of the unknown where it belonged. It was immediately noted to be heavily edites and to contain many omissions. Many words and phrases were simply lined out and re-written...only the choices of omission and rewording were very different from those found in Vaticanus. Sinaiticus is also nowhere found to be used in any church!

    Secondly, also being incomplete, and ending some books in the most obscure places, Codex Sinaiticaus contained additional non-scriptural writings without distinction from the inspired word. In this bastardization there are some 9,000 changes (amazing) and at least 10 later scribes added to or took away from the text. These changes are quite different from the ones we find in Vaticanus.

    The majority Byzantine textual tradition represents about 90% of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts, and additional 15,000 extant samples from earlier version (the Syriac Peshitta, the Old Latin, the Italic Bible from 157 A.D., and supports references from the early church fathers taught by the Apostles or the men they appointed as Bishops...including Irenaeus Mark 16:9 which both Vat and Sin delete...Vat leaving an empty space for it or for where it was).

    In the gospels alone Vaticanus omits over 2500 words, adds 536, substitutes 935, transposes over 2000, and modifies 1132! The corresponding figures for Sinaiticus being nearly 3500 omitted, 839 added, 1114 substituted, 2299 transposed, and 1265 modified.

    And let it be known that these omissions, additions, substitutions, transpositions, and modifications, are NOT THE SAME in both MSS. IN fact, it is in fact easier to find two consecutive verses in which these two differ (the one from the other), than two consecutive verses in which they entirely agree.

    These two heavily edited hodge-podge rejected versions are then combined eclectically by modern translators such as Nestle or Westcort/Holt (whose translations also disagree in many places) who pick and choose as fits their motives (though I do believe Nestle was TRYING to be honest regarding the Critical Text with HIS hodge-podge eclectic version).

    The problem, IMHO, is that they press that this is the oldest versions (lie number 1) and the best versions (lie number 2) and the result is over 50 versions which all disagree with one another in many places.
     

Share This Page