For Greek Scholars: 1 Corinthians 11:23-24 - "This is Really my Body...."

[dacoobob]

Re: the discussion over “body” being in neuter gender… I refer you to Mark 14:8 (“She has done what she could; she has anointed my body beforehand for burying.”) Here Christ is very unambiguously talking about his literal body. The Greek word for “body” here is the exact same form as that used in the Last Supper account (ho soma). Just fyi.

 

[porthos11]

And what does this more literal translation say [and ergo] “this is the body of me” mean?

It must mean that the Eucharist*** is*** the very body of Christ! It is not symbolic or it would read “this is the symbolic Body of me” or perhaps “this is the body of me symbolically”

But in th passage the Body is not identified as anything but the Body of Christ - Himself … and realistically, then it is really Christ who is the “me” referred to … not a spirit, not a memory, not another but Jesus…

To impose another meaning is to force the meaning with your own BIAS …

The OP merely asked about the translation, specifically, whether the Greek words meant “is really”.

The translation is simply: This is my body. Nothing more, nothing less.

Whether “is” means “is really” or “is figuratively” is not indicated by the text. The text simply says, “is”, and that’s the OP’s question.

And don’t BIAS me, with your all caps. I’m Catholic and I firmly and truly believe in the Real Presence.

As for the gender of the word “soma”, in Greek, “soma” is neuter. It has nothing to do with the biological gender of the body’s owner. The word will always be rendered in the neuter regardless of context.

 

[porthos11]

PROTESTANT translation. It is considered error by Catholics, as it was the product of disobedience. Sorry.

What are you talking about? The poster cited the Greek text, and is therefore NOT a translation, but the original text.

There’s nothing in error about the text he cited. It simply translates into “This is my body.”

 

[YADA]

The OP merely asked about the translation, specifically, whether the Greek words meant “is really”.

The translation is simply: This is my body. Nothing more, nothing less.

Whether “is” means “is really” or “is figuratively” is not indicated by the text. The text simply says, “is”, and that’s the OP’s question.

And don’t BIAS me, with your all caps. I’m Catholic and I firmly and truly believe in the Real Presence.

As for the gender of the word “soma”, in Greek, “soma” is neuter. It has nothing to do with the biological gender of the body’s owner. The word will always be rendered in the neuter regardless of context.

Pothos, I apologize if you thought the BIAS was for you…Sandusky offered an all caps and bolded 'bias" in an earlier post regarding catholic’s reading into the scriptures … my reference was to that … Please accept my apology…

My point was that the translation of “this is the body of me” points to a reality of Jesus’ body in the Eucharist…and to force a different or symbolic meaning is to read into the passage a bias against the True Presence …

 

[po18guy]

Yes, but the inspired author wrote in Greek. We can’t go back to the original Aramaic, because we don’t know what was said (in Aramaic at least).

Although this is most unfortunate, in such instances, we must rely on Sacred Tradition to provide the stabilizing influence. Without Tradition, each succeeding translation could veer further from original intent.

I’m not sure if one could say “Protestant translations are, byu definition, in error”.

Well, if they are used to disprove Catholic theology, what else would you call it? Protestant tranlators have had to discredit (to some extent)Catholic thought to justify the Lutheran’s separation from the one church. Some of this certainly shows up in their work. Both faith traditions cannot be 100% correct. Which do you choose?

I think even Catholic translators claim that the KJV is a very good translation. Maybe not 100% accurate (there probably are biases), but I don’t know of credible Catholics making this claim.

Well, Father Ken Roberts, who did apologetics for EWTN back in the 80s advised of over 2,000 translation errors in the KJV. I googled “KJV translation errors” and there is much controversy to this day among Protestants over that version.

Not that I’m calling you “uncredible”, it’s just I don’t know of a better way to put it.

We are just going to disagree here. But, please remember that King James did not command or authorize a scripture translation with the purpose of supporting the Catholic Church. He had something else in mind.

Christ’s peace.