Original Languages on Christ's Divinity?

[The_Catholic]

A friend of mine is claiming that the original Biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek, do not support the doctrine of the Trinity nor show that Christ is Eternal God. He’s not a scholar, but he can speak some Hebrew and Greek, and he has transtated his own Bible from those languages into english. But he hasn’t given me any examples yet.

So basicly my question is do the original languages, outside of sacred tradition, deny Christ divinity?

 

[alexaustralia]

The Catholic,

There are instances in the NT were Jesus is worshipped (hence God). The greek word for worship is proskuneo (from memory). I know Jehovah witnesses will translate proskuneo into what amounts to “being obedient”. However they only do so in reference to Jesus, whenever the word is used in reference to God (jehovah) then they translate it as worship. So they make their translation to accomodate for their already set beliefs !!! Perhaps your friend is doing something similar…also translating the Bible is a big task and I doubt he did a good job if he does not have any true study in the field.

Alex

 

[Liberian]

The Catholic,

Not to put too fine a point on it, but “ho kyrio kai ho theo” (John 20:28–forgive my rendering but I do not know Greek) should be pretty explicit.

I would guard seriously against private translations of the Bible from the original languages. I know enough Hebrew to know that the original text is VERY wild and woolly, and the possibilities for error are infinite.

• Liberian

 

[cygnusdei]

The Catholic,

There are instances in the NT were Jesus is worshipped (hence God). The greek word for worship is proskuneo (from memory). I know Jehovah witnesses will translate proskuneo into what amounts to “being obedient”. However they only do so in reference to Jesus, whenever the word is used in reference to God (jehovah) then they translate it as worship. So they make their translation to accomodate for their already set beliefs !!! Perhaps your friend is doing something similar…also translating the Bible is a big task and I doubt he did a good job if he does not have any true study in the field.

Alex

Interesting - I thought the JW were the strict translators, considering that they use ‘Jehovah’ for all references to God (instead of interchanging LORD and GOD).

 

[mlchance]

Interesting - I thought the JW were the strict translators, considering that they use ‘Jehovah’ for all references to God (instead of interchanging LORD and GOD).

If the JWs were “strict translators,” they’d drop “Jehovah” from their vocabulary. It is a construction based on a flawed transliteration of Hebrew.

And, of course, no one can sensibly claim the earliest Christians, including those that wrote the NT, viewed Jesus Christ as anything other than divine.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus by Murray J. Harris

Your friend does not know what he is talking about. Likely, he has read some arian or unitarian books that try to explain away the texts that prove that Jesus is God.

The above book was written by a greek scholar who goes through each of the texts where Theos, God is applied to Jesus as being God.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

The Isaiah text clearly is speaking about the LORD, our God. The gospels apply this text to Jesus.

Isaiah 40:3
A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the LORD ; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God.

Matthew 3:3
This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah: "A voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.’ "

Mark 1:3
"a voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.’ "

Luke 3:4
As is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet: "A voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

A friend of mine is claiming that the original Biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek, do not support the doctrine of the Trinity nor show that Christ is Eternal God. He’s not a scholar, but he can speak some Hebrew and Greek, and he has transtated his own Bible from those languages into english. But he hasn’t given me any examples yet.

So basicly my question is do the original languages, outside of sacred tradition, deny Christ divinity?

The term “Trinity” was not adopted until much later. The Early Chrisitians believed in God, and believed that the God of the Jews was the One True God. They also believed that Jesus was a God, and was somehow the same being as the God of the Jews. This is pretty obvious from a reading of the gospels. They also believed in something called “The Spirit”, which rested on and guided members of the church.

However they wouldn’t necessarily have thought to take a count and say that God is therefore three as well as One. To that extent your friend is correct.

As for “eternal God”, that’s a selective reading of the text. I doubt it expicitly says anywhere that Jesus is God for all time rather than temporarily, but it is perfectly clear that the Early Chrisitians didn’t believe that Jesus was a temporary god.

 

[The_Catholic]

Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus by Murray J. Harris

Your friend does not know what he is talking about. Likely, he has read some arian or unitarian books that try to explain away the texts that prove that Jesus is God.

The above book was written by a greek scholar who goes through each of the texts where Theos, God is applied to Jesus as being God.

He has been reading Unitarian works and I think Arian as well. And he admits he doesn’t know everything and that he could possibly be wrong. He is very honest about it all. But mainly he says that Jews believed in ONE God, and the OT speaks of only ONE God. And to start saying that there is three distinct persons in ONE God is too complex and is just overly exxaggerated. The simplist way to read the Bible verses are that there is ONE God and cannot be a Trinity.

I of course disagree.

 

[noma]

He has been reading Unitarian works and I think Arian as well. And he admits he doesn’t know everything and that he could possibly be wrong. He is very honest about it all. But mainly he says that Jews believed in ONE God, and the OT speaks of only ONE God. And to start saying that there is three distinct persons in ONE God is too complex and is just overly exxaggerated. The simplist way to read the Bible verses are that there is ONE God and cannot be a Trinity.

I of course disagree.

A point of discussion (and the question that gets the bad Jewish kids kicked out of Sunday School) is the word “Elohiym”.

It is plural for “Eloh”, used to talk about God in Genesis. The plurality leads some scholars to believe that the very early Hebrews believed in many gods. The better interpretation is suggesting a relationship of God with Himself (this relationship is mentioned and postulated by Rashi in the Chumash).

Relationships within a being, if we are using scholastic language, require seperate persons in the same nature.

 

[The_Catholic]

A point of discussion (and the question that gets the bad Jewish kids kicked out of Sunday School) is the word “Elohiym”.

It is plural for “Eloh”, used to talk about God in Genesis. The plurality leads some scholars to believe that the very early Hebrews believed in many gods. The better interpretation is suggesting a relationship of God with Himself (this relationship is mentioned and postulated by Rashi in the Chumash).

Relationships within a being, if we are using scholastic language, require seperate persons in the same nature.

I’ve heard this before, so has my friend. It’s very interesting.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

A friend of mine is claiming that the original Biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek, do not support the doctrine of the Trinity nor show that Christ is Eternal God. He’s not a scholar, but he can speak some Hebrew and Greek, and he has transtated his own Bible from those languages into english. But he hasn’t given me any examples yet.

So basicly my question is do the original languages, outside of sacred tradition, deny Christ divinity?

Oh good another Bible Translation from the lost originals no doubt.

I think I’ll stick with the translation and interpretation of the Early Church Fathers, rather than my own.

 

[yngwie7]

A friend of mine is claiming that the original Biblical languages, Hebrew and Greek, do not support the doctrine of the Trinity nor show that Christ is Eternal God. He’s not a scholar, but he can speak some Hebrew and Greek, and he has transtated his own Bible from those languages into english. But he hasn’t given me any examples yet.

So basicly my question is do the original languages, outside of sacred tradition, deny Christ divinity?

What’s up dude. Thank you for your kind words but I didn’t actually translate the bible myself into english. All I did was print out the greek text with the english translation next to it. Maybe someday I’ll be able to translate the entire bible myself, but I can’t now.

God bless you

 

[The_Catholic]

Hey karl! It’s awesome to here from you in here. Oops, sorry man, lol. I thought you told me you translated it yourself. Honestly, I was thinking “holy cow, how did he learn Hebrew and Greek so fast?” But I guess I blundered.

Anyway I hope to see you soon.

God bless you.

 

[The_Catholic]

Oh good another Bible Translation from the lost originals no doubt.

I think I’ll stick with the translation and interpretation of the Early Church Fathers, rather than my own.

First off please do not be sarcastic, Br. Rich. My friend has a very humble heart and is just looking for the Truth, in all honesty.

Second off, I blundered anyway. See his response above.

 

[George_Craft]

Hi everyone,

I copied this portion from the Encyclical of Pope Benedict XV on St. Jerome which is in the beginning of my Bible:

From what St. Augustine wrote to St. Jerome:

" Accord the Sacred Books such honor and reverence as firmly to believe that none of their writers had ever fallen into any error; and that consequently, if in the said books he came across anything which seemed to run counter to the truth, he did not think that that was really the case, but either that his copy was defective or that the said translator had made a mistake, or again, that he himself had failed to understand.

I wouldn’t want to deny in any way the dictionary being used to translate the Greek or Hebrew, but as both of these great theologians claim, if there appears to be error in the manuscript or translation, it has to be in the copy being translated, the translation just done or the understanding of the translator.

This was understood when Jerome was translating the Scriptures in the mid 4th century, and I’m sure the documents being translated now are not the same ones Jerome used. I would suspect the copies used today are more in error.

With love,
George

 

[The_Catholic]

Hi everyone,

I copied this portion from the Encyclical of Pope Benedict XV on St. Jerome which is in the beginning of my Bible:

From what St. Augustine wrote to St. Jerome:

" Accord the Sacred Books such honor and reverence as firmly to believe that none of their writers had ever fallen into any error; and that consequently, if in the said books he came across anything which seemed to run counter to the truth, he did not think that that was really the case, but either that his copy was defective or that the said translator had made a mistake, or again, that he himself had failed to understand.

I wouldn’t want to deny in any way the dictionary being used to translate the Greek or Hebrew, but as both of these great theologians claim, if there appears to be error in the manuscript or translation, it has to be in the copy being translated, the translation just done or the understanding of the translator.

This was understood when Jerome was translating the Scriptures in the mid 4th century, and I’m sure the documents being translated now are not the same ones Jerome used. I would suspect the copies used today are more in error.

With love,
George

St. Francis of Assisi! Awesome! Praise the LORD!

 

[yngwie7]

I thought you told me you translated it yourself.

I think I said that I translated some of the biblical quotes I used in my paper myself so that they would be more literal. If I didn’t say that, that’s what I meant to say.

See you soon and God bless you

 

[R_McGeddon]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but “ho kyrio kai ho theo” (John 20:28–forgive my rendering but I do not know Greek) should be pretty explicit.

I do know some Greek, and all that sentence says is: “Man and God”
I’m not sure what you mean by quoting it.

I would guard seriously against private translations of the Bible from the original languages. I know enough Hebrew to know that the original text is VERY wild and woolly, and the possibilities for error are infinite.

Ever wondered why the church frowns upon personal translation?

It’s all about you knowing more than the church wants you to know.