Should we study Greek?

[porthos11]

copland:

But let me say, Greek is not simple to learn. It will require time and effort. I recommend for beginners “Basics to Biblical Greek” by William Mounce. It is very good, though it is Protestant. But he does not bash Catholicism in his course, so it is Catholic friendly.

Agreed. I use that textbook as well, lent to me by an, amazingly enough, Baptist pastor. I try to practice with “A Reader’s Greek New Testament”, the eclectic text behind the NIV. It has no notes, so it’s Catholic-friendly as well. Plus Greek words that appear 30 times or less are immediately footnoted. Better than an interlinear, easier than a critical.

 

[copland]

Just take these verses from the New Testament: John 1:1, John 6:56-67, and 1st Corinthians 11:24. While for the first verse, the English does quite well, the word order and use of the definite article in Greek strongly reinforces the dogma of Jesus’ divinity. Only the Greek conveys the full power of the latter three verses in support of the Eucharist and the Sacrifice of the Mass.

You are exactly right. John 1:1 in Greek also stresses the Trinitarian doctrine by making a distinction between the Word/logos and God/theos by word order and the lack of an article before theos in the last part of 1:1. Only something you will see in Greek, that is not something that cannot be nessesarily translated out to give the full effect of the Greek.

 

[serendipity]

I’ve been trying to motivate myself to study Greek for a while, not and it hasn’t worked yet. I think reading in the original language of a writer makes you more conscious of ther fact that they are writing in a different time, which is something that every one should be able to consider when reading something that has been translated; but it is easy to forget.

Hebrew is not so much of a challenge to me, because I have an extensive background in Arabic, and there are many cognates, also similarites between the letters themselves. Older languages have so many more colorful expressions than what we have in English. I love those langauges. I’m sure it is the same with Greek, which has quite a history of its own, but whenever I look at the alphabet, I have flashbacks of horrible phyisics classes form high school.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Since, in my opinion, the correct answer isn’t in the poll I won’t vote – but I will express my opinion.

Scripture must always be interpreted with the mind of the author. This means, as has been noted, understanding the language, the culture and mores, the historical and social setting in which the author work. Absent that we are taking Scripture out of context. But learning all of that is something that only a professional Scripture scholar can undertake. It is, in general, beyond most of us because we have other duties and obligations.

Having said that, I learned Latin in high school (four years), Greek and Hebrew in graduate school. I feel comfortable reading the Vulgate or the Greek Scriptures. I do not know Hebrew well enough to even attempt to read Hebrew scripture.

Learing the language can be a fun process that enhances our ability to come closer to the author’s mind, but it can never lead us to an authoritative understanding.

So, go ahead and learn Greek if you want. As the saying goes, “it couldn’t hurt!”

Deacon Ed

 

[romano]

[snip]
. . . . Translations can never be considered inspired

Interesting. . . I wonder who told you that? Matthew’s Gospel was first written in the Palestinian vernacular and only later ‘translated’ into Greek. Does this mean that we shouldn’t consider Matthew as we have received it inspired?

 

[romano]

[snip]
Since, in my opinion, the correct answer isn’t in the poll I won’t vote. . . .

So what, in your opinion and in 10 words or so, is the “correct answer”? It isn’t too late to consider it part of the poll, but it should be kept brief.

 

[romano]

[snip]
. . . . Just take these verses from the New Testament: John 1:1, John 6:56-67, and 1st Corinthians 11:24. For the first verse, the English does quite well, but the word order and use of the definite article in Greek, etc.

Edward W. Goodrick, a professor of Greek, tells us in his ‘Do It Yourself Hebrew and Greek - Everybody’s Guide to The Language Tools’ (1976) that:

“The slopes of the mountain are littered with the dead and the dying. 90% of those who begin to study Greek in an effort to master the pinnacles of Bible knowledge do not continue with their language studies. . . . The mortality rate for those studying original Bible languages is horrendous!” (p.1).

The declension of the Greek article is covered in his book, along with much else.

 

[mercygate]

I voted “yes.”

That said, I do not believe every Joe Sixpack in the pew needs to know Greek. Better to learn the Catechism. On the other hand, being able to read the Book as we have received it is a tremendous eye-opener. It expands the experience of Scripture in a remarkable way.
Maybe everybody doesn’t need to know Greek but clergy certainly need to be comfortable with it. In my diocese, Greek, Latin, and Hebrew are no longer required in seminary. :crying:

 

[porthos11]

romano:

Interesting. . . I wonder who told you that? Matthew’s Gospel was first written in the Palestinian vernacular and only later ‘translated’ into Greek. Does this mean that we shouldn’t consider Matthew as we have received it inspired?

I should have been clearer. English (or any other translations) made after the apostolic age can never be considered inspired, or infallible. Infallibiity belongs only to the Pope, and the entire college of Bishops in union with the Pope in Ecumenical Council. Not Bible translators, therefore, Bible translations are never considered infallible.

As for Matthew, yes tradition indicates that it was originally written in Aramaic by the Apostle, and translated (and most likely edited) to Greek, possibly by a later disciple. However this occurred before the death of St. John (the Greek edition is dated around AD 80), when public revelation was still open. The Church, on her authority declared the Greek canonical and inspired, so strictly speaking, the Greek of Matthew was an original text as far as canonicity and inspiration was concerned (even if it technically was a translation).

This cannot apply to English, or even the Latin Vulgate because they do not fit the criteria for infallibility.

 

[BayCityRickL]

Kevin Walker:

We should study Latin, Greek, and Hebrew!

I would innocently ask a science-friend of mine “What’s new (nu)?” and he would invariably respond " pi over lambda" – so it’s good to study the Greek alphabet and be ready for geeks like this.

I’m not the best teacher of this matter, but I think sooner or later any student of the Bible should know some things about the NT being written in Greek.

People were multi-lingual in Palestine, but the majority language was Greek, following the influence of the previous dominant Greek empire, under Alexander.

And, it a way, that was important for the spread of the Gospel in the very early Church, as that was the common language in many areas. But, also, many Greeks were ready for a new religion and were keen that Greek was the primary language. It greatly facilitated evangelization in that time.

Ideally, a scripture scholar would understand the ancient dialect of Greek that the NT was written in. A Greek Orthodox acquaintance of mine who understands modern Greek fluently, does not understand that Greek used in religious ceremony.

It has no connection to the subject in question, but scientists use Greek alphabet characters to represent unknown quantities (“it’s Greek to me”), in a lot of cases. Like pi is used to represent an indefinite quantity in geometry (2.1415…).

 

[BayCityRickL]

I think it would be instructive to have Greek and English interlinear versions of Catholic bibles, where the Greek and English would be printed together (over and under, or side by side).

Along with a Bible dictionary, it might be quite meaningful to look at how a word in used throughout the NT, and even to trace the connection to the OT.

For example, the English ‘Jesus’ comes to us from the Greek (whatever) and is related to the Hebrew form of Joshua (Y’shua, I think).

The name “Mary” comes to us through Miriam and the Hebrew Miryam.

Jesus and Mary were common names in history, I think.

 

[romano]

Just discovered this interesting line from St Bede in the prefatory matter to my D-R:

“Let me not, O Lord, be puffed up with worldly wisdom, which passes away. . . .”

 

[Deacon_Ed]

BayCityRickL:

I think it would be instructive to have Greek and English interlinear versions of Catholic bibles, where the Greek and English would be printed together (over and under, or side by side).

Along with a Bible dictionary, it might be quite meaningful to look at how a word in used throughout the NT, and even to trace the connection to the OT.

For example, the English ‘Jesus’ comes to us from the Greek (whatever) and is related to the Hebrew form of Joshua (Y’shua, I think).

The name “Mary” comes to us through Miriam and the Hebrew Miryam.

Jesus and Mary were common names in history, I think.

There are a couple of interlinears that are available: one uses the “majority text” which was used to produce the New King James Version (this is a composite manuscript drawing from the best of the ancient manuscripts and using the most commonly found variant when there are variations). Of course, this is for the New Testament only. I believe the Old Testament is still the Masoritic text. There is also a New Testament interlinear that is based upon the Nestle text (not the best, but perhaps the most studied).

The Septuagint was the Christian Old Testament and, while I don’t know of any interlinears of this, there are side-by-side versions – especially the Brenton translation which seems to be pretty much the standard.

In addition one needs to have a good Lexicon (LSJ seems to be the best).

Deacon Ed

 

[Deacon_Ed]

romano:

So what, in your opinion and in 10 words or so, is the “correct answer”? It isn’t too late to consider it part of the poll, but it should be kept brief.

Something to the effect of “Yes, it’s useful and may help us to better understand Scripture.”

Deacon Ed

 

[abalandy]

Many people think learning Greek they would understand more of the NT. Protestants have that habit and if we try to learn by ourselves the Bible and try to interpret everything, we could fall in the same mistakes they have. For instance: “Jesus Christ brothers”. Protestants say: in Greek, the word “brother” means no other than the son of my father, so as this is said so in Greek, Jesus had two brothers at least.

Do we need to have the same mistakes??Are we, Catholics, going to doubt our Mother, Mary, is pure??

Like this, there are many wrong interpretations from those groups.

 

[abalandy]

Many people think learning Greek they would understand more of the NT. Protestants have that habit and if we try to learn by ourselves the Bible and try to interpret everything, we could fall in the same mistakes they have. For instance: “Jesus Christ brothers”. Protestants say: in Greek, the word “brother” means no other than the son of my father, if this is said in Greek, Jesus had two brothers, at least.

Do we need to have the same mistakes??Are we, Catholics, going to doubt our Mother, Mary, is pure??

Like this, there are many wrong interpretations from those groups.

 

[porthos11]

abalandy:

Many people think learning Greek they would understand more of the NT. Protestants have that habit and if we try to learn by ourselves the Bible and try to interpret everything, we could fall in the same mistakes they have. For instance: “Jesus Christ brothers”. Protestants say: in Greek, the word “brother” means no other than the son of my father, so as this is said so in Greek, Jesus had two brothers at least.

Do we need to have the same mistakes??Are we, Catholics, going to doubt our Mother, Mary, is pure??

Like this, there are many wrong interpretations from those groups.

But we have the living Tradition of the Church! Why do we need to fear Greek for as long as we interpret Scripture according to that Tradition?

Greek + Tradition = WOW!

How can learning Greek plant doubts that our Lady is pure? So the Greek says adelphos. So what? We also know that the Greek tells of a culture that spoke Aramaic, which had no direct word for kinsman or cousin. So why should the Greek scare us? If it weren’t for the Greek, I may never have regained my faith in the Holy Eucharist! Would you have denied me that?

 

[porthos11]

abalandy:

Many people think learning Greek they would understand more of the NT. Protestants have that habit and if we try to learn by ourselves the Bible and try to interpret everything, we could fall in the same mistakes they have. For instance: “Jesus Christ brothers”. Protestants say: in Greek, the word “brother” means no other than the son of my father, so as this is said so in Greek, Jesus had two brothers at least.

Do we need to have the same mistakes??Are we, Catholics, going to doubt our Mother, Mary, is pure??

Like this, there are many wrong interpretations from those groups.

But we have the living Tradition of the Church! You can never go wrong when interpreting Scripture according to that Tradition, Greek or otherwise. In fact, Greek+Tradition=WOW!

So why should the Greek cast any doubts on our Lady’s purity? So the Greek says adelphoi. So what? The Greek simply describes a culture that spoke Aramaic, and we know that Aramaic does not have a direct word for cousin or near kinsman (ask your local Chaldean priest to confirm this). Big deal. The Greek also has Mary asking “How can this be? I know not man” and the Greek tells of Jesus giving her to John, not an adelphw. Again, when interpreted within the Tradition of the Church, you can’t go wrong.

If I hadn’t learned a bit of the Greek, I may never have regained my faith in the Holy Eucharist! Goodness, who would have known that there’s big difference between phago and trogo! And mnemnos and anamnesis! And for that, I’m grateful. Like it or not, the Greek is the language of the NT, and only that language carries with it the full force of the NT. Not English, not Latin. Greek.

Ditto Hebrew for the Old Testament, but one thing at a time.

 

[copland]

Deacon Ed

The Septuagint was the Christian Old Testament and, while I don’t know of any interlinears of this, there are side-by-side versions – especially the Brenton translation which seems to be pretty much the standard.

I have Brentons LXX, it is good. I agree, I don;t know of any interlinear for the LXX. There are alot of different things that exist out there that are no longer in print or in circulation. Usually they exist in Libraries and monistaries, or even museums, or in auctions. If I had the money I would try to purchase some of these rare items.

 

[romano]

Deacon Ed:

Something to the effect of “Yes, it’s useful and may help us to better understand Scripture.”

Deacon Ed

It’s hard to see that yours differs significantly from my: " Yes, otherwise we’ll never fully understand the NT."

I don’t see yours as being “correct” as opposed to my allegedly “incorrect” option. They’re just two ways of saying the same thing. It’s just that mine’s a bit stronger.