You got the Bible written in the Greek language and translated into English. All Yeshuas talmidim were Hebrews, not one of them are Greek, even Luke is Hebrew. Even if I give you Aramaic this is VERY FAR from Greek! Transliterated from Messiah to Kristos many years after the Hebrew Messiah was sitting at the right hand of the Father/Y H V H ! IGNORANT, Really? Who?Linus said:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
christian is a wrong term
- Thread starter t3gah
- Start date
Dinogrrl
peeb!
Does it matter that much what language you say a word in? If I called Jesus by His Irish, Latin, or Esperanto name, I'm still calling Him Jesus, or Christ, or God, or whatever term I choose to call Him.
If you want to be so historically accurate, maybe you should revert to Hebrew or Greek or whatever you're saying is the correct language, and then you wouldn't have to be so cranky about English and all its idiocies, or whatever the heck this is all about. I lost track.
~Dino, really really tired of repeating herself
If you want to be so historically accurate, maybe you should revert to Hebrew or Greek or whatever you're saying is the correct language, and then you wouldn't have to be so cranky about English and all its idiocies, or whatever the heck this is all about. I lost track.
~Dino, really really tired of repeating herself
James the Persian
Dreptcredincios Crestin
Ronald,
Two points. The first is that the text of Scripture does not say who called the disciples Christian first at Antioch, only that they were called Christians. You may assume, if you like, that the name was made up by enemies of the disciples but you have no evidence for that belief. On the other hand, I have evidence of Apostolic and Early Church Fathers writing of Christians and they clearly saw nothing wrong in the term, so I'd have to say your objection seems baseless.
The second is that the vast majority of the New Testament was originally written down in Greek and using a Greek translation for the OT quotes. It simply wasn't written in Hebrew or Aramaic and then translated into Greek. The reason for this is obvious - the lingua franca at the time was Greek and hence using that language allowed the Gospel to be preached the furthest and quickest. Most of the Jews in the diaspora even used Greek (and the Septuagint) and as these were the obvious first targets for Christian evangelisation it would have been foolish to use Hebrew or Aramaic. Christos (it's not Kristos, the initial letter is a chi, not kappa) is a simple translation of Messiah and is used in both the OT and NT Greek manuscripts. For some reason English translators chose to use Messiah in the OT and Christ in the NT - but that's much the same as with my first name (Jacob OT, James NT) and Christ's name (Joshua OT, Jesus NT). You and t3gah are still making theological mountains out of linguistic molehills. The Greek term translated into English as Jesus Christ is (transliterated, as it's obviously written using the Greek alphabet) Iesous Christos, which is exactly the same as writing 'the Annointed Jesus' in English. There is no fabrication or distortion at all - the English translators merely left some words and phrases untranslated.
James
Two points. The first is that the text of Scripture does not say who called the disciples Christian first at Antioch, only that they were called Christians. You may assume, if you like, that the name was made up by enemies of the disciples but you have no evidence for that belief. On the other hand, I have evidence of Apostolic and Early Church Fathers writing of Christians and they clearly saw nothing wrong in the term, so I'd have to say your objection seems baseless.
The second is that the vast majority of the New Testament was originally written down in Greek and using a Greek translation for the OT quotes. It simply wasn't written in Hebrew or Aramaic and then translated into Greek. The reason for this is obvious - the lingua franca at the time was Greek and hence using that language allowed the Gospel to be preached the furthest and quickest. Most of the Jews in the diaspora even used Greek (and the Septuagint) and as these were the obvious first targets for Christian evangelisation it would have been foolish to use Hebrew or Aramaic. Christos (it's not Kristos, the initial letter is a chi, not kappa) is a simple translation of Messiah and is used in both the OT and NT Greek manuscripts. For some reason English translators chose to use Messiah in the OT and Christ in the NT - but that's much the same as with my first name (Jacob OT, James NT) and Christ's name (Joshua OT, Jesus NT). You and t3gah are still making theological mountains out of linguistic molehills. The Greek term translated into English as Jesus Christ is (transliterated, as it's obviously written using the Greek alphabet) Iesous Christos, which is exactly the same as writing 'the Annointed Jesus' in English. There is no fabrication or distortion at all - the English translators merely left some words and phrases untranslated.
James
What scrolls?t3gah said:
that verse in Revelation only applies to the book of Revelation and not to the Bible as a whole since the Bible as we know it didn't exist at the time. If that is to be read as applying to the Bible as a whole then the verse in Deuteronomy 4:2 which reads "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." should be read the same way and therefore everything in the Bible after Deuteronomy was added to the scriptures already given.t3gah said:
What about the book of Matthew in Hebrew? Same old arguement as of old, because I can show no evidence of Hebrew writings. They never exsisted. No one was hostile with the Hebrews in that day and age! Yeah Right! You have not one shred of evidence Yeshua ever spoke the word CHRIST! I think you and I are on equal footing, No proof, just faith. Obvious only to those who believe it is obvious. So shall we strive for words? Let's find out if you know what "Is" is?IacobPersul said:
James the Persian
Dreptcredincios Crestin
I never said that none of the New Testament was written in Hebrew, I said the vast majority was written in Greek, which is true and there's tons of evidence for it. I don't need any evidence that Christ spoke the word Christ because I know He didn't. He certainly didn't speak English, so how could He? He may have said Christos because he may have spoken Greek (it being the lingua franca at the time) but I have no evidence for Him doing so, and he probably didn't as He probably used the Aramaic. (He almost certainly didn't use Hebrew either, by the way, outside of the synagogue or temple). The point is that none of this is theology, it's linguistics. You seem to be trying to make profound theological conclusions based on the language Jesus spoke but this is utterly ridiculous and if my words won't convince you maybe Pentecost should?Ronald said:
The term Christians is not wrong, it's just a rendering into English of a Greek term which was applied at Antioch (which was a city full of diaspora Jews) by persons unknown, but probably non-Christian Jews as the early Christians would not have forced the distinction (and why should pagans bother?), considering themselves as the fulfilment of Judaism and continuing to worship in the synagogues. The root of the word is itself a translation from Hebrew of a word meaning 'Annointed One' (Messiah). It is not a name but a title. Maybe we shouldn't call Him Lord either, and obviously we couldn't use Kyrios as that's Greek. Is Adonai an acceptable title? Perhaps we should go the whole hog andjust give up English for Aramaic or Hebrew?
James
What on earth are you talking about?Ronald said:
The Gospel of the Hebrews, probably similar to the Gospel of Matthew, is a lost harmonic gospel that is preserved in the works of the Church Fathers. Possibly the most important ancient scholar was Eusebius. He was born in Palestine about 225 years after the crucifixion, later becoming Bishop of Caesarea. Many believe he is the greatest historian of the Christian faith, on a par with Josephus. He is best known for his Church History in which he chronicles the important events from the birth of Christ to his era.Deut. 32.8 said:
At the time of Eusebius, there was no Bible, as we know it. However, there existed numerous Christian writings that recorded the life of Jesus. This corpus of literature had come into being during the 200 or so years after Christ. Eusebius catalogued these writings in his Church History. It is because of this catalogue that we know of those early works (many of which were lost). His catalogue consisted of three sections:
According to the Church Fathers, the Gospel of the Hebrews or the Hebrew Gospel was authoritative and apostolic in nature.
Papius and Irenaeus tell us that the Apostle Matthew wrote it in Hebrew letters.
Eusebius adds that the reason Matthew wrote the Hebrew Gospel was that he was about to leave the Christian community he established, and therefore put together an account of the life of Jesus for the people he left behind in their own dialect (Aramaic).
Epiphanius confirms the aforementioned, and goes on to say that Matthew alone of the New Testament writers composed a Gospel in Hebrew script that was called the Gospel of the Hebrews.
Some modern scholars contested this, arguing that Matthew also wrote the Canonical Matthean Gospel in Hebrew script. However, Higher Criticism has proven that the Canonical Matthean Gospel as recorded in the Bible was composed in Greek many years after the time of Matthew by an unknown redactor.
St. Jerome is most helpful in understanding the origins of the Gospel of the Hebrews. According to Jerome, the Gospel of the Hebrews was written in the Syriac language (Aramaic) but used Hebrew letters. Most people of Jeromes day called it Authentic Matthew, as the Apostle of Jesus who was the tax collector composed it. The Hebrew original was preserved at the library in Caesarea, but copies existed in the Nazarene community in Beroea, Syria, as well as in the Ebionite community. The Nazarenes gave Jerome a copy that he translated into Greek.
Jerome believed the Gospel of the Hebrews was authoritative and wrote about it extensively, thus preserving an otherwise lost Gospel.