Unsettled ChristianityOne blog to rule them all, One blog to find them, One blog to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
I am a hobby translator, not an expert so I have to rely on others and other resources for help. Here are several of the resources I’ve used in the past year.
If you are looking for resources to help teach your child New Testament Greek, this might help:
We are excited about helping your child and student learn the Greek of the New Testament. This is an entirely new approach in which they will learn not only to read the Greek of the Bible but to speak it. This makes it easier to learn and a lot more fun.
One of my first ‘blogger friends’ was Wb Moore, and after a long hiatus, he has returned, in traditional form, with a bang! He tackles Romans 1.27-28 against charges such as ‘words used only here by Paul. Familiar words are used here in unusual ways.’ Wb answers it soundly.
Welcome back, Wb.
I love the study of Greek – Mike Aubrey has posted a link to a short book on Granville Sharp’s rule on a certain phrasing of the Greek language, which I feel is important in our understanding of the deity of Christ.
Following Wallace’s important words on Granville Sharp’s rule, I would encourage you to take the time to read through Christopher Wordsworth’s Six Letters to Granville Sharp fully available on Google Books for download and read through what the native Greeks say and think about Sharp’s Canon.
In a previous post, Mike notes the native Greek speaker acknowledges the Granville Sharp rule as valid:
At 242f., I love the fact that Sharp’s Canon is confirmed via native speaker intuition. For me, this was by far the strongest argument, though I wish that a few of the Arians who conceded the syntax of the construction were mentioned or cited. That would have been helpful.
Thanks to Mike for pointing this book out!
The blogger at Biblical Paths, and excellent conservative blog, points us to Time magazine’s article on the important Codex. Further, he gives us an excellent video on some of the restoration techniques of the 1600 year old manuscript:
I am starting the translation of chapter 2 for the Marcellian document, Exposition of Faith, and I am running into some problems – as to be expected from a novice. Any help would be appreciated.
2.1 Πιστεύομεν ὁμοίως εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τὸ πάντα ἐρευνῶν “καὶ τὰ βάθη τοῦ θεοῦ,” ἀναθεματίζοντες τὰ παρὰ τοῦτο φρονοῦντα δόγματα.
2.2 οὔτε γὰρ υἱοπάτορα φρονοῦμεν ὡς οἱ Σαβέλλιοι λέγοντες μονοούσιον καὶ οὐχ ὁμοούσιον καὶ ἐν τούτῳ ἀναιροῦντες τὸ εἶναι υἱόν.
2.3 οὔτε τὸ παθητὸν σῶμα ὃ ἐφόρεσε διὰ τὴν τοῦ παντὸς κόσμου σωτηρίαν, ἀνατίθεμεν τῷ πατρί.
2.1 Credimus similiter in Spiritum sanctum, qui omnia scrutatur etiam profunda Dei. Dogmatius nutem omnibus quae his contraria fuerint, anathema dicimus.
2.2 Neque enim Filio Patrem agnoscimus qui unius sit substantiae, non vero consubstantialius, ut volont Seblliani, qui hoc pacto Filium pentius tollunt.
2.3 Neque etiam patibile corpus, quod propter totius mundi salutem gestavit, attribuimus Patri.
2.1 We believe also in the Spirit, the Holy (Hebrews 10.5), the searcher of all things, even the depths of God (1st Corinthians 2.10). Cursed is he who is against this doctrine.
2.2 Niether, for the Son-Father, of which Sabellius speaks, acknowledges the monoousian but not the homoousian, and he destroys the Son’s existence.
2.3 Neither, the suffering body, by which he saved all the world, given by the Father.
I am not happy with the beginning of verse 2 and 3. The ‘οὔτε γὰρ’ and ‘οὔτε τὸ‘ is throwing me. Please, help! I am thinking that the author intends to state that those that, like Sabellius, deny the Consubstantiality of the Father and Son, referring to think the Son is a ‘nickname’ (patripassianism) are accursed as well, as are those that destroy the notion that Christ had a body.
Marcellus’ problem for a long time had been that he was unfairly categorized a Sabellian by his opponants – unfair because Marcellus never denied the disctinction in time of the Incarnation and never professed that the Son was realy the Father, but with a different name. It is only natural that along with other heresies, the author places Sabellius.
Thanks to David Stark for this bit of delightful information
For instance, with just a few clicks and keystrokes, here’s a version of Gal 3:15–16 showing vocabulary that occurs 50 or fewer times in the New Testament.
The woman said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming” (who is called Christ). “When He comes, He will tell us all things.” Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am He.” (John 4:25-26 NKJV)
I was reading this the other day, and I figure it was worth a second glance. Let’s look at it in the Greek,
λεγει αυτω η γυνη οιδα οτι μεσσιας ερχεται ο λεγομενος χριστος οταν ελθη εκεινος αναγγελει ημιν παντα. λεγει αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι ο λαλων σοι
The goal of this exercise is εγω ειμι (ego eimi), which is used in Exodus 3.14 LXX, translated as ‘I AM’. (We covered a bit of this a few weeks ago.) The literal translation of verse 26 is, ‘I AM speaks to you.’
Did Christ say that He was the Messiah, human, or did He say that He was the I AM, Messiah, Deity?
Tyndale put these fine books in mail for me to review. I am eternally interested in Hebrews and generally devour any commentary that comes my way. I have recently become more open to Text Crit, and I am looking forward to Comfort’s work.
Therefore, when we could no longer endure it, we thought it good to be left in Athens alone, and sent Timothy, our brother and minister of God, and our fellow laborer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you and encourage you concerning your faith, that no one should be shaken by these afflictions; for you yourselves know that we are appointed to this. (1 Thessalonians 3:1-3 NKJV)