Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Bible NON-Translations (NT)
Message-ID: <4879@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 13-Apr-85 22:12:54 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.4879
Posted: Sat Apr 13 22:12:54 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Apr-85 02:10:27 EST
References: <875@uwmacc.UUCP> <177@spar.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 37

In article <177@spar.UUCP> ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) writes:

>I'm looking for versions of the Bible that are as close as possible to
>the original texts, whatever that means.

>From what I can gather, the New Testament was compiled from various Greek,
>Latin, Hebrew and Aramaic texts that appeared during the first two
>centuries AD.

>Since I've been led to believe that Aramaic was the language spoken by
>Christ, it would seem that versions in this dialect ought to be as
>close to authentic as one could get, at least in the 4 Gospels, where
>his words are often directly quoted, yes?

Well, no.  If the originals were written in greek (as is generally believed
these days (Yiri excepted)), then an Aramaic version of the same would be a
translation.  The principal early versions (such as Sinaiticus) are in Greek.

>On the other hand, I do not know what languages Matthew, Mark, Luke and
>John actually spoke and wrote in. Perhaps they used a more standard
>dialect of ancient Hebrew.

[Clanking as the author dons his flame-proof cassock]
Several months ago, there was a quite violent argument over this question.  I
maintain that the greek versions we have are truly decendants of the
principle apostolic tradition.  They invariably quote Jesus speaking in
Aramaic, never Hebrew.  Unless you deny that they have any connection with
the apostles, it's hard from this to justify Jesus speaking Hebrew, or
Hebrew originals of the Gospels.

Yirmiyahu claimed that there were, in fact, Hebrew orginals, and that the
current texts all display various degrees of perversion from the hebrew
versions, to the end of the hellenization of the message.  I don't really
care to go through this whole thing again; in any case, even the texts
Yirmiyahu took as having any authority are in greek.

Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe