From: Will Wagers (wagers@computek.net)
Date: Thu Jan 11 1996 - 12:59:49 EST
Stephen Carlson writes:
>As for your main query, if AGGELOS in Greek is already specialized
>in some contexts to mean a messenger from God, what's wrong with
>using a specialized English term?
(I think) Greek and Hebrew words are not commonly transliterated -
left untranslated - unless we do not know specifically to what they
refer. For example, some long-forgotten technical term for a piece of
a cart or the name of a plant of which identity we are uncertain. Or,
unless the foreign term has no ready counterpart in English, because
of differences in how the conceptual pie is sliced.
So, when an exact counterpart is available, what justification can
there be for not using it?
To put the argument another way, why do we not use separate terms
for "angel of the Lord", "angel of God", "angel of Jehovah", angels of
the seven churches, Jesus' angels, etc. ? The answer is because they
are the same (species).
Why do we translate "angel of Satan" as "messenger of Satan"
(C2 12:7) ? This is one instance of where the use of context is distorting
the meaning. The fact is that both God and Satan use either "angels" or
"messengers", whichever way you would have it. To artificially
distinguish between them is to invite misunderstanding. For example,
if Satan is himself an angel, we can learn from this that angels can
use other angels to deliver messages, that there are good and bad
angels, that Satan operates using the same mechanism as God, etc.
> In other contexts, where AGGELOS
>retained its broader meaning, a broader English equivalent would be
>appropriate.
My point is that the broader English equivalent is the proper choice
for all instances, as the original terms are also broad. I won't tax the
patience of the list by belaboring the point further. Thanks for your
help.
Sincerely,
Will
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:35 EDT