From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Thu Jan 08 1998 - 17:38:39 EST
I'd be happy to express an opinion on this subject in private
correspondence, but it strikes me as very much a subject that is
inappropriate for B-Greek discussion--unless perhaps someone wants to argue
that the author of 2 Timothy had in mind "VERSION" as a possible sense in
which GRAFH should be understood. That, I think, is worth considering,
inasmuch as it is not unlikely that the particular writing envisioned in
this passage is the LXX, the Greek translation of the Hebrew and Aramaic
texts of the OT, and some have argued, if 2 Timothy is understood to have
been composed quite late in the compositional history of the NT canon, that
the GNT is also being referred to.
However, the question whether any particular English translation is
"divinely inspired" in any appropriate sense of that term, strikes me as a
theological question rather than a question about what the Greek text means.
At 3:52 PM -0600 1/8/98, Michael S. Olszta wrote:
>I've been reading through some of the posts on translation and how the
>theology of a translator may affect his translating. An internet
>contact and I have had a very heated discussion going on as to the
>merits of the King James Bible. He believes the translators were quite
>biased in certain places that seem to disagree with his understanding of
>the New Testament. I, on the other hand, believe that the English text
>is perfect as it stands BUT in cases of pure misunderstanding of the
>English, I have no trouble with going back to a Hebrew or Greek lexicon,
>concordance, grammar, etc. to elucidate the meaning of the English.
>
>The main reason I subscribed to B-Greek was at his bidding so that we
>could read the opinions of those who obviously spend a great deal of
>their time in studying the Greek New Testament and compare notes on
>various passages where to him the King James Bible is absolutely wrong
>and to me there just needs further study to understand the text as it
>stands.
>
>May I ask you folks one question:
>
>Is it possible for a Bible translation to be THEOPNEUSTOS or is it only
>possible that the original words penned by the writers of the New
>Testament could be so? Please give your reasons why or why not.
>
>If 2Tim 3:16 (GTR)"pasa grafh qeopneustoV kai wfelimoV proV didaskalian
>proV elegcon proV epanorqwsin proV paideian thn en dikaiosunh
>17 ina artioV h o tou qeou anqrwpoV proV pan ergon agaqon exhrtismenoV"
>how could such only apply to the original language seeing such would not
>be profitable to anyone except one who could read and/or hear and
>understand Greek? (My apology for the variations in transliteration
>here. It looks as though my Greek testament makes final sigma into a
>"V" and theta into a "q".
>
>Your input is greatly appreciated.
>
>Michael Olszta
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:50 EDT