View Full Version: Lost in Translation

Politics And Prose > Religion > Lost in Translation


Title: Lost in Translation
Description: Not the movie.


RancerDS - February 24, 2006 06:31 AM (GMT)
Once, many years ago, I'd proposed to a stalwart Christian that passages within the Bible may have been mis-interpreted when translated through the various languages. They blindly claimed that the King James Version had nothing lost in translation.

Supporting information:
QUOTE
What language did Jesus really speak during his ministry?

It's very important to know that the Hebrew and Greek letters that were found, are only translations that were written 150 to 300 years after Jesus.  It is important to know that Jesus did not speak Greek.  So therefore, the Greek letters are nothing but a translation (which could have many faults in it) from Aramaic to Greek.  Same applies to Hebrew.  When you translate a doctrine that was written hundreds of years after the fact into another language, then you can't really claim that your sources are 100% correct.  As a matter of a fact, claiming 50% would be even too much.

Aramaic Language, Semitic language closely related to Hebrew. Originally the language of the Aramaeans (see Aram), it was used, in many dialectical forms, in Mesopotamia and Syria before 1000BC and later became the lingua franca of the Middle East (see Assyro-Babylonian Language). Aramaic survived the fall of Nineveh (612BC) and Babylon (539BC) and remained the official language of the Persian Empire (539-337BC). Ancient inscriptions in Aramaic have been found over a vast area extending from Egypt to China.

Before the Christian era, Aramaic had become the language of the Jews in Palestine. Jesus preached in Aramaic, and parts of the Old Testament and much of the rabbinical literature were written in that language. Christian Aramaic, usually called Syriac, also developed an extensive literature, especially from the 4th to 7th centuries.

Aramaic began to decline in the 7th century AD. Aramaic survives today in Eastern and Western dialects, mostly as the language of Christians living in a few scattered communities in Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, and Iran.


Originating Link: http://www.answering-christianity.com/jesus_speak.htm
-----------------------------------------

Deltasix - February 24, 2006 01:44 PM (GMT)
Ever play a game of telephone? You know, when you have like 20 people, and you tell one person somthing, then they tell the person next to them the same thing, etc. You go all through the room, until everyone told the person next to them what they thought they heard from the pervious person? Among 20 people in one languge, it hardly ever comes out the same as it went in.

Over thousands of people, thousands of years, and a few languages? I'll dare to say that it didn't come out completely right.

Boru - February 25, 2006 02:44 AM (GMT)
Meh, it is possible that Jesus spoke Greek.

He was at least moderately educated and at that period in time if you were educated you probably knew some Greek.

What I will grant you though is that most of his sermons would have been given to an audience that WOULDN'T know Greek, ergo, the bulk of Jesus' preaching would have been done in Aramaic.

He merely would have been conversing in Greek when talking to other educated people, the Pharases or the Romans, but he didn't spend all that much time doing either till the end.

RancerDS - February 25, 2006 06:44 AM (GMT)
I think people are not always cognizant of certain aspects of the biblical timeline and regional political settings. Sometimes the inescapable escapes me, for an oxymoronic twist phrase.

There are also books of the Bible that were written in Aramaic, that had been translated through Hebrew, Greek or both (when talking about the King James Version). Not many pause to think about Aramaic being a language predecessor to modern Arabic dialects. If Muslim teachings are based upon the texts that were used in compling the English version, then it's likely some things could be more accurately interpretted from them. Some feel the Koran definately includes such texts.

That doesn't necessarily mean Islam is the truer religion. They still have a division of sects under it. Yet there are fewer sects than those of the Christian faiths. I am still ignorant for not reading the Quraan (Koran) and finding the commonalities between it and other religions, such as Christian and Jewish churches.




Hosted for free by InvisionFree