Blueskyboris

Celsus
Ignoring your ad hominem attack I respond: I consider the question of philosophical importance, of course.

Vivisector

To the OP's question, I began studying Greek near the conclusion of being restored to my natural state of atheism, when I became interested in the NT texts and learned there was this thing called textual criticism that seemed to be fairly important. It seemed to me there was simply no way to understand the variants or their significance without knowledge of Greek. Peter Kirby has noted other landmark texts' presumption of competence in Greek (e.g., Bultmann). All things considered, it seemed a prerequisite for having a good reasons to believe what I believed, to disbelieve what I disbelieved.

Alas, it's a perishable skill; whereas I knew only enough to be stupid a few years ago, I know even less now.

Cheers,

V.

Celsus

I would then ask why you chose to beg your own question by characterising it as a "waste [of] time" in your question. Also, you don't seem to understand the idea of the ad hominem attacks very well, if you consider my statement as such.

But to answer your question, the utility is so that people can decide for themselves whether the original texts say what others have said they have said. The pleasure is personal, I'm sure.

Joel

Blueskyboris

Vivisector
I pitty the Christian who picks a debate with you.



Celsus
In this sentence you question my competence, the depth of my self-reflection, and my honesty instead of meeting my opinion with content and argument.

Toto

Please confine your comments to the abstract question of reasons for studying ancient languages, which is a bit marginal to this forum to start off with.

Toto