Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Diogenes the Cynic · 11-13-2010, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

maybe του θεου, can also be translated as "of a God", instead of "of THE God"

There is no "of". του means "the" (in the genitive case).

spin

"Of" is implied by the genitive case.

spin · 11-14-2010, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

There is no "of". του means "the" (in the genitive case).

"Of" is implied by the genitive case.

You're trying to make it easy for him.

spin

avi · 11-14-2010, 03:27 AM

Thanks Jay, Diogenes, and spin.

I learned something. Good thread, Jay.

I remain confused about the original English, i.e.
του θεου : Are these two phrases equivalent?

"word of God"

"word of the God".

The second phrase obviously hurts our ears. If one omits the definite article in English, however, does the translation yet retain the full, monotheistic implication of the original Greek? Do other languages translate "the", or, do they, as we do, omit the definite article, leaving a bit of ambiguity, thereby. Is there a specific rule in English, regarding translations of the definite article, i.e. when one can omit it, or conversely, when it must not be omitted to avoid misunderstanding?

Some languages, including the #1 language, Mandarin Chinese, have no definite article. (haha, and no declensions either!!) I have no idea how this would be translated into PuTongHua, to differentiate the concept of "the" God, from "a" God. The Chinese would, I believe, simply write God, perhaps with the trailing particle, "de" to indicate possession.

avi

spin · 11-14-2010, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Thanks Jay, Diogenes, and spin.

I learned something. Good thread, Jay.

I remain confused about the original English, i.e.
του θεου : Are these two phrases equivalent?

"word of God"

"word of the God".

Greek uses the definite article differently from English. Peter frequently has an article, as does Jesus. What we translate as "god" is frequently "the god" in Greek. Take that as a yes.

spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

The second phrase obviously hurts our ears. If one omits the definite article in English, however, does the translation yet retain the full, monotheistic implication of the original Greek? Do other languages translate "the", or, do they, as we do, omit the definite article, leaving a bit of ambiguity, thereby. Is there a specific rule in English, regarding translations of the definite article, i.e. when one can omit it, or conversely, when it must not be omitted to avoid misunderstanding?

Some languages, including the #1 language, Mandarin Chinese, have no definite article. (haha, and no declensions either!!) I have no idea how this would be translated into PuTongHua, to differentiate the concept of "the" God, from "a" God. The Chinese would, I believe, simply write God, perhaps with the trailing particle, "de" to indicate possession.

avi

aa5874 · 11-14-2010, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

....Philo of Alexandria did not take the Genesis account of creation literally, but rather as a text giving us deeper allegorical truths....

Please read "On the Creation" by Philo. He did BELIEVED GOD was the LITERAL CREATOR.

These are Excerpts from "On the Creation"

Quote:

..II. (7) For some men, admiring the world itself rather than the Creator of the world, have represented it as existing without any maker, and eternal; and as impiously as falsely have represented God as existing in a state of complete inactivity, while it would have been right on the other hand to marvel at the might of God as the creator and father of all, and to admire the world in a degree not exceeding the bounds of moderation....

Quote:

XIII. (42) But in the first creation of the universe, as I have said already, God produced the whole race of trees out of the earth in full perfection, having their fruit not incomplete but in a state of entire ripeness, to be ready for the immediate and undelayed use and enjoyment of the animals which were about immediately to be born.

(43) Accordingly he commanded the earth to produce these things. And the earth, as though it had for a long time been pregnant and travailing, produced every sort of seed, and every sort of tree, and also of fruit, in unspeakable abundance..

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

It’s possible that Mark was a student of Philo’s while living in the city of Alexandria and applied this paradigm to his writings. When viewed in this manner, “Jesus” is symbolic of the nation of Israel as a “suffering servant” at the hands of internal and external foes. The cruci-“fiction” of Jesus was in fact an allegorical account written by Mark sometime after the destruction of Jerusalem by Romans. Certainly no one in the early first century had interpreted 53:3 as being a prophetic account of any particular person....

Once Thousands of Jews were crucified and possibly hundreds of Jews were called Jesus then there is no theological value, no historical value, no political advantage, in isolating some unknown wandering illiterate Jesus who did nothing as found in the Gospels and claim he was the Creator of heaven and earth, the offspring of the Holy Ghost, who walked on water, transfigured, crucified, resurrected, ascended to heaven and will SAVE ALL MANKIND from SIN.

In Judea that is just NEEDLESS Blasphemy, a CAPITAL CRIME punishable by death.

The EVIDENCE suggest that it was an EVENT, some major event, that triggered the story about Jesus, son of Man, coming in the clouds of heaven.

IT was most likely the Fall of the Temple and the destruction of Jerusalem. Everybody in the Roman Empire must have heard about the catastrophe.

Daniel 11:31 -

Quote:

And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate....

.

And authors of the Synoptics will SAY EXACTLY the name of the prophet.

Matthew 24:15 -

Quote:

When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)...

Mark 13:14 -

Quote:

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains....

It is very likely that the Jesus, Son of Man, story was INVENTED from Hebrew Scripture just as the authors themselves claimed.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-14-2010, 03:27 AM	#33
avi Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Location: eastern North America Posts: 1,468	Thanks Jay, Diogenes, and spin. I learned something. Good thread, Jay. I remain confused about the original English, i.e. του θεου : Are these two phrases equivalent? "word of God" "word of the God". The second phrase obviously hurts our ears. If one omits the definite article in English, however, does the translation yet retain the full, monotheistic implication of the original Greek? Do other languages translate "the", or, do they, as we do, omit the definite article, leaving a bit of ambiguity, thereby. Is there a specific rule in English, regarding translations of the definite article, i.e. when one can omit it, or conversely, when it must not be omitted to avoid misunderstanding? Some languages, including the #1 language, Mandarin Chinese, have no definite article. (haha, and no declensions either!!) I have no idea how this would be translated into PuTongHua, to differentiate the concept of "the" God, from "a" God. The Chinese would, I believe, simply write God, perhaps with the trailing particle, "de" to indicate possession. avi

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.