Blueskyboris

I am not trying to lower anyone's enthusiasm, but I don't understand why anyone would want to learn ancient Greek or translate classical texts. Modern, atheist scholars must have translated these texts to remove the Christian bias? If this is true, why waste time learning and translating when you could be arguing philosophy, learning science, or socializing?

Peter Kirby

For me? Because there is disagreement over what the original texts say and because I want to learn Greek to understand the reason for the disagreement and weigh what the correct understanding is.

Also, when I get good enough, it would be enjoyable. There is an Italian saying that reading in translation is like kissing through a sheet.

For Roger's project, he is looking at texts that don't have an English translation at this time.

best,
Peter Kirby

Diogenes the Cynic

How could anyone possibly "remove Christian Bias" from the NT?

The goal is not to "remove" anything but to understand the text. In order to understand a written text you have to know how to read it. No translation is perfect and there is no substitute for the original language.

Besides....it's FUN. I enjoy the challenge and it gives me a better sense of ancient history to understand the languages of the time.

Blueskyboris

The New Testament? Sorry to confuse, but I meant Plato's and Aristotle's work. There is no way to eliminate Christian bias from the early translations of the Bible.

Yes, but the effort involved is hardly worth the effort when there are top-notch translations available, regardless if these translations are imperfect. Wouldn't reading commentaries on the nature of the disagreements be just a fruitful? It seems, at least to me, that studying philosophy and science is more important? Of course, that is just my opinion. I never did understand why my sister likes biology.

I'm was just wondering why. If you enjoy it then my curiosity is satisfied.



And there is a modern English adage: "Life is short"

Peter Kirby

For many people, that would be sufficient. In fact, teaching one how to read the commentaries is one of the goals of "Greek for the Rest of Us." One needs a basic understanding of how the Greek language works in order to understand what the commentaries are saying. (And one needs more for some commentaries: Bultmann's History of the Synoptic Tradition is still very dense to me.) So, for those who want to be able to make their interpretation with the aid of commentaries, this "baby Greek" book by Mounce is a good choice.

For me, though, I will study more. This is partly because there are not many (or any) commentaries written on the texts that I study, which include Christian writers of the second century. It is also because I plan to be among the people who write articles and such on this and related subjects.

I already have an above-average understanding of philosophy and science. I continue to study Computer Science, my initial major, enough to bang out software. But now, early Christianity and the ancient world generally is what I am studying seriously. I enjoy it, and other people enjoy reading what I write about it. To have this interest and share it with other people is importance enough for me.

I make up for it by avoiding television.

best,
Peter Kirby

Blueskyboris

Makes sense.

Hmmm, it still seems like a pointless endeavor to me, but that's just my philosophy-is-everything bias speaking.

What's television?

Chris Weimer

Because I'm a linguist and that's what linguists do!

copernicus

Blueskyboris, I am going to go out on a limb here and recommend that you not study any ancient language, let alone Greek. I am quite sure that you would not find it a productive use of your time. What puzzles me is why you are concerned that other people, e.g. linguists and historians, want to study ancient languages. If you want to know how language has evolved or what ancient writers actually wrote (in their own words), then it is necessary to study ancient languages. If you were successful in getting people to stop doing an activity that strikes you as useless, how would that improve your situation?

Metacrock

(1) no such thing as an atheist scholar. All the Bible schoarls that atheists cling to and love to quote, such as Crosson, are believers! they are not atheits and they love theology.

(2) a pox on your house! :wave:

(3) becasuse you never get to the bottom of it. IT's always there and there's alway more to do. 90% of it is conjecture. So there's always a new arguemnt and new outlook something else to consider.


(3) Christian scholars are the best.

Christian philosohers are the best.

Christian thinkers are the smartest.


If I made a list of great thinkers who were christian it would be about three pages. If I made a list of atheist great thinmkers it would have abotu three names on it. (note the tounge in cheek content)

Metacrock

Doesn't anyone want to read Plato anymore?