Religions > Atheism > Mark Nutter, or any other atheist familiar with the NT's authorship
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Son of man" |
| Date: |
22 Aug 2004 07:27:42 PM |
| Object: |
Mark Nutter, or any other atheist familiar with the NT's authorship |
Have you ever read "The Unvarnished New Testament" translated by Andy Gaus?
Do you know anything about the original Greek versions of the four gospels?
For those who do, can you confirm what I read in it;
The premise for writing The Unvarished New Testament is to produce "as close
to a literal translation" from the original Greek of the entire NT as
possible,.
My question is that in reading one of the key verses that I usually quote of
the answer Jesus gives to the most important question that is asked of him,
there seems to be some words that are indicated in italics to mean he placed
some additional "stress" on the word(s) when he spoke his answer verbally.
Anyone knows if the original Greek gospels contained some italics in some
places which indicates a verbal stress on the spoken word(s)?
The verses of the Unvarnished New Testament with the question are in
Matthew:26 translated exactly as :
63. And the high priest, standing up, said to him, "Don't you have any
answer as to why these people testify against you?" But Jesus kept silent.
And the high priest said to him: "I command you by the living God to tell us
if you are the Annointed, the son of God."
64. Jesus says to him, "That's what *you* say. But I do tell you this: next
time you will see the son of humanity sitting at the right hand of power and
coming on the clouds of the sky."
What I have indicated in between asterisks, is what is portrayed in italics
in Andy Gaus' literal translation. In other words, on usenet it would be
like me typing :
That's what YOU say.
Anyone knows if there are indications of verbal stress in the original Greek
writings?
The parallel of the event of Matthew:26:63-64 is also in Mark:14 translated
exactly as :
61. And the high priest stood up in front of everyone and asked Jesus,
"Don't you have any answer as to why these people testify this way against
you?" But he was silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked
him: "Are you the Annointed, the Son of the Most Blessed?"
62. Jesus said, "Yes I am, and you will see the son of humanity sitting on
the right hand of power and trailing the clouds of the sky."
So my three questions are :
1. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospels of verbal stress
as indicated by Andy Gaus' translation in the answer Jesus gave in
Matthew:26:64
2. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospel verse of
Matthew:26:63 where "son of God" is indeed 'son' with a common 's' and not
capitalized?
3. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospel verse of Mark:14:61
where "Son of the Most Blessed" is indeed 'Son' with a Capitalized 'S' and
not a common 's' as was used in the parallel verse Matthew:26:63?
I would think it consistent to capitalize both 'S'on of God" and also 'S'on
of the Most Blessed, we won't address why the answer Jesus gave to each is
different for now, I just want to know if anyone has any knowledge about the
original Greek gospels to confirm these differences that appear in Andy
Gaus' translation from other Bible translations? Since he was doing it all
from scratch from the original Greek writings, I can assume the differences
mentioned above were in the original Greek writings? Anyone with knowledge
of the original Greek gospel writings know about these?
--
"The blindingly obvious is never immediately apparent." Brad Rogers
http://bellsouthpwp.net/c/h/Christ-Son-of-Buddha/TheWordOfGod_1.htm
.
|
|
| User: "Mark Nutter" |
|
| Title: Re: Mark Nutter, or any other atheist familiar with the NT's authorship |
22 Aug 2004 09:18:00 PM |
|
|
In article <KRaWc.240$AY2.231@bignews4.bellsouth.net>,
"Son of man" <thepuppetmaster@bellsouth.net> wrote:
So my three questions are :
1. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospels of verbal stress
as indicated by Andy Gaus' translation in the answer Jesus gave in
Matthew:26:64
2. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospel verse of
Matthew:26:63 where "son of God" is indeed 'son' with a common 's' and not
capitalized?
3. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospel verse of Mark:14:61
where "Son of the Most Blessed" is indeed 'Son' with a Capitalized 'S' and
not a common 's' as was used in the parallel verse Matthew:26:63?
Well, the oldest manuscripts look like this:
JESUSSAITHUNTOHIMTHOUHASTSAIDNEVERTHELESSISAYUNTOYOU...
Except in Greek characters and language, of course. In other words, no
capitals, no miniscules, no punctuation, not even decent breaks between
words. So any conventions regarding capitalization or italics are
strictly up to the translator.
m
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Son of man" |
|
| Title: Re: Mark Nutter, or any other atheist familiar with the NT's authorship |
23 Aug 2004 07:31:18 AM |
|
|
"Mark Nutter" <manutter51@alethian.org> wrote in message
news:manutter51-C43D58.22180022082004@corp.newsfeeds.com...
In article <KRaWc.240$AY2.231@bignews4.bellsouth.net>,
"Son of man" <thepuppetmaster@bellsouth.net> wrote:
So my three questions are :
1. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospels of verbal
stress
as indicated by Andy Gaus' translation in the answer Jesus gave in
Matthew:26:64
2. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospel verse of
Matthew:26:63 where "son of God" is indeed 'son' with a common 's' and
not
capitalized?
3. Is there any indication in the original Greek gospel verse of
Mark:14:61
where "Son of the Most Blessed" is indeed 'Son' with a Capitalized 'S'
and
not a common 's' as was used in the parallel verse Matthew:26:63?
Well, the oldest manuscripts look like this:
JESUSSAITHUNTOHIMTHOUHASTSAIDNEVERTHELESSISAYUNTOYOU...
Except in Greek characters and language, of course. In other words, no
capitals, no miniscules, no punctuation, not even decent breaks between
words. So any conventions regarding capitalization or italics are
strictly up to the translator.
Makes me wonder why Andy Gaus placed verbal stress the way he did. I also
checked the 1611 KJV, nothing there to indicate as Andy put there either.
I will try to hunt down his email address and see if I can get a direct
answer. It may be that in the oldest manuscripts thay might have used an
underline or bolder print to indicate the verbal stress.
m
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
