Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"speak of the...." wait....
Ok, so the greek in the manuscripts is fairly well translated. The question is whether the reporters gave the sense of what Jesus was saying. I, for one agree with the Pope, not that the translation is wrong, but the sense is inaccurate.
The sense is perfectly accurate when it comes to the Old Testament, I don't see that the New Testament would change the fact that God created, allows, and controls evil/calamity and controls/directly influences people's wills/emotions although it is not at all accurate when it comes to Zoroastriansim (where no evil is created or maintained or influenced by Ahura Mazda but only by proxy of his free creation of a free arbiter) nor Late Hellenism (where Zeus/Theos was omnipresent, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent).
Ok, so the greek in the manuscripts is fairly well translated. The question is whether the reporters gave the sense of what Jesus was saying. I, for one agree with the Pope, not that the translation is wrong, but the sense is inaccurate.
Literally it is clear in meaning.
And Matthew has an opposite, "but deliver us from evil".
The sense may be inaccurate, but I see no evidence for it.
Biblical scholars, any legitimacy to the claim that it wasn't correctly translated?
The original Greek text of Matthew: 6-13 reads:
AND YOU-MAY-BE-INTO-CARRYING US INTO trial, but rescue-you ! US FROM THE wicked-one
Luke: 11-4 uses the exact same wording in the original Greek. The Pope's assertion that God would never "carry us into trial," (lead us into temptation), seems to deviate from the opinion of the authors of Gospels Matthew and LUke, which seems to indicate that God would (does) "lead us into temptation."
"speak of the...." wait....
Ok, so the greek in the manuscripts is fairly well translated. The question is whether the reporters gave the sense of what Jesus was saying. I, for one agree with the Pope, not that the translation is wrong, but the sense is inaccurate.
You're presuming that God wouldn't place temptation in our paths. Some of us are of the opinion that God gave us free will in order to exercise it. If He'd wanted mindless puppets, He'd have made us that. I believe there are any number of examples in the Bible of God "testing" us (or allowing the devil to test us). Our job is to pass the test.
Biblical scholars, any legitimacy to the claim that it wasn't correctly translated?
This story is almost a year old.
But if you read the article, I kind of agree with him. He's not suggesting Jesus didn't know what he was saying. He's saying we have understood it wrongly. His rationale is the translation is not great--because God does not lead us into temptation. He would be in agreement with James, the brother of our Lord, who says that God does not tempt us.
You're presuming that God wouldn't place temptation in our paths. Some of us are of the opinion that God gave us free will in order to exercise it. If He'd wanted mindless puppets, He'd have made us that. I believe there are any number of examples in the Bible of God "testing" us (or allowing the devil to test us). Our job is to pass the test.
The pope is being a revisionist historian.
James said God doesn't tempt us. Do you realize that?
But if you read the article, I kind of agree with him. He's not suggesting Jesus didn't know what he was saying. He's saying we have understood it wrongly. His rationale is the translation is not great--because God does not lead us into temptation. He would be in agreement with James, the brother of our Lord, who says that God does not tempt us.
Well, there was Jesus in the desert being tempted by Satan, and presumably God allowed that, but who am I to argue with Pope Francis? Likely (we need our translator), "allowing" is different from "tempting" (in fact, I'm sure it is). More along of lines of not interfering with it -- just as He permits evil on earth when (again presumably), He could theoretically prevent it.
Well, there was Jesus in the desert being tempted by Satan, and presumably God allowed that, but who am I to argue with Pope Francis? Likely (we need our translator), "allowing" is different from "tempting" (in fact, I'm sure it is). More along of lines of not interfering with it -- just as He permits evil on earth when (again presumably), He could theoretically prevent it.
Yes, allowing is different. He's just calling for a different English phrasing of it. I will disagree and argue with the Pope on many issues, but this really isn't one of them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
