Home » Greek
Category Archives: Greek
APOLOGIZES, THIS IS NOT A COMPREHENSIVE LIST, AND IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING EDITED, BUT THERE IS MORE THAN ENOUGH FOR THE POINT TO BE MADE. (It seems I have only searched for one form of the word, and many other forms of it exist)
Just to remind the readers; in a previous post we asked the question: “Does Worship actually mean Worship in the New Testament?”
Now we will approach this question from a different angle by examining every occurrence of this Greek word, Proskuneó/ προσκυνέω(G4352) in the LXX (Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament) and the New Testament.
Below I have BLUED all occurrences of the word where it is applied in the context of praising/bowing/reverence etc; and I have REDED all occurrences of the word where it actually means WORSHIP; as in the English sense of Worshiping something/someone like God, whether it be actually God, or false gods.
I have also GREENED instances where it refers to Jesus , as to be fair to our Christian readers and not impose my theological leanings from the get-go.
I will now summarize my research/conclusion here (so you don’t have to scroll all the way down 🙂
Let us recall that THIS WHOLE EXERCISE, is being done to address the argument that “Jesus is God, because he was worshiped“. If we are to assume that all occurrences of the word, Proskuneó/ προσκυνέω(G4352), must imply WORSHIP and not general reverence , then we would have no choice but to believe in the following:
FROM THE LXX
Genesis 33:6 -Esau is God.
Genesis 33:7-Esau is God.
–Genesis 37:7-Sheaf is God.
Genesis 42:6 -Joseph is God.
Genesis 43:28 -Joseph is God.
Genesis 48:12- Jacob is God
1 Chronicles 29:20 -David and God are being worshipped at the SAME TIME.
–2 Chronicles 24:17- King Joash is God.
THEN THE NT:
Rev 3:9- Christians are God.
In conclusion, the argument that “Jesus is God because he is accepting Worship” can not be used as a proof of his so-called divinity. If so , you have opened up the trinity to a pantheon of gods. Now you may argue that most of these instances are from the LXX. Fine, however JUST ONE instance from Rev 3:9 is good enough to show that you can not apply the meaning of ACTUAL WORSHIP universally. If you did, then you would have to agree that God is going to make the Jews WORSHIP the Christians as God.
And so ends a long strenuous exercise in examining the word , Proskuneó/ προσκυνέω(G4352) within in the LXX and the NT.
94% of our surviving Greek manuscripts of the New Testament date from after the ninth Christian century. That is 800 years (years!) after the so-called originals.
Why does the Oldest Complete Hebrew Old Testament (Aleppo Codex) come after the Oldest Complete Greek Bible(Codex Sinaiticus)?
(Research in Progress)
Daniel B.Wallace announced ( 22 MARCH 2012) in a debate with Bart Ehrman, that he had access to a fragment of Mark from the first-century; making it even older than P52 from the second century (which is the size of a credit-card). This announcement even made it’s way into Forbes magazine.
It is interesting to note that in that article, Wallace claims that :
…..radiocarbon dating has not been employed for Greek manuscripts to any significant degree, “largely because until recently it would necessarily destroy part of the manuscript.”
We have already examined this issue of radiocarbon-dating vs paleography. How is it possible for a manuscript of the Qur’an to be radiocarbon dated, and not the Bible?
But keeping all that aside, lets get back to the main question: WHERE IS THIS FIRST CENTURY MARK?
The Lives of the Twelve Caesars by C. Suetonius Tranquillus
At ne cui dubium omnino sit et impudicitiae et adulteriorum flagrasse infamia, Curio pater quadam eum oratione omnium mulierum virum et omnium virorum mulierem appellat.
And to emphasize the bad name Caesar had won alike for unnatural and natural vice, I may here record that the Elder Curio referred to him in a speech as: “Every woman’s man and every man’s woman.”
Several significant studies of literacy have appeared in recent years showing just how low literacy rates were in antiquity. The most frequently cited study is by Columbia professor William Harris in a book titled Ancient Literacy. By thoroughly examining all the surviving evidence, Harris draws the compelling though surprising conclusion that in the very best of times in the ancient world, only about 10 percent of the population could read at all and possibly copy out writing on a page. Far fewer than this, of course, could compose a sentence, let alone a story, let alone an entire book. And who were the people in this 10 percent? They were the upper-class elite who had the time, money, and leisure to afford an education. This is not an apt description of Jesus’s disciples. They were not upper-crust aristocrats.
In Roman Palestine the situation was even bleaker. The most thorough examination of literacy in Palestine is by a professor of Jewish studies at the University of London, Catherine Hezser, who shows that in the days of Jesus probably only 3 percent of Jews in Palestine were literate. Once again, these would be the people who could read and maybe write their names and copy words. Far fewer could compose sentences, paragraphs, chapters, and books. And once again, these would have been the urban elites.
Source: Ehrman, Bart D. (2012-03-20). Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth (Kindle Locations 702-712). Harper Collins, Inc.. Kindle Edition.
Keeping aside the oral tradition of the Qur’an of which the Bible does not have in Greek , let alone in Aramaic ( the language which Jesus spoke); how does the textual integrity of the surviving manuscripts of each respective book compare?
Just considering the first hundred years of each respective calendar (the Islamic Calendar vs the Christian Calendar), we find that within the early first century the Muslims can boast a 91.7 % completion rate . As for the Christians they do not have a Biblical fragment until the second century, and even then it is the size of a credit card. Moreover just based on manuscripts, it would take more than 300 years to get a complete Bible.
As Muslims we have the Qur’an verbatim from the Prophet(saw), he recited in Arabic and we recite in Arabic. word for word, letter for letter, dot for dot.
But can the same be said about Christianity? Basically we have a text which was originally supposed to be in Aramaic ( a sister language to Arabic) being written in Koine Greek (dead language which only a few know) translated into Latin and then FINALLY translated again into English, where it finds its common usage today.
Is it possible something could have been lost in translation?
Taken from here: http://www.revisedenglishversion.com/Matthew/chapter28/19
“in my name.” We have translated the text according to the evidence we have that there were early Greek texts that read that way, and also according to what the Apostles did in Acts. They made disciples in the name of Jesus. We admit that there is no extant Greek text that says “go and make disciples of all the nations in my name,” they all read “baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the holy spirit.” Nevertheless, we believe that the historical evidence, as well as the evidence in the Bible itself, supports the conclusion that the common rendering is a very early addition to the text, and the original reading was “in my name.” We give the following evidence to support our conclusion:
The Greek word προσκυνέω( its English transliteration being proskyneō [looks similar to the word prostrate]) has been translated as ‘worship’ throughout the whole New Testament, except for one particular instance:
Rev 3:9 (English Standard Version)
Behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie—behold, I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and they will learn that I have loved you.
Most newer translations have exchanged the Greek word for ‘worship’ for the English phrase of ‘bowing down’. Older translations have maintained the Greek word for ‘worship’ as the English word for ‘worship’:
Rev 3:9 (King James Bible)
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
Why this Change?
The older translations falsely imply that God wants the corrupt Jews to worship the Church of Philadelphia. So according to the older translations, the pantheon of God not only extends to the existing trinity but also to a whole church, which Christians would obviously deny.
Two questions arise from this controversy: