Original language of the Bible

[Quesocoatl]

Asalam-u-Alaikum. May peace and guidance be upon you all.

A question was asked that what is the original language of the Bible. The Jews, Christians and the Muslims believe that the Old Testimony was revealed to the Prophet Moses(P.B.U.H). The Christians and the Muslims believe that the New Testimony was revealed on Jesus(P.B.U.H). Now, we all know that english is not the native language of the Bible. The Bible holds the record of being the most translated book on the face of the earth, then in which language was it actually revealed? Can the original copy of the Bible be obtained? Please clarify.

Yes, it can be obtained. I'm currently preparing to transcribe the Book of John from the original Greek Text(s). Have to be careful with Hebrew though. Lots of hidden astro-philosophical symbolism in the characters.

I'll keep in touch about my transcription. (So far, it doesn't vary much from the original King James appointed version other than stereotypically gender-centric words appearing to be not so gender-centric at all, in fact.)

Biblical Greek is much different than modern English. More conceptual.

 

[iBrian]

Kindest Regards, Brian!
I am not very familiar with the scholarship on this subject, but my gut inclination would be that the early Christians, especially post Temple destruction, would have to operate covertly, "underground" and in secret. This would explain to my satisfaction the release in "dribs and drabs." The Apocrypha in the 1611 KJV is from the inter-Testament period, that is, pre-New Testament. Most of the other extra-Biblical texts I have looked at seem to me from sources attempting to legitimize and consolidate political power and primacy among the various factions, with greater and lesser success (after the Council of Nicea and "official" canonization, 324 AD). I haven't taken the time yet to read Josephus, but I wonder if he sheds any light on the day-to-day operations of the early Christians. The period that encompasses the Roman persecutions would necessitate covert operations, during which fractional writings and factional positions would seem obvious to me. It is my understanding that during the time covering the persecutions up to and including the Council of Nicea, many texts were lost or destroyed. Books such as the Gospel of Thomas seem to support this, in my view, being an incomplete and seemingly random collection of wisdom sayings of Christ.

Sorry, juantoo - I wasn't very clear.

There's a strong tradition in Christianity of the literary sources having existed in oral form for some time prior to being written down, and there's no reason to really doubt that claim at all.

The point of difference between the Christian canon and Islamic canon is that in Islam it was established relatively swiftly in comparison - at around 20 years after the death of Mohammed. And that's everything decided there and then (apparently). Whereas in Christianity there was the general um-ing and ah-ing for about 4 centuries, though certain texts seem to have a clear widespread use (the Gospels, for example). It was canonising certain epistles over others that apprently caused a lot of contention.

The Apocrypha I meant are the New Testament Apocrypha - just in case you hadn't seen it:
http://www.comparative-religion.com/christianity/apocrypha/

These are texts that, for the most part, originate from early Christians. In fact, the Shepherd of Hermas, I believe was a rather shock omission from the NT canon - as was I Clement - and if I remember right both of these texts are actually present in the Codex Sinaiticus. The Gospel of Barnabas, on the other hand, is a general apologetic Islamic work from the early mediaeval period of Spain, so far as I can remember.

 

[Mus Zibii]

Yes, it can be obtained. I'm currently preparing to transcribe the Book of John from the original Greek Text(s).

Plural 'texts' being the most telling word in that paragraph.

 

[Quesocoatl]

Plural 'texts' being the most telling word in that paragraph.

Yes. There are several "acceptable" orthodox documents
on which to base one's study.

Helpful hint to anyone interested in this sort of research:
Download some Hebrew and Greek Fonts....do a couple of searches
and....well.....you'll be rollin' in the car, Baby.




I would add that Sanskrit.....is very similar to Hebrew
...and, generally, considered to be much older and, therefore,
well worth at least a peek...

or two.



or three.

 

[Quesocoatl]

Sorry, juantoo - I wasn't very clear.

There's a strong tradition in Christianity of the literary sources having existed in oral form for some time prior to being written down, and there's no reason to really doubt that claim at all.

True.

I have a 29th chapter of Acts roaming around somewhere in this mess and..
I've also seen account of a certain Roman governor that threw himself off a cliff in the Alps sometime following the death of Jesus. I couldn't recite my whole collection in a single reply.

The same is true of Hebrew icons, in regard to history being, more or less, a fireside chat in some cultures. The (allegorical) Tree of Eden can be found in nearly all religious concepts. To see it, all one has to do is find the pole star. There's a big snake coiled around it to protect it.

(Remember, only "nobles" were "allowed" to read at one point.)

In my opinion, the divine inspirants of the Bible had this very idea in mind when "borrowing" from other cultures' pantheons.

We are all "Hebrew" ... if you really want to get down to the sh**.


And I do. Two fisted and foaming at the mouth.
Sick of this crap.


Incidentally, as far as the pole star is concerned........there are rumors going around that if one does the math to place Sirius as the "Central Sun" of our "Solar Cluster"....then, the math behind Polar Precession Theory doesn't even fit into the equation.

Go figure.

 

[Mus Zibii]

Sanskrit brings up another point. If Moses wrote WROTE the Torah what language did he write it in?

 

[Quesocoatl]

Sanskrit brings up another point. If Moses wrote WROTE the Torah what language did he write it in?

Thank you.

 

[Quesocoatl]

But what are the implications of such claims or what do muslims conclude from such claims?

Good point.

And what of the Satanic Verses?

http://www.cs.albany.edu/~amit/essays/rushdie.html

 

[Mus Zibii]

Good point.

And what of the Satanic Verses?

http://www.cs.albany.edu/~amit/essays/rushdie.html

I always hated the secular liberal American apologists for the Fatwa crazy nuts that wanted to kill Rushdie, but I have to admit he was far more antagonistic than he needed to be. Or maybe that was his point.

Still, a damn good book. I got it and The Last Temptation of Christ sitting right next to each other.

More on the history of the SV (not the novel).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses

http://answering-islam.org.uk/Gilchrist/Jam/chap4.html

 

[bananabrain]

The (allegorical) Tree of Eden can be found in nearly all religious concepts. To see it, all one has to do is find the pole star. There's a big snake coiled around it to protect it.

as i've said before, not all trees the same tree, nor are all snakes the same snake. every culture has trees in its symbolic language because - gasp - there are trees everywhere. what this does not mean is that we should all go round accusing judaism of being plagiarised. sheesh. *rolls eyes*

(Remember, only "nobles" were "allowed" to read at one point.)

not in jewish culture.

We are all "Hebrew" ... if you really want to get down to the sh**.
And I do. Two fisted and foaming at the mouth.
Sick of this crap.

which means what exactly? i must say that you seem to have some kind of agenda; you seem more concerned with passing judgement than actually learning anything.

If Moses wrote WROTE the Torah what language did he write it in?

traditional opinion is divided as to whether it was written in the palaeo-hebrew or ashurit script. however, i don't see why we should automatically assume the language wasn't hebrew, unless we are (as usual) subjecting judaism to more stringent and tendentious criticism than any other religious system.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Mus Zibii]

traditional opinion is divided as to whether it was written in the palaeo-hebrew or ashurit script. however, i don't see why we should automatically assume the language wasn't hebrew, unless we are (as usual) subjecting judaism to more stringent and tendentious criticism than any other religious system.

Well, Judaism is the most established so it gets the dirtiest end of the stick. There's no reason to automatically assume that Hebrew didn't have a written form by then. But the evidence that most supports the Exodus as a historical event conflicts with that--in the usage of typically Egyptian (not claiming Judaism is Egyptian! LOL) terms, the bobbing lyrical form that would traditionally denote a oral history, to name a couple.

The first two books of the Torah are the most interesting because of the snares that are set for critical thinking. Moses of all the ancient characters (maybe even moreso than David) would have been the most likely candadite for literacy and yet the structure of the Torah suggests the tradition was at least added to, or given footnotes.