jasonrollins wrote:
The answer to your ‘for what (purpose)?’ question is that it was to understand what had been written. Those reading Paul’s letters, or having these read to them, would reasonably have wanted to know what he was writing about in quoting a word that may have been unfamiliar to them.
The process of transliteration involves writing down a word (or words) from other language, using an alphabet of letters to represent how it would have sounded, as accurately as possible. Without any knowledge of the other language, or with only partial knowledge, a reader would then have to make a judgement as to the word’s intended meaning. The mistake in transliteration, to which I am here referring, is coming to the wrong conclusion.PeterC wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2024 5:16 pm The difference from my position, however, is that was no extraordinary coincidence. This is because the author of Mark, or possibly some other early Christian, made a mistake in transliteration in reading κηφας in Paul’s letters. They read the word as rock and that was a mistake.
I don't follow the logic here. κηφας is already in Greek. So really its translating an already transliterated Greek into a real Greek word that has the same meaning as a word that sounds the same as the Hebrew. For what?
The answer to your ‘for what (purpose)?’ question is that it was to understand what had been written. Those reading Paul’s letters, or having these read to them, would reasonably have wanted to know what he was writing about in quoting a word that may have been unfamiliar to them.
Statistics: Posted by PeterC — Tue Oct 29, 2024 1:34 pm