Nazarene Space

Has anyone read the Syriac versions of his letters? Only three of them
survive, those to the Romans, the Ephesians, and to Polycarp. Among
them, there are huge portions of text that are absent in the Greek.

To Polycarp (Syriac)
To the Ephesians (Syriac)
To the Romans (Syriac)

I cannot find anything in them that is antinomian. If these are indeed
the genuine letters, and the Greek are later forgeries, would Ignatius
be vindicated?

(I made this post elsewhere, but got no responses; so I decided to make it its own post.)

Views: 207

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I do enjoy a good word study, however, I also believe it's more important to understand the point behind what someone's saying, even if they're using the wrong terms.

For instance, I have relatives who consider themselves "Christians" in the technical sense, but keep Sabbath, the kosher diet, etc. By real standards and definitions, they are not Christians, but they consider themselves as such, and I have no issue with that; I also have no issue with inviting them to fellowship with me and my "crazy Jew friends". ;-)

mikha El said:
Seemingly a legitimate comment and question....I'll apply my 2 cents worth here not intending to offend or thread drift.

As far as the term "Christ" being another name for the Meshiach I must say I beg to differ. Here's some etymological research a brother has done on the subject...

The Greeks used both the word Messias (a transliteration) and Christos (a translation) for the Hebrew Mashiach (Anointed). The word Christos was far more acceptable to the pagans who were worshiping Chreston and Chrestos.
According to The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, the word Christos was easily confused with the common Greek proper name Chrestos, meaning "good." According to a French theological dictionary, it is absolutely beyond doubt that Christus and Chrestus, and Christiani and Chrestiani were used indifferently by the profane and Christian authors of the first two centuries A.D.
The word Christianos is a Latinism, being contributed neither by the Jews nor by the Christians themselves. The word was introduced from one of three origins: the Roman police, the Roman populace, or an unspecified pagan origin. Its infrequent use in the New Testament suggests a pagan origin.
According to Realencyclopaedie, the inscription Chrestos is to be seen on a Mithras relief in the Vatican. According to Christianity and Mythology, Osiris, the sun-deity of Egypt, was reverenced as Chrestos. In the Synagogue of the Marcionites on Mount Hermon, built in the third century A.D., the Messiah's title is spelled Chrestos. According to Tertullian and Lactantius, the common people usually called Christ Chrestos.


Concerning your comment about making "technical terms of everything" and "labeling everything so strictly" I think is a bit amiss and probably not actually what you meant literally. The study of the origin words (etymology) came up early in my researches.

Thanks in part to Lew White's findings, I discovered the origin of many of the "English" words we know and grew up being taught, as you most likely know, is chock full of pagan terms. I finally came to the conclusion enough was enough and began putting forth my best effort to rid myself of words, as far as possible, in my opinion are unbecoming of someone "working out their salvation with fear and trembling" ...such as myself.





Christian said:
Christian just means a follower of Christ. And Christ is just another name for Messiah, or Meshiach. It refers to being a follower of Yeshua. Nothing wrong with that.

People should call themselves what they want,
why do we need to make technical terms of everything and label everything so strictly ?

That word study only showed popular opinion, or referenced the popular opinion of a long lost time, anecdotally.
So what?
All languages are diluted versions of Hebrew, so no word can be "pagan", but it can have a pagan meaning, which "Christos" and "Christian(os)" does not have.

Mikha El: the word Christos was easily confused with the common Greek proper name Chrestos, meaning "good."
"Chrestianos"?
Um, so what?
"Good" - oh no!

"Mikha El: Concerning your comment about making "technical terms of everything" and "labeling everything so strictly" I think is a bit amiss and probably not actually what you meant literally. "


Turning the word "Christian" into meaning "Antinomian Christian" IS indeed the creation of a technical term.
No dictionary says anything of antinomianism in it's definition of Christianity.
7th Day Adventists are Christians - who keep Sabbath and abstain from pork.
As the earliest Christians did.

Mikha El:
Its infrequent use in the New Testament suggests a pagan origin.


It's used more often than "Nazarenes"...
Nothing about it suggests a "pagan origin", unless you're saying the Greek language has sentience, and chosen to be pagan....
Well said.

Realistically, it seems that "the Anointed" is more accurate in English than either Christ or Messiah.

Christian said:
That word study only showed popular opinion, or referenced the popular opinion of a long lost time, anecdotally.
So what? All languages are diluted versions of Hebrew, so no word can be "pagan", but it can have a pagan meaning, which "Christos" and "Christian(os)" does not have.
the word Christos was easily confused with the common Greek proper name Chrestos, meaning "good."
"Chrestianos"?
Um, so what?
"Good" - oh no!
I agree with your 1st thought in this line, I don't the second. When words that we know come down to a vowel dance that does not exist in original Hebrew I choose to not tango! You know, you say tomato I say tomato. :>)


Quote Christian:
All languages are diluted versions of Hebrew, so no word can be "pagan", but it can have a pagan meaning, which "Christos" and "Christian(os)" does not have.

I need online Syriac-Arabic text preferably in Interlinear to English if this exist, or just a Aramaic-Syriac translation. These two Greek to English translations seem anti-nomian.

Be not seduced by strange doctrines nor by antiquated fables, which are profitless. For if even unto this day we live after the manner of Judaism, we avow that we have not received grace ... If then those who had walked in ancient practices attained unto newness of hope, no longer observing Sabbaths but fashioning their lives after the Lord's day, on which our life also arose through Him ... how shall we be able to live apart from Him?

— Ignatius to the Magnesians 8:1, 9:1-2, Lightfoot translation.

Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish manner, and rejoice in days of idleness, ... But let every one of you keep the Sabbath after a spiritual manner, rejoicing in meditation on the law, not in relaxation of the body ... and not eating things prepared the day before, nor using lukewarm drinks, and walking within a prescribed space ... And after the observance of the Sabbath, let every friend of Christ keep the Lord's day as a festival, the resurrection-day, the queen and chief of all the days [of the week]. Looking forward to this, the prophet declared, "To the end, for the eighth day," on which our life both sprang up again, and the victory over death was obtained in Christ

— Letter to the Magnesians 9, Roberts and Donaldson translation, p. 189.

I find this odd that Lightfoot would mistranslate this in light of his other studies into Judaism comparing early Christian beliefs, https://www.amazon.com/Commentary-New-Testament-Talmud-Hebraica/dp/.... I used to own and read this in a collection of four books. I found Lightfoot to be quite fair-minded in his approach.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2018   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service