Scholasticism

[Resurrexi]

To read good, worthwhile books. St. Thomas Aquinas is a Saint and Doctor of the Church. Saints are to be venerated, not scorned.

[kafka]

though lovers be lost,
love shall not:
And death shall have no dominion.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Innocent' post='1856343' date='May 3 2009, 01:13 AM']As I have said previously, [size=1](in that thread where you recommended I read Life of Moses by St. Gregory of Nyssa - I'm still frustrated at not finding a Public Domain version of this book online. Apparently, everything St. Gregory wrote has been put on the internet - except for this book!) [/size]I am not currently in a position to buy books through the internet, and I'm pretty much sure I won't be finding it in any bookstore nearby.[/quote]
You can get a paperback copy for around (or under) ten dollars.

[kafka]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1856357' date='May 3 2009, 03:31 AM']You can get a paperback copy for around (or under) ten dollars.[/quote]
yet why bother?

though lovers be lost
love shall not:
And death shall have no dominion.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='kafka' post='1856362' date='May 3 2009, 01:35 AM']yet why bother?

though lovers be lost
love shall not:
And death shall have no dominion.[/quote]
The Life of Moses is a classical patristic text on the spiritual life, but you certainly do not have to read it.

In fact, my post was not directed at you, but was written to inform Innocent of the fact that the book is available for less than ten dollars (that is why I quoted Innocent's earlier post).

That said, a sampling of the text can also be read at Google books.

[url="http://books.google.com/books?id=wAJ6fwFAligC&pg=PP1&dq=%22Life+of+Moses%22"][u]The Life of Moses[/u][/url]

Edited May 3, 2009 by Apotheoun

[kafka]

enough games.


Yes that is a good work.

[Theoketos]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1856331' date='May 3 2009, 03:04 AM']Pius XII may not have liked it, but God Himself chose to inspire the Sacred Scriptures in Greek, not Latin, and I think that God knew what He was doing.[/quote]


How does the Papias fragment in Eusiebius that claims, pretty authoritatively, that Matthew is originally in Aramaic, square with your assertion?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Theoketos' post='1857524' date='May 4 2009, 10:27 AM']How does the Papias fragment in Eusiebius that claims, pretty authoritatively, that Matthew is originally in Aramaic, square with your assertion?[/quote]
It is a claim without evidence. Papias may also be confusing, as several ancient authors did, the Ebionite "Gospel of the Hebrews" with the "Gospel of Matthew." Be that as it may, the only extant copies of Matthew's Gospel are in Greek, and the Church has always recognized it (i.e., the Greek text) as inspired and canonical.

[Innocent]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1857595' date='May 5 2009, 12:19 AM']Be that as it may, the only extant copies of Matthew's Gospel are in Greek, and the Church has always recognized it (i.e., the Greek text) as inspired and canonical.[/quote]

Hi.

I have two questions.

Does that mean in the Eastern Orthodox Catholic tradition, it is considered that the translations from Greek into other languages, are not, in the strictest sense, Scripture, but merely a translation of Scripture done to the best of human ability?

In the Eastern Orthodox Christian theological tradition, is it considered that the spiritual effect in the reader's soul is different when he reads the inspired Greek text than when he reads an English translation of that text?

Edited May 5, 2009 by Innocent

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Innocent' post='1858401' date='May 5 2009, 09:29 AM']Hi.

I have two questions.

Does that mean in the Eastern Orthodox Catholic tradition, it is considered that the translations from Greek into other languages, are not, in the strictest sense, Scripture, but merely a translation of Scripture done to the best of human ability?[/quote]
What it means is that any time a question would arise about what Christ meant, one would need to look at the text in the original language.

[quote name='Innocent' post='1858401' date='May 5 2009, 09:29 AM']In the Eastern Orthodox Christian theological tradition, is it considered that the spiritual effect in the reader's soul is different when he reads the inspired Greek text than when he reads an English translation of that text?[/quote]
The Eastern tradition does not go into this kind of detail about spiritual reading, at least not that I have ever heard.

That said, if a question should arise about the meaning of a particular text during spiritual reading of Scripture or the Fathers one would have to have recourse to the text in its original language in order to discern its proper meaning (e.g., sacred scripture uses different words when talking about the procession of the Spirit from the Father and His progression through the Son).

The Protestant Reformers were famous for taking a translated text, which may or may not be accurate or which may only convey part of the meaning of the text in the original language, and turning what is said in the translation into a "doctrine."

Edited May 5, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Formosus]

[quote name='Theoketos' post='1857524' date='May 4 2009, 01:27 PM']How does the Papias fragment in Eusiebius that claims, pretty authoritatively, that Matthew is originally in Aramaic, square with your assertion?[/quote]

I have heard arguments for both sides, and the vast number of scholars on the side of Greek authorship is telling in this situation. I am not so knowledgeable on such things, but I think its a stretch to suggest it was originally in Aramaic.