Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Synoptic-L] Re: Greek and Latin in Rome

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 4/8/2002 3:18:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, david@colonialcommerce.com writes:
    Message 1 of 4 , Apr 8, 2002
      In a message dated 4/8/2002 3:18:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
      david@... writes:

      << Like John Lupia, I think (John, correct me if I'm wrong), I've long been
      suspicious of claims that the Romans Christians spoke only Greek, and that
      this is the main reason that a Latin NT was first created elsewhere, in North
      Africa, as evidenced by the reference to the Acts of the Scillitan [spellings
      vary] Martyrs. I simply find it very hard to believe that Latin copies of
      (at least) Romans and Mark, and probably Luke and Matthew, were *not* in
      existence in the 1st century AD. >>

      I like the fact that you mention Mark first in terms of the likelihood of
      very early translation into Latin. I would push this point still further to
      say that the original audiences of both Matt and Lk could probably read Greek
      well (so there would be no urgent need to translate these texts). It is very
      likely, however, that the audience of Mark would have included people for
      whom Greek would have posed a problem, if not an obstacle to understanding.
      If Mark was the first Gospel to be translated into (or even originally
      written in?) Latin, I would accept this is as a legitimate permutation of
      Markan "priority".

      As for Romans, I see quite a lot of Roman (Latin) cultural values that seem
      to be incorporated into the apostolic preaching and exhortation of Paul in
      this letter. Much of the thinking in Romans, for example, would have
      resonated with people who admired the great (more or less) Stoic writers of
      the first B.C.E. and C.E. centuries (Cicero, Seneca, Epictetus, Quintilian,
      etc.). This audience would have been able to read Greek, however. I am not
      absolutely sure that Paul was ever quite as democratic in his appeal as was
      suggested by John Lupia last week in his lengthy and informative post on the
      subject. Romans is a highly sophisticated document, more comparable, in this
      respect, to Matt and Lk, rather than Mark.

      Leonard Maluf

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.