3 ms·

I would suggest you read the original Greek if you want to hang your textual arguments on specific words, and then also realize that the Latin translation which

I would suggest you read the original Greek if you want to hang your textual arguments on specific words, and then also realize that the Latin translation which is canonical for Catholics is also a translation. A lot is lost in both directions.

kergonath 1y ago
Looking for the original words in the bible is a fool’s errand. It was written in many languages by many people over many centuries. Every bit of the bible was translated.
- pclmulqdq 1y ago
  Not most of the New Testament. The Old Testament is a different story.
hajile 1y ago
That’s an appeal to ignorance. You can look up the Greek yourself (I’ll link a basic translation below). There’s just not much room to mistranslate “one wife”, or “husband”. The official Catholic translation agrees with KJV as does Thomas Aquinas in his commentary. In fact, I don’t know that there’s ANY disagreement about this translation anywhere. The clear issue is that the Catholic Church believes (and states) that their ecclesiastical authority supersedes even the Bible on not only this minor topic, but more important ones too. https://biblehub.com/text/1_timothy/3-2.htm https://biblehub.com/text/1_timothy/3-2.htm
- pclmulqdq 1y ago
  "Episkopos" literally translates to "overseer" ("epi" = "on/over"; "skopo" = "watch/behold/contemplate"). "Guardian" is also in LSJ, as is the translation you give of "bishop." It's likely this is the unambiguous word for "bishop" in this text, which is pretty funny.
  - hajile 1y ago
    https://www.etymonline.com/word/bishop https://www.etymonline.com/word/bishop > Late Latin episcopus in Spanish became obispo, in Italian vescovo, in Welsh esgob. The Germanic forms include Old Saxon biscop, Old High German biscof. Episkopos literally changed over time into the English transliteration of Bishop.
    - dragonwriter 1y ago
      You are misusing transliteration and, more importantly, making the error of assuming that because something is the etymological root of a term that it can have had no other meaning when it was written than that term for which it is the root. Yes. Episkopos is where we get “bishop" and presbuteros is where we get “priest”, but their use for distinct positions in the heirarchy of orders are newer than the NT itself, in which they are used more loosely and apparently, at least in some cases interchangeably. Confusing knowing etymology (either forward or backward) for knowing meaning in context is a common, but potentially very serious, error.
      - hajile 1y ago
        You argued that I was mistranslating. I showed that the etymology and transliteration made a mistranslation effectively impossible. You then completely ignore the evidence to make up an assertion about changing semantics with ZERO proof (even though the burden of proof is on you). The only reason the word bishop exists in English is because we needed a loan word for episkopos. It has served that purpose and in the religious context has had no significant change in semantics. As to your assertion that bishop and priest are different, you are wrong even from the Catholic framework (and completely wrong from a Protestant framework). Here's a quote from Thomas Aquinas about 1 Tim 3:1 > But since Dionysius declares that there are three orders, namely, bishops who rule, priests who enlighten, and deacons who cleanse, why does the Apostle make no mention of priests? > The answer is that priests are included under the term, bishop, not as though the two orders are not really distinct, but only nominally. For priest is the same as elder, and bishop the same as overseer. Hence priests and bishops are indiscriminately called both bishops and priests.

kergonath 1y ago

Looking for the original words in the bible is a fool’s errand. It was written in many languages by many people over many centuries. Every bit of the bible was translated.

pclmulqdq 1y ago
Not most of the New Testament. The Old Testament is a different story.

hajile 1y ago

That’s an appeal to ignorance. You can look up the Greek yourself (I’ll link a basic translation below). There’s just not much room to mistranslate “one wife”, or “husband”. The official Catholic translation agrees with KJV as does Thomas Aquinas in his commentary. In fact, I don’t know that there’s ANY disagreement about this translation anywhere. The clear issue is that the Catholic Church believes (and states) that their ecclesiastical authority supersedes even the Bible on not only this minor topic, but more important ones too. https://biblehub.com/text/1_timothy/3-2.htm https://biblehub.com/text/1_timothy/3-2.htm

pclmulqdq 1y ago
"Episkopos" literally translates to "overseer" ("epi" = "on/over"; "skopo" = "watch/behold/contemplate"). "Guardian" is also in LSJ, as is the translation you give of "bishop." It's likely this is the unambiguous word for "bishop" in this text, which is pretty funny.
- hajile 1y ago
  https://www.etymonline.com/word/bishop https://www.etymonline.com/word/bishop > Late Latin episcopus in Spanish became obispo, in Italian vescovo, in Welsh esgob. The Germanic forms include Old Saxon biscop, Old High German biscof. Episkopos literally changed over time into the English transliteration of Bishop.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    You are misusing transliteration and, more importantly, making the error of assuming that because something is the etymological root of a term that it can have had no other meaning when it was written than that term for which it is the root. Yes. Episkopos is where we get “bishop" and presbuteros is where we get “priest”, but their use for distinct positions in the heirarchy of orders are newer than the NT itself, in which they are used more loosely and apparently, at least in some cases interchangeably. Confusing knowing etymology (either forward or backward) for knowing meaning in context is a common, but potentially very serious, error.
    - hajile 1y ago
      You argued that I was mistranslating. I showed that the etymology and transliteration made a mistranslation effectively impossible. You then completely ignore the evidence to make up an assertion about changing semantics with ZERO proof (even though the burden of proof is on you). The only reason the word bishop exists in English is because we needed a loan word for episkopos. It has served that purpose and in the religious context has had no significant change in semantics. As to your assertion that bishop and priest are different, you are wrong even from the Catholic framework (and completely wrong from a Protestant framework). Here's a quote from Thomas Aquinas about 1 Tim 3:1 > But since Dionysius declares that there are three orders, namely, bishops who rule, priests who enlighten, and deacons who cleanse, why does the Apostle make no mention of priests? > The answer is that priests are included under the term, bishop, not as though the two orders are not really distinct, but only nominally. For priest is the same as elder, and bishop the same as overseer. Hence priests and bishops are indiscriminately called both bishops and priests.