Are you a Greek scholar? No?
Then who are you to say that all the Koine experts who have translated the Didache have got it wrong? Every scholar who has translated the Didache agrees it should be translated "Lord's day".
No not at all. I know a little Greek (enough to ask questions and search out information) but far from being a scholar. I posted you some references showing that other scholars believe that the didache has been mistranslated in 14.1 and that there is also not date and author to these writings that mysteriously appear in the 1873 from a Catholic monastery to trace an accurate date of when it was written so all dates to the didache are only speculation at best by anyone. You were shown also that in the biblical Koine Greek that as posted earlier the naming of the days in the Hebrew culture (unlike the the Romans and the Greeks) used Gods' Word for the naming of the days. For example; if "day" is not in the Greek text the
reference point used by the translators in adding the English word day is to "
week". This is because the original Greek if "day" is omitted it is normally written in the Greek as "first of the
week" meaning
first day of the week. The Greek word for reference here to add in the word "day" in the English is the Greek Word "
week" therefore
the first of the week, is
day 1 or
the first day of the week which are all are
all equivalent readings. Therefore this is the reasoning for the translators adding in "day" when there is only a number all first because it is linked directly to the "
week" which is
the reference point to day (e.g.
John 20:19 see
Greek context to week here). Now note;
Revelation 1:10 in the Koine Greek is τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ translated as "
the Lords day" with ἡμέρᾳ (day)
not being a supplied word of the translators but
the original Greek text that is not supplied.
For a translator to add in a word that is
not in the Greek they need to have a reference point to justify to addition. There is
no reference point in the didache for the translators to add the word "day " in a translation. As posted earlier this is where you run into problems. In the translation of the didache in the Greek there is no reference points to the Greek words for day or week being used in the entire document as shown earlier by
@HIM in his link to the original Greek text shown in the
original Greek.
Here is the proof that the English translation has been mistranslated.
Didache 14:1a in the original Greek reads....
Κατὰ κυριακὴν δὲ κυρίου συναχθέντες κλάσατε ἄρτον καὶ εὐχαριστήσατε, προεξομολογησάμενοι τὰ παραπτώματα ὑμῶν, ὅπως καθαρὰ ἡ θυσία ὑμῶν ᾐ.
Didache 14:1a in the original Greek to English....
According to 'the Lord's things' of Lord: gather break bread and give thanks, confessing out
Mistranslated to English....
Didache 14:1a as mistranslated to the English with no reference point for translation reads....
"But every Lord's [day] gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving".
The first clause in Greek, "κατά κυριακήν δέ κυρίου", literally means "On the Lord's of the Lord", a unique and unexplained double possessive, and translators supply the elided noun, e.g., "day" (ἡμέρα
hemera), "commandment" (from the immediately prior verse 13:7), or "doctrine". This is one of two early extrabiblical Christian uses of "κυριακήν" where it does not clearly refer to Sunday because textual readings have given rise to questions of proper translation. According to the scriptures breaking bread of bread is also not a reference point because this can be done daily or weekly at any time of the week *
Acts of the Apostles 2:42, 20:7. (
Ambiguous references)
The above section as referenced is scholarly criticism of the Greek translation of section 14:1a shown above of the Didache inclusion of "the Lords day" when there is no reference point to day or week when the literal translation means on the "Lord's of the Lord".
That includes....
Roberts & Donaldson "But every Lord's day..."
J.B. Lightfoot " And on the Lord's own day...."
Charles H. Hoole "But on the Lord's day...."
Kirsopp Lake "On the Lord's Day...."
Tony Jones "On the Lord’s day, "
Rick Brannan "And coming together on the Lord's day...."
M.B. Riddle "But every Lord's day...."
Hitchcock and Brown "But on the Lord's day...."
Herbert W. Armstrong "Now according to the Lord's day...."
Ok you have posted a list of Catholic and Sunday keeping translators of the didache that have made the same application and mistake. How does this address anything in what is shown in the previous section that it is a mistranslation? - It doesn't
So who I should trust - the unanimous consensus of Koine Greek experts or you? That's a tough one.
You should not put your trust in either me or the scholars of the day. It was the Scribes and the Pharisees in the days of Jesus that were the scholars of the day that Jesus lived that crucified him and put him to death on the cross. Yet it was the very scriptures they claimed to be scholars over that testified of Him. While I am only another voice crying in the wilderness pointing to God's Word. We can only know the truth of Gods Word as we seek Jesus for a knowledge of the truth of His Word. This is why I often post only God's Word is true and we should believe and follow them. It is to the Word of God that we should be pointing people not teachings and traditions that are outside of the scriptures that lead people away from God and His Word. Anything outside of the scriptures are from sources outside of the bible and if they are not supported by scripture are
not God's Word or from God. Now do you have any scripture from Gods' Word that show that Sunday is "the Lords day" found in the man-made teachings and traditions of the early Church? - Nope. Then who should we believe; God or man?
There is a consensus for a mid to late first-century dating (50-70 CE), Didache dated by modern scholars to the first or (less commonly) second century. Didache - Wikipedia
No. There is only estimates or
best guesses to when the didache was written as there is no date or author written in the original didache manuscript. The didache has been the most widely dated writings from 100 AD to 400 AD. The variation is so wide because there is no way of dating it except through
speculation. Your links only state a
variation in consensus to different date ranges not evidence of a specific date.
"
Although several scholars have assigned the Didache to the first century, and others have dated it to the third or even fourth century, most prefer a date in the first half of the second century. {3} The dates fixed upon by critics for the composition of the Didache fall between the years 50 and 160. The work was probably composed between 80 and 110. The basis for such a conclusion is the fact that the liturgy and hierarchy which the author describes, are quite primitive; there is no trace in the work of a creed or a canon of the Scriptures, and no allusion is made to pagan persecution or Gnosticism. On the other hand, the writer is acquainted with the gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke and entertains an obvious mistrust towards wandering Christian teachers who visit the communities. This state of affairs is characteristic of the end of the first century. {4} Bryennios and Harnack assign, as the date, between 120 and 160; Hilgenfeld, 160 and 190; English and American scholars vary between A.D. 80 and 120. Until the priority to Barnabas is more positively established, the two may be regarded as of the same age, about 120, although a date slightly later is not impossible." (
Religious Facts)
On top of this as shown earlier the application of section 14.1 to "the Lords day" is not in the original Greek as the Greek has no reference point to day. It is a mistranslation of "
the Lords day". The only way therefore to prove that "the Lords day" of Revelation 1:10 being Sunday is to prove it with the biblical scriptures. No one in this thread has done this in support of this man-made teaching and tradition of the early Church.
Several factors point to an early date of mid- to late-first-century AD. The influence of Jewish customs (e.g., fasting and prayer three times a day), the probable use of the Babylonian Talmud (especially in Didache chapter 2), the Old Testament quotations and the view of prophets as replacements for the high priest may point to an early period of the church when it was still closely related to Judaism. Other evidence suggesting an early date includes the simplicity of the rituals of baptism and the Eucharist, the primitive nature of church leadership and organization, and the expectation of an immanent second coming of Christ. There is also a notable absence of any mention of pagan persecution or heresy, which were central features of most second-century Christian writings. Didache - ReligionFacts
It can't be that late because the document was referred to by the church father Dionysius of Corinth in AD170. So? That is the date the first complete copy was found, with that manuscript itself dating back to the 11th century. The earliest complete manuscript of Revelation was only found in 1844 but you don't doubt the authenticity of that do you? Papyrii and parchment have a habit of disintegrating you know. Other existing fragmentary copies of the Didache date back the 4th century. Despite your attempts at sowing doubt, the vast consensus of scholars overwhelmingly accept the authenticity and earliness of the Didache, and regard it as a very important Christian document.
It can't be that late because the document was referred to by the church father Dionysius of Corinth in AD170. So? That is the date the first complete copy was found, with that manuscript itself dating back to the 11th century. The earliest complete manuscript of Revelation was only found in 1844 but you don't doubt the authenticity of that do you? Papyrii and parchment have a habit of disintegrating you know. Other existing fragmentary copies of the Didache date back the 4th century. Despite your attempts at sowing doubt, the vast consensus of scholars overwhelmingly accept the authenticity and earliness of the Didache, and regard it as a very important Christian document.
What you have posted above here is not evidence of date but speculation of date from one source. There are many other scholars that have a different view on the date that the Didache was written yet these once again are all simply speculation because there is nothing to determine the actual date and time or authorship of when the didache was written and as has been shown earlier there is
nothing in the Greek manuscripts that reference "the Lords day." So what have you shown here? Speculation in regards to the dating of the didache which scholars range from the 100 to 400 AD. There is no evidence that any of the Apostles had anything to do with this manuscript and there is nothing in the Greek that says "the Lords day" and nothing in the original Greek manuscript that discusses Sunday or the first day of the week.
Now the above is all and good and interesting discussion but there is nothing posted here in this thread that show from the scriptures that "the Lords day" written in Revelation 1:10 has any claim to being Sunday or the first day of the week. For this claim to be proven true scripture needs to be provided to show that "the Lords day" of Revelation 1:10 is Sunday and nothing has been provided here or even in the original Greek writings of the didache so this brings us back to the question of the OP. Where is the scripture that proves that "the Lords day" from Revelation 1:10 is Sunday? - There is none. So who should we believe and follow? God's Word or the teachings and traditions of men from outside of the bible? Well I know who I believe and follow according to Romans 3:4 and Acts of the Apostles 5:29. Let's talk more when you have scriptures proving that "the Lord's day" of Revelation 1:10 is Sunday. Until then we will of course agree to disagree.
Take Care
