Solparvus
Puritan Board Senior
Watched Robert Godfrey last night in his lectures on the middle ages, and he discussed the renaissance and ad fontes: to the fountains! There was a return to the works of the older world, as it was perceived to provide more richness than what they were seeing pumped out by their contemporaries or even much of the work produced in recent centuries. The old wine was better to them. I'm no historian, so I am in no place to evaluate.
Among the things the renaissance men perceived, was how much better was the Latin of the old world (Cicero, Augustine, etc.) than the Latin they were accustomed to in their own day and age. The classical Greek was also beautiful and rich as far as they were concerned.
I have mixed feelings. I'd love to dip into the classical languages if it means I will truly pick up something in the way of linguistic beauty and richness by doing it, and perhaps acquire an expanse of the mind; though the world of ancient philosophers, writers and orators while by common grace produced many great works and insights, I take Paul's warning seriously that vain philosophy carries a real snare. And the early church spent a lot of time undoing certain philosophical assumptions from their theology. Yet, even what theologies I've read show that the authors were not ignorant of the words or the substance of the thoughts of these writers.
I started Latin not because I want to read the classics, but because even English Reformed authors enjoy quoting other authors in their original Latin without the courtesy of providing a translation. Some will do the same with quotes in Greek.
This is a matter of the scope of my interest, and how far I want to take the study of Latin, and perhaps Greek. I've already picked of "Wheelock's Latin", though I've passed by "Hemlock's Greek".
Questions:
- What value might one reasonably expect to pick up by studying these two classical languages?
- What value might one reasonably expect to obtain by studying the ancient writers and philosophers in their own words?
- How quickly can you transition from a comprehensive understanding of Koine Greek to Classical Greek?
Among the things the renaissance men perceived, was how much better was the Latin of the old world (Cicero, Augustine, etc.) than the Latin they were accustomed to in their own day and age. The classical Greek was also beautiful and rich as far as they were concerned.
I have mixed feelings. I'd love to dip into the classical languages if it means I will truly pick up something in the way of linguistic beauty and richness by doing it, and perhaps acquire an expanse of the mind; though the world of ancient philosophers, writers and orators while by common grace produced many great works and insights, I take Paul's warning seriously that vain philosophy carries a real snare. And the early church spent a lot of time undoing certain philosophical assumptions from their theology. Yet, even what theologies I've read show that the authors were not ignorant of the words or the substance of the thoughts of these writers.
I started Latin not because I want to read the classics, but because even English Reformed authors enjoy quoting other authors in their original Latin without the courtesy of providing a translation. Some will do the same with quotes in Greek.
This is a matter of the scope of my interest, and how far I want to take the study of Latin, and perhaps Greek. I've already picked of "Wheelock's Latin", though I've passed by "Hemlock's Greek".
Questions:
- What value might one reasonably expect to pick up by studying these two classical languages?
- What value might one reasonably expect to obtain by studying the ancient writers and philosophers in their own words?
- How quickly can you transition from a comprehensive understanding of Koine Greek to Classical Greek?
Last edited:
