What's the deal with liturgic languages, /his/? With Catholics

In Islam the Angel Gabriel spoke to Muhammad for God, so the Classical Arabic scripture is literally taken as the words of God. The Quran itself is a miracle of God, because of it's poetic language and the fact that Muhammad was illiterate.

It all boils down to the fact that translations are for plebs, and lose a lot of the magic.

>>2729580

Issues of interpretation/translation.

>>2729620
I don't know why Aramaic wasn't chosen as the basis of the Bible but this exactly:
>It all boils down to the fact that translations are for plebs, and lose a lot of the magic.

If you are anything but a monolingual, you would know that some things cannot be exactly translated into another language due to lack of a native concept and had to go around explaining such foreign concept (often than not, they fail or lack some detail).

>>2729580
Preserving liturgical language helps connect you with the history of your traditions.

Tibetan Buddhists use mantras originally in Sanskrit modified to fit Tibetan phonology. This approach is common in Mahayana traditions, so you get people reciting syllables which don't mean anything directly, but represent earlier Buddhist traditions.

>>2729620
Because Quran is only to be chanted in Arabic, and no other language, also it is forbidden to just translate it to other language without presenting it side by side with the original Arabic text, as Muslims believe the use of translation is the reason the Bible become distorted overtime; even one character difference printing mistake would make a a Quran print considered unsuitable

>>2729649
Aramaic was the language Jesus and the Apostles would have spoken

>>2729683
Yeah but why wasn't it the main form of the bible?

Muslims were right on point on this one as it prevents (supposedly) misinterpretations due to translation errors as illustrated by >>2729682

>>2729689
Because the bible is an agglomeration of verses written in different times in different languages

>>2729580
ancient languages feel mystical

Before fedoras come and shit on the thread like pidgeons, religious people do care about the preservation of their sacred texts exactly the way they received them. Ancient hindus studied and wrote autistic treatises on etymology and logic for the sole meaning of interpreting scripture, and there's esoteric schools that take special notice of the hidden meaning of the words, the quantity of syllables and the related numerology, etc., such as the Kabbalah. It's not just about lol mystifying teh masses!

>>2729580
""Classical Arabic"" isn't ancient it's used everyday in new and media everyone even children can speak it and understand it it's just basically formal version of the language.

>>2729710
I'd hate to be a fedora. Nothing is ever meaningful, everything becomes le ironic joke.

>>2731172
it is ancient, but it was artificially maintained as a formal language next to the vernacular as was latin until a few centuries ago.

there are also some small differences in grammar and pronunciation between classical (quranic) arabic and modern standard arabic, even though arabic uses the same word for both (al-fusha)

>>2731501
only the quran is written differently but it is grammatically correct, the quran is written in the ottoman text, which is how Uthman ibn Affan written it. the pronunciation of words and letters and diacritics is still the same.

>>2729580
Because these religions are based on books and literary culture and languages books are written in don't change over time, in contrast with vernacular dialects.

>>2729693
NT is a pretty homogenous collection of 27 Koine Greek texts written from 40 to 100 AD. Considering Jesus and his original follower were Aramaic-speaking peasants and wouldn't have spoken Greek, it's a valid question, how reliable the translations we have?

>>2729580
Liturgical languages are much richer in meaning than modern languages and they often that do not have an exact equivalent. Modern translations are a crutch.

>>2732066
Case in point, תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ