himself the title ‘Defender of the Faith’ and it has remained as a title of English monarchs since. Christianity has played an influential role within English politics since the 8th century. The laws of Alfred the Great are prefaced by the Decalogue, the basic ten commandments to which Alfred added a range of laws from the Mosaic code found in the old testament. So, even at this stage there was a strong Judeo-Christian stamp on the law. But it was the close connection between Crown and Church which developed after Henry’s break from Rome that allowed English law to be greatly influenced by Christianity This has led to the situation that now prevails in contemporary England that there is a close interdependency between the norms of Christianity, the law and the constitution. In the coronation oath, the monarch promises to uphold the Christian religion by law established. The Archbishop of Canterbury asks the monarch ‘Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel and the Protestant reformed religion established by law?’ To which the Monarch responds ‘All this I promise to do’. No monarch can take the throne without making the oath. The next section brings together the issue of language, Christianity and law to draw out some of the problems of language. 2.4.1 Sacred texts, English law and the problem of language The sacred texts of the Old Testament and the New Testament collected in the Bible have been translated into numerous languages. Many misunderstandings of texts can be caused by mistranslations. English translations of the Bible are translations of translations. The Aramaic of the original speakers of the Christian message was written in Greek during the first century and from there translated into other languages. The historical Jesus did not, so far as we know, speak to people in Greek; he most likely spoke Aramaic. A few fragments were written in Aramaic, yet the English translations are made from the ‘original’ Greek! The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. However, the English translation is from an ‘original Greek translation’ of the Hebrew. To suggest why the source of translation might matter is also to illustrate the importance of other readings, other interpretations. Other readings and other interpretations are core issues for lawyers: what do these words mean for this situation rather than what do these words mean for ever. To illustrate this point within religion the first phrase in the first sentence from a Christian prayer known as the ‘Our Father’ or ‘The Lord’s Prayer’ will be considered. The English translation found in the ‘King James Version’ from the ‘original’ Greek will be compared to an English translation from an Aramaic version dating from 200 AD. The King James version is authorised by law for use by the Anglican church established by law. The King James Version of the Bible was developed after much bloodshed in the 17th century, and the Aramaic comparison is derived from Douglas Koltz who tried a reconstitution of the Aramaic from the Greek. This latter translation is, therefore, a little suspect as Aramaic is far more open textured than Greek (or indeed English) as will be discovered. However, the exercise provides a useful illustration of the flexibility of language, as well as the manipulation of language users!

DOI link for himself the title ‘Defender of the Faith’ and it has remained as a title of English monarchs since. Christianity has played an influential role within English politics since the 8th century. The laws of Alfred the Great are prefaced by the Decalogue, the basic ten commandments to which Alfred added a range of laws from the Mosaic code found in the old testament. So, even at this stage there was a strong Judeo-Christian stamp on the law. But it was the close connection between Crown and Church which developed after Henry’s break from Rome that allowed English law to be greatly influenced by Christianity This has led to the situation that now prevails in contemporary England that there is a close interdependency between the norms of Christianity, the law and the constitution. In the coronation oath, the monarch promises to uphold the Christian religion by law established. The Archbishop of Canterbury asks the monarch ‘Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel and the Protestant reformed religion established by law?’ To which the Monarch responds ‘All this I promise to do’. No monarch can take the throne without making the oath. The next section brings together the issue of language, Christianity and law to draw out some of the problems of language. 2.4.1 Sacred texts, English law and the problem of language The sacred texts of the Old Testament and the New Testament collected in the Bible have been translated into numerous languages. Many misunderstandings of texts can be caused by mistranslations. English translations of the Bible are translations of translations. The Aramaic of the original speakers of the Christian message was written in Greek during the first century and from there translated into other languages. The historical Jesus did not, so far as we know, speak to people in Greek; he most likely spoke Aramaic. A few fragments were written in Aramaic, yet the English translations are made from the ‘original’ Greek! The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. However, the English translation is from an ‘original Greek translation’ of the Hebrew. To suggest why the source of translation might matter is also to illustrate the importance of other readings, other interpretations. Other readings and other interpretations are core issues for lawyers: what do these words mean for this situation rather than what do these words mean for ever. To illustrate this point within religion the first phrase in the first sentence from a Christian prayer known as the ‘Our Father’ or ‘The Lord’s Prayer’ will be considered. The English translation found in the ‘King James Version’ from the ‘original’ Greek will be compared to an English translation from an Aramaic version dating from 200 AD. The King James version is authorised by law for use by the Anglican church established by law. The King James Version of the Bible was developed after much bloodshed in the 17th century, and the Aramaic comparison is derived from Douglas Koltz who tried a reconstitution of the Aramaic from the Greek. This latter translation is, therefore, a little suspect as Aramaic is far more open textured than Greek (or indeed English) as will be discovered. However, the exercise provides a useful illustration of the flexibility of language, as well as the manipulation of language users!

himself the title ‘Defender of the Faith’ and it has remained as a title of English monarchs since. Christianity has played an influential role within English politics since the 8th century. The laws of Alfred the Great are prefaced by the Decalogue, the basic ten commandments to which Alfred added a range of laws from the Mosaic code found in the old testament. So, even at this stage there was a strong Judeo-Christian stamp on the law. But it was the close connection between Crown and Church which developed after Henry’s break from Rome that allowed English law to be greatly influenced by Christianity This has led to the situation that now prevails in contemporary England that there is a close interdependency between the norms of Christianity, the law and the constitution. In the coronation oath, the monarch promises to uphold the Christian religion by law established. The Archbishop of Canterbury asks the monarch ‘Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel and the Protestant reformed religion established by law?’ To which the Monarch responds ‘All this I promise to do’. No monarch can take the throne without making the oath. The next section brings together the issue of language, Christianity and law to draw out some of the problems of language. 2.4.1 Sacred texts, English law and the problem of language The sacred texts of the Old Testament and the New Testament collected in the Bible have been translated into numerous languages. Many misunderstandings of texts can be caused by mistranslations. English translations of the Bible are translations of translations. The Aramaic of the original speakers of the Christian message was written in Greek during the first century and from there translated into other languages. The historical Jesus did not, so far as we know, speak to people in Greek; he most likely spoke Aramaic. A few fragments were written in Aramaic, yet the English translations are made from the ‘original’ Greek! The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. However, the English translation is from an ‘original Greek translation’ of the Hebrew. To suggest why the source of translation might matter is also to illustrate the importance of other readings, other interpretations. Other readings and other interpretations are core issues for lawyers: what do these words mean for this situation rather than what do these words mean for ever. To illustrate this point within religion the first phrase in the first sentence from a Christian prayer known as the ‘Our Father’ or ‘The Lord’s Prayer’ will be considered. The English translation found in the ‘King James Version’ from the ‘original’ Greek will be compared to an English translation from an Aramaic version dating from 200 AD. The King James version is authorised by law for use by the Anglican church established by law. The King James Version of the Bible was developed after much bloodshed in the 17th century, and the Aramaic comparison is derived from Douglas Koltz who tried a reconstitution of the Aramaic from the Greek. This latter translation is, therefore, a little suspect as Aramaic is far more open textured than Greek (or indeed English) as will be discovered. However, the exercise provides a useful illustration of the flexibility of language, as well as the manipulation of language users!