Posted on 09/18/2009 12:54:26 PM PDT by Nikas777
What Language(s) Did Jesus Speak and Why Does It Matter?
by Rev. Dr. Mark D. Roberts February 2004 (updated 2/2007)
Copyright © 2004 by Mark D. Roberts Note: You may download this resource at no cost, for personal use or for use in a Christian ministry, as long as you are not publishing it for sale. All I ask is that you give credit where credit is due. For all other uses, please contact me at mark@markdroberts.com. Thank you.
Part 1: Introduction
Although responses to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ movie varied widely, every viewer was struck by the fact that not one word of English was spoken in the film. All dialogue was in one of two ancient languages, Aramaic or Latin. Without the English subtitles, most of us wouldn't have been able to understand a word in The Passion of the Christ .
I expect that many people who aw this movie wondered about its odd languages. What is Aramaic, anyway? Was this really the primary language of Jesus? Didn't he speak Hebrew? And, since the New Testament gospels were written in Greek, is there any reason to believe that Jesus also spoke Greek?
These questions are not merely matters of intellectual curiosity, however. Knowing something about the language (or languages) of Jesus will do much more than help you win a game of Trivial Pursuit. In fact this knowledge opens up new windows of understanding into the world and ministry of Jesus.
In my next few posts I will address the questions: What language(s) did Jesus speak and why does it matter? But before I begin to address these questions, I want to begin by saying something that seems so obvious that it doesn't need to be said. Are you ready? Jesus didn't speak English.
(Excerpt) Read more at markdroberts.com ...
For years I thought that meant the start and ending in Greek but then I as I matured I realized Jesus was brilliantly using Greek to say something.
The Greek alphabet is from the east from the Phoenicians and the Semitic languages. Greekt shares some consonant letters like the "Alpha" but the Omega like all vowels are Greek invented letters.
Was Christ saying he is not only the starting and ending of all but that he was also starting from the Hebrew and ending the Greek/wider world?
I think he was.
OK I’ll trans-bite.
You said, if I grok it correctly, Jesus wouldn’t have understood Hebrew spoken in the manner of a living language. No matter that the grammar was there.
I suppose I could disagree if only because of His deity status. But it doesn’t need a god to know how to construct sentences in Hebrew....
It he did speak Greek, why the in-narrative translation of his prophetic cry from the cross?
We forget Jesus lived in Egypt - which to me means Alexandria (where else would Joseph get work as a carpenter?).
I can see Jesus shopping with his mother at the Alexandrian market where transactions and gossip, etc was in Greek.
Denying Jesus spoke Greek is accusing him of being a hick.
I thought that was an Archie Bunker quote?
The language of faith and truth
“Aramaic”
Exactly, I didn’t thing that was in dispute.
In a particular kind of plenary inspiration theology, it would. For Jesus to have talked in Aramaic, or Hebrew, and to have that later rendered into a Greek quotation by someone writing a gospel, would be theologically unspeakable!
It’s what happened, though.
“If the King’s English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it’s good enough for the children of Texas!”
Ma Ferguson
No I did not say that. Jesus could make all tongues understood to him if you accept Jesus had holy powers. But Let us suppose Jesus was highly educated without dwelling on his supernatural powers.
Jesus did not bother speaking Hebrew as an everyday language because no one else did. If I speak Latin like a Roman what good does it do me if I go shopping for shoes where everyone speaks English? Jesus's own people did not use it themselves for everyday purposes.
But even more, it simply shrugs off the rock-solid accounts we have which are (hel-lo?) in GREEK. And it makes no sense of the occasional notes of Aramaic in the records. Why interject these little Aramaic spurts, if that was His characteristic language? There's no deep significance to "Talitha kum" that couldn't have been communicated by korasion, egeire, or some other Greek phrase.
But if He didn't characteristically speak Aramaic in public, these rare little dabs make sense.
“The other question is “does it matter”? The answer would be no.”
I disagree, the more we learn about our Lord the better.
I have to disagree with you on that one. In order to interpret the Bible it is important to know the language that is being translated into our English Bibles. I like to remind folks that the Bible writers were divinely inspired but the translators were not. So the actual meaning of the words as written in the original language is sometimes different than translated. It matters.
For exanmple, the perrenial argument about the "Peter = Rock" brings the language Jesus spoke into play. The non-Catholic will cite to the Latin word for rock(petra)which is used to raise the issue of whether Jesus was referring to Petras(small) or Petros(large). Since Latin is a romance language words have a male or female version. The change in gender from petras to Petros is to account for the fact that Peter is male.
The Aramaic word for rock is Kefa which has no gender distinction. Thus, in Aramaic when Jesus said "Peter you are Rock and upon this Rock I build my Church" it is clear that he was referring to Peter both times. The Language he spoke is important.
He has a gift for stating the obvious. Anyone with the least bit of knowledge about Christianity knows that Jesus’ primary language was Aramaic. I suppose the author’s next revelation is that Jesus was male. It really doesn’t matter what language Jesus spoke, but what does matter is knowing the original languages of the Bible, especially Koine, if you are minister. The laity can do very well by using the NASB, NJV, or ESV versions.
The educated Romans learned the Attic Greek of Athens which was very difficult and also they and the normal Roman would know the more popular Koine Greek.
If a Roman was wealthy enough his wetnurse was probably Greek and those were the first words he heard.
People don't know this because of the Shakespeare play but Julius Caesar did not say in Latin "Et Tu, Brute?" when Suetonius said Caesar's last words were "Kai sy, teknon?" which is the Greek for "You too, descendent?" or "You too, child?" (It was common gossip in Rome that Brutus was Caesar's illegitemate child).
So in that case you can see that while Latin was used for formal functions, Greek was the language the Romans used for intimate purposes between themselves.
BECAUSE it was important to the gospel writer (and to God, in using the writer) to report the actual Divine utterances at those times. Aramaic had a separate Jewish theological significance. Certain angels traditionally held to communicate between man and God (no, Christians don't use that system, but I speak of Jewish tradition) could only speak Aramaic.
That is a different issue. The Bible is written in Greek and Hebrew. Granted that Hebrew is very similar to Aramaic and that the translation is important. But the translation is from those who wrote the scriptures and wrote quotes from Christ not Christ speaking into a “tape recorder” for example.
My point is that what language he spoke is no more important than his skin or hair color. The message is clear in whatever language.
I personally believe that concentrating on matters like this, takes away from the message of WHAT He spoke and not HOW He spoke it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.