Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: editor-surveyor

***No, they were teranslated into Greek, after they were translated into Aramaic,****

Matthew may have written his in Hebrew, but why would Mark, Luke, and John and st Paul write theirs in Aramaic? I doubt many in Greece and Asia could read Aramaic. Even St Paul wrote to the Galatians in large letters. I doubt they would read Aramaic.


303 posted on 05/17/2013 7:12:06 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (When someone burns a cross on your lawn, the best firehose is an AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies ]


To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

>> “but why would Mark, Luke, and John and st Paul write theirs in Aramaic?” <<

.
Are you trying to look stupid?

They wrote in Hebrew, and Aramaic translations came later. The Greek translations were last, and done very poorly. There are numerous translational nonsequiturs in the Greek, proving that they were done from earlier Aramaic translations rather than by the original authors.


304 posted on 05/17/2013 7:23:30 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies ]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Matthew may have written his in Hebrew, but why would Mark, Luke, and John and st Paul write theirs in Aramaic?

Or Klingon or Reformed Egyptian.

We just do NOT 'know' what the ORIGINALS were written in - period.

What we HAVE as evidence are bits and pieces of the NT Scriptures - some much larger than others - and they are in GREEK.

330 posted on 05/19/2013 4:22:46 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson