Posted on 01/17/2015 9:07:56 AM PST by Salvation
This week we leave the Culture Wars behind and return to some basic apologetics…well, some interesting information about the Scriptures that informs our apologetics.
I once had a discussion with a person who insisted that Our Divine Lord spoke only Hebrew. The conversation had begun centered around the word “rock” in St Matthew’s Gospel (Mt 16:18), but quickly devolved into a debate about ancient languages. My friend held that the word “rock” couldn’t possibly refer to St. Peter because the Gospel was written in Greek, and the Greek words used in that passage are “petros” and “petra,” which mean “rock” and “small rock,” respectively. I pointed out that Jesus didn’t speak Greek, He spoke Aramaic, and the Aramaic word for rock is “kepha,” which means “big rock” or “boulder.”
My friend was thunderstruck, he had never considered that a Jew in that time would speak any other language but Hebrew.
By the time Christ arrived on the scene, the Jewish people had been through a series of calamities that fundamentally altered their society. The Jewish state, Judah, was a rump of Israel’s former glory under King David, having been invaded and imprisoned a number of times by the Persians, the Greeks, the Assyrians, and the Romans. During the Babylonian Exile and the subsequent occupation by the Assyrians (700-330 BC), the Imperial Language of Aramaic became the common language of the Jews. In fact, the books of Ezra and Daniel were written in Aramaic. Similar to the way that the Church’s official language is Latin even today, the Rabbis and Temple officials maintained the Hebrew language of worship and the Scriptures, but the people spoke Aramaic in their daily lives.
The linguistic patchwork of first century Judea was complicated by two more civilizations…Greek and Roman. Greek was the common language used by the Roman elites in the conduct of business in the Empire. Latin, of course, was the official language of the Empire spoken by Roman officials and military forces, as well as the Roman citizens.
History aside, how do we know from the Scriptures that Christ spoke Aramaic? Simple. In several places He is quoted speaking Aramaic. In St. Matthew’s and St. Mark’s Gospels, some of Christ’s words are rendered in the language the people spoke. “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” (Mt 27:46, Mk 15:34), “Talitha cuom” (Mk 8:41), and “Ephphatha” (Mk 7:34) are all Aramaic phrases. Even the word “Abba” which Christ uses often to refer to the Father is the Aramaic word roughly translated as “Daddy.” Incidentally, the Arabic word “Abu” has the same meaning… so “Abu Sulieman” means “Father of Solomon.”
Why is all this language study important to defense of the Faith? Just this: properly translating the Scriptures leads to proper interpretations. For example, when the “brothers of Jesus” are referred to in Scripture, it’s important to know that they are cousins, not children of Mary. We know this because Aramaic has no word for “cousin” and Semitic cultures usually consider all male relatives as “brother” or “uncle.” In fact, not to refer to a male relative as “brother” or “father” or “uncle” is a way of distancing oneself from them. If we try to go with the English word, or even the Greek one, then we run the risk of drawing the wrong conclusion from the word “brother” or “rock,” and that weakens our personal understanding of the faith.
The Church recognizes the need for linguistic variety in her worship. It’s also a reason the Latin Rite uses Aramaic (Amen), Greek (Kyrie), Latin (Sanctus, Gloria, Angus Dei), and the vernacular (mostly English or Spanish in the USA) during Holy Mass. Words have power and real meaning…how else could we believe what someone tells us if words do not mean real ideas?
So the language Jesus Christ spoke on earth is important, both for our heads and our hearts. If words were not important, then the Father wouldn’t have spoken the Eternal Word. We are thankful He did.
**That is why the Holy Spirit choose Greek for its language**
How do you know this? Source?
Also people forget that Israel was basically divided then into a southern part and a northern part. Jesus came from the northern part.
Hebrew.
Aramaic was the language of the diaspora in Babylon. In ~40 BCE, Hillel (who spoke Aramaic natively) immigrated to the Land of Israel. He married a women raised in the Land. The description of their language differences, well before Aramaic became common in the Land indicate that the common Jew in the Land in the early First Century spoke Hebrew as the home language. Aramaic was secondary in society, with Greek also spoken by those who traveled outside the Land.
Christian scholars claim Aramaic was dominant earlier in the Land of Israel, ostensibly for theological, rather than archeological reasons. Jewish scholars (who never underestimate ate the importance of Aramaic) have placed more weight on Hebrew as the primary language in Israel in the First Cen.
Jesus probably spoke the language that was commonly spoke among those peoples within which he moved. He probably knew Hebrew as he spoke in the synagogue at the age of 12/13 expounding the scriptures which I assume were written in Hebrew. Be that as it may the earliest christian scriptures, to my understanding, were written in Greek Koine.
>Christ was also referred to having sisters as well as brothers.<
.
I know a Christian Sri Lankan who lives in the Dallas area who, even today, refers to his cousins, nephews and nieces as his brothers and sisters.
It’s a common practice since ancient times in the East, he says.
LOL Did not the Holy Spirit inspire that book ? Is not greek the most precise language?
"the Greek language had been molded over the centuries by the categories of philosophical thought. This is what Greece is known for, and their language had well-developed truth categories that would be needed to convey the doctrines of Christianity. To read the New Testament in Greek is to realize how perfect that language is for the theological writings of apostles like Paul and John.
http://www.alliancenet.org/CC/article/0,,PTID307086_CHID559376_CIID1936488,00.html
What a Lie!
If there is no word for cousin then explain how Mary could visit her cousin that was pregnant with John the Baptist?
Or that John the Baptist was also refered to as Jesus cousin?
Seems you lie about the differance the Bible clearly makes between brothers,sisters,and cousins.
He spoke English in the Bible,too.
I’m not sure your conclusion is scriptural, but it makes sense considering the vast spread of the Koinon Greek Language and how much more description it is than any modern language currently being used. God certainly used Alexander the Great for His purposes. Daniel mentions him many times.
English is an idiot’s language, even modern Spanish, French and Italian are more advanced languages for descriptive meanings. Think of the word “love”. There are at least 4 words for love in Ancient Koinon Greek covering multiple meanings of the word “love”?
First Century Jewish Ebonics.
Thems fightin’ words!!!
“...He spoke English in the Bible,too....”
It was on page 116. He was a Yankees fan too, as I understand it...
Jesus likely spoke Aramaic (mostly in Galilee); Hebrew in Judea (where it was more widely spoken than is usually accepted); and perhaps some Greek.
Hillel (around the time of Augustus, and before), who was an Aramaic speaker, had trouble understanding his Jerusalem-born wife, who was a native Hebrew speaker.
Around 100 AD, some rabbis consulted a woman (almost unheard of) over a question about Hebrew, of which she was a native speaker—she being from Judea.
Pilate questions Jesus in Greek, but evidently rudimentary Greek which according to some, shows some Latinisms. Whether there was then an interpreter, or Jesus also knew Greek, is unknown.
Carmignac (”Birth of the Synoptics”) and Tresmontant (”The Hebrew Christ”) both present overwhelming evidence that the New Testament relied heavily on Hebrew underlying documents; or else was originally composed in that language.
All that said, it matters not a smidgen to the basic gospel, what relations Joseph and Mary had after Jesus was born. Some early writers said that Joseph had children from a first marriage; and after his first wife died, he married Mary, with whom he had no children. Thus, Jesus might have had half-brothers.
But again, nothing is changed by any of this, and we are not given any clear indication in the scripture, meaning it was not really important.
This quote is from The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Vol. 1, pp.129, 130; by Alfred Edersheim:
If Greek was the language of the court and camp, and indeed must have been spoken by most in the land, the language of the people, spoken also by Christ and His Apostles, was a dialect of the ancient Hebrew, the Western or Palestinian Aramaic. It seem strange that this could ever have been doubted. A Jewish Messiah Who would urge His claim upon Israel in Greek, seems almost a contradiction in terms.
We know, that the language of the Temple and the Synagogue was Hebrew, and that the addresses of the Rabbis had to be “targumed” into the vernacular Aramaen – and can we believe that, in a Hebrew service, the Messiah could have arisen to address the people in Greek, or that He could have argued with the Pharisees and Scribes in that tongue, especially remembering that its study was actually forbidden by the Rabbis?
A thread here at PB discussing the LXX’s Ps. 14:3 and the alleged use of it in Romans 3:12-18 can be found here (my input is in post #5): Psalm 14:3 in LXX. What follows is excerpted from an essay on the OT text (by Dr. Thomas Strouse), and here in particular what was used by Jesus:
First, the Bible clearly shows that the Lord Jesus Christ used the Hebrew text as His Scriptures. When Satan tempted Him, the Lord submitted Himself to the written Words of God [xxvi] by stating, "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God" (Mt. 4:4). The expression "It is written" (gegraptai) is in the perfect tense indicating past action with continuing results. In effect the Lord said this Hebrew verse to which He alluded (Dt. 8:3), and obviously the Hebrew Book of Deuteronomy and consequently the Hebrew Pentateuch, had been written (by Moses the Hebrew) and was still written to His very day. The Lord Jesus Christ had the preserved Words of the Hebrew OT available to Him just as He had promised (cf. Dt. 4:2; 12:32; 17:18-20; 29:1, 29; 30:11-14 [vide Rom. 10:6-8]; 31:9-13, 24-27; Josh. 1:7-8; Ps. 12:6-7; 119:111, 152, 160).
The Lord taught that the jots and tittles of the Hebrew OT would be preserved, stating, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Mt. 5:18). He believed that the very consonants and the very vowels of the OT Hebrew words of prophecies (and of course all the other words of Scripture) were preserved perfectly intact in His day and would continue until final fulfillment (cf. Jn. 12:48). Since the Greek OT (LXX) does not have jots and tittles He was not referring to this inferior translation which has a historical background and timetable that are very suspect.
Again the Lord Jesus alluded to the three-fold division of the Hebrew OT, which division the LXX does not follow, when He affirmed, "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me" (Lk. 24:44; cf. v. 27; also Acts 26:22).
The law (torah), the prophets (nebiim), and the writings (kethubim [of which Psalms was first]) made up the Hebrew OT and is called the Tanak. He elaborated on His use of the Hebrew OT when the Lord identified the Pharisees' persecution of the prophets with their murderous Jewish ancestors, stating, "From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation" (Lk. 11:51). He surveyed the whole scope of the Hebrew OT, using the examples of the murder of the righteous Abel from the first book (Genesis 4:8) to the murder of the righteous Zacharias from the last book (II Chronicles 24:20-22).
The Biblical truths that the Lord Jesus always used the Hebrew text for His Scriptures includes His reference to the perfectly preserved Hebrew text, His reference to the perfect preservation of the smallest components of Hebrew words, and His reference to the three-fold division of the Hebrew OT are indisputable. The NT does not countenance the assumed position that Christ used the LXX because it clearly contradicts this false assumption.
The Lord consistently alluded to the Hebrew OT. Since the nature and character of the LXX are extremely questionable, the alleged argument that the NT quotes the LXX must be rejected. The supposed NT quotes of the LXX must be understood in another way. The simple fact of the matter is that the LXX was in part or whole post-first century and never used by Christ or the Apostles.
Excerpt : SCHOLARLY MYTHS PERPETUATED ON REJECTING THE MASORETIC TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
So glad to see this! This what I've always thought concerning that splendid, unique, never used before-or-since, Angelic/Koine neologism,
Produce any Hebrew or Aramaic manuscripts older than the Greek we have.
Bump
You mention yourself in #1 the Aramaic verses.
What language do you believe He spoke to Roman Centurion in Matthew 8:5-13? Or His conversation with Pontius Pilatus in Matthew 27 or John 18? And if it wasn’t Latin, then it most certainly was Greek. Although Pilate was a Samnite (Josephus), which means more than likely He spoke more Latin than Greek.
They can not rightly divide the word of God.. it is truely "all greek " to them
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.