Did Jesus really say this? John 3:1-8

w1z4rd

w1z4rd

Valued Senior Member
This is a pretty famous verse.. most new age Christian groups cling to it as the whole "born again" thing. Personally, I was born right first time.

Let me quote John 3:1-8

Code: 
John 3

Jesus Teaches Nicodemus

 1Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2He came to Jesus at night and said, "Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him."
 3In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.[a]"

 4"How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!"

 5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[b] gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You[c] must be born again.' 8The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

Now whats interesting about this passage is the original Koine Greek usage. The word that is interesting is the koine greek word: Anothen

It has two meanings 'born from above' or 'born again'.

In the passage you can see Nicodemus is confused by the use of the word. He asks Jesus how can he be born again (from his mothers womb), and Jesus corrects him and says its "born from above".

Now some of you might already have figured out whats wrong with this sentence. The sentence is a koine greek pun that does NOT back translate in Aramaic.

Jesus was an Aramaic Jew and he was speaking to Nicodemus who was a Pharisees Jew. Now unless Jesus and Nicodemus were speaking koine greek which is slightly possible (though highly unlikely).. that sentence would not have being said by Jesus. Due to the koine greek only pun used there.

Nicodemus and Jesus would have spoken either Aramaic or Hebrew.. not Greek.

So this was either messed up by a bad scribe or never spoken by Jesus.

Whats your thoughts?
 
Nothing was ever spoken by "Jesus."

It is very unlikely a Jesus would have actually been conversant in Hebrew any more than Jews are today or most xtians can speak latin or greek.

At the time however, Koine Greek was a usniversal language of trade and scholasticism. Its possible a Jesus could have spoken it, it was a fairly universal second language. In particular if he was trying to be taken as an educated person he would have used it in formal settings.

But its pretty obvious the earliest copies of the new testiment were written by Greek speakers and not Aramaic speakers. Also whoever wrote them really didn't know a lot about Jewish customs from JC's time.

At least that's my impression, your milage may vary.
 
swarm said:
Nothing was ever spoken by "Jesus."

It is very unlikely a Jesus would have actually been conversant in Hebrew any more than Jews are today or most xtians can speak latin or greek.

At the time however, Koine Greek was a usniversal language of trade and scholasticism. Its possible a Jesus could have spoken it, it was a fairly universal second language. In particular if he was trying to be taken as an educated person he would have used it in formal settings.

But its pretty obvious the earliest copies of the new testiment were written by Greek speakers and not Aramaic speakers. Also whoever wrote them really didn't know a lot about Jewish customs from JC's time.

At least that's my impression, your milage may vary.
Click to expand...

I dont think I agree that its more likely Jesus spoke koine greek instead of Hebrew. Jesus was an aramaic Jew.. and he had some teachings by Jewish elders. While I understand a lot of greek was spoken at the time.. I dont see how a hand worker from a small town would have learnt it.. though he may.

Im sure back then as now, Young Jews had to learn the Torah and read and speak Hebrew?

I would have guessed that both of them spoke Aramaic though.
 
Here's an interesting thought. Perhaps Jesus taught this concept to someone. The writer couldn't remember all the ins and outs, but he remembered being told about this conversation/lesson. The writer took an artistic liberty and made the concept come across a bit more poetically.

Thus, who said what in which language doesn't matter so much as the "moral of the story".
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
Here's an interesting thought. Perhaps Jesus taught this concept to someone. The writer couldn't remember all the ins and outs, but he remembered being told about this conversation/lesson. The writer took an artistic liberty and made the concept come across a bit more poetically.

Thus, who said what in which language doesn't matter so much as the "moral of the story".
Click to expand...

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
 
How does my suggestion of the writer taking a liberty to get across a topic to, I imagine, greek readers, offend Occam's Razor?

I thought the idea that there was a witness to JC and Nico's private conversation who recalled it word for word twenty or thirty years later to be a bit more of a stretch, don't you?
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
How does my suggestion of the writer taking a liberty to get across a topic to, I imagine, greek readers, offend Occam's Razor?

I thought the idea that there was a witness to JC and Nico's private conversation who recalled it word for word twenty or thirty years later to be a bit more of a stretch, don't you?
Click to expand...

I simply think its another example of common scribal additions/errors for the time period.

I dont think he said that sentence.
 
i am not being critical here wizard but those boxes are hard to read when you have to scroll left to right.
 
I can't argue with that. I doubt that you can argue with the concept that he COULD have said it, either. I mean, it could be argued that perhaps they were conversing in a more "educated" language considering that the region had recently been Greek/Macedonian, as well as Rome's appreciation for Greek culture and lore.

The problem is that we have no means of really verifying a conversation recorded 2000 years ago as having occurred as recorded or not.
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
Here's an interesting thought. Perhaps Jesus taught this concept to someone. The writer couldn't remember all the ins and outs, but he remembered being told about this conversation/lesson. The writer took an artistic liberty and made the concept come across a bit more poetically.

Thus, who said what in which language doesn't matter so much as the "moral of the story".
Click to expand...
This is a really interesting problem, I think I have an answer (after a bit of Googling around)! There's quite a good explanation here and also here.

It seems that the original aramaic is mitiled min dresh translated 'born from the head/crown'. This is a reference to childbirth where it is the babies head that appears first. Nicodemus would have believed his salvation came from his being a descendant of Abraham i.e. Jewish. He is therefore understandably confused that Jesus seems to be saying he must be 'born from the head'. So he says:
Nicodemus said:
"How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!"
Click to expand...
Jesus then makes clear that he is meaning 'reborn in your thinking' i.e. 'born of water and the Spirit' which would be a lightbulb moment for Nicodemus, as it refers to Ezekiel 36:24-28:

Then I will sprinkle clean water on you,
and you shall be clean;
I will cleanse you from all your filthiness
and from all your idols.

I will give you a new heart
and put a new spirit within you;
I will take he heart of stone out of your flesh
and give you a heart of FLESH.

I will put My spirit within you
and cause you to walk in My statutes,
and you will keep My judgements and do them.

Then you shall dwell in the Land that I gave to you fathers;
you shall be my people, and I will be your God.

I imagine the Greek translators would have tried to capture the confusion using the pun on the Greek "Anothen", which sort of works in the Aramaic too (born from the head), but in a slightly different way. I don't know how accurate this explanation is, so any Hebrew scholars might want to check out the meaning of "mitiled min dresh".

P.S. Anyone who has read the 'Gospel of Thomas' - which is the alleged sayings of Jesus - will know how Jesus loved using those sort of confusing but memorable aphorisms. So, for me it rings true as an account.
 
w1z4rd said:
I dont think I agree that its more likely Jesus spoke koine greek instead of Hebrew.
Click to expand...

The Jewish scholars who claim to know such things have it as a dead language by then. Known by the priests much like Latin in the middle ages, but not something your average carpenter's son would know. Sure there is a requirement to recite a passage from the Torah, but then as now it is mainly done by rote.

Koine however was the language of commerce in the region and even a carpenter could be expected to know a smattering of it. In fact despite being a Roman province, Greek was far more well known as a second language.

Again though, I'm not a specialist in this area, this is just what I've picked up reading analysis of personal life in the region at that time.

Another oddity is the Jewish synagogues of the time (there was only the temple) where often used as community centers even by non Jews.

I agree it is likely they both stayed in Aramaic. But we were exploring what they might have spoken other than Aramaic
 
swarm said:
The Jewish scholars who claim to know such things have it as a dead language by then. Known by the priests much like Latin in the middle ages, but not something your average carpenter's son would know. Sure there is a requirement to recite a passage from the Torah, but then as now it is mainly done by rote.

Koine however was the language of commerce in the region and even a carpenter could be expected to know a smattering of it. In fact despite being a Roman province, Greek was far more well known as a second language.

Again though, I'm not a specialist in this area, this is just what I've picked up reading analysis of personal life in the region at that time.

Another oddity is the Jewish synagogues of the time (there was only the temple) where often used as community centers even by non Jews.

I agree it is likely they both stayed in Aramaic. But we were exploring what they might have spoken other than Aramaic
Click to expand...

Ok.. I understand your position. For me personally, I cant say that Jesus spoke KG unless I have evidence of such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top