Why was the NT written in Greek when Jesus spoke Aramaic?

M

Medicine*Woman

Jesus: Mythstory--Not History!
Valued Senior Member
*************
M*W: Please settle this confusion for me. The OT was written in Hebrew, and the NT was written in Greek. The NT is about Jesus who spoke only Aramaic, a form of Hebrew. Why, then, was the NT written if Greek if it was NOT a language Jesus spoke? There had to have been some misinterpretations of all the many translations. Since the NT wasn't written in Jesus' native tongue, there is no way it could be considered a holy book.
 
I am with you on this one G.

[And the only way I will switch allegiances is if you lose the ****ing asterisks MW. Bloody gross.]
 
Ophiolite said:
I am with you on this one G.

[And the only way I will switch allegiances is if you lose the ****ing asterisks MW. Bloody gross.]
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: I'll have you know right now that those "asterisks" denote orgasms when I'm talking about how misguided Christianity is!

(Has anybody noticed that I always use 13 asterisks? Where's your sense of superstition?)
 
To my understanding, Jesus spoke three languages. Roman (Latin), Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. According to several sources, including http://www.levitt.com/essays/language.html , many Hebrews of the supposed time of Jesus spoke three or four languages. Its entirely possible that jesus spoke Latin to the Romans, Aramaic to the common people, Hebrew to his fellow Jews, and possibly Greek to those out-of-towners (which, supposedly, he traveled to many areas within Palestine.) This has nothing to do with the New Testament being written in Greek though. Greek at that time was like English or Spanish today. It was the "universal" language spoken by many scholars, writers, and philosphers (a reason why the entire bible was later translated into Greek.) Just as later on, Latin was the universal language (the main reason the bible was translated into Latin.) Yes, perhaps there may have been some misinterpretations or mistakes, but after all... the Bible was written by humans. It was inspired, not dictated (in my belief atleast.) Thus there is always room for mistake. That does not refute the Bible, claiming it false. it just leaves room for possible human error. Even if the Bible was written in Aramaic, that would be useless. It would then have been translated into Greek, leaving room for error, then Latin, room for error, and then all the languages of the world, room for error. THEN there are the human errors of self-interpretation! This is why there are so many versions of the Bible. So many editions. The New American Bible, the Internation Bible, King James Bible, ect. The fact that the Bible was written in Greek, a 'universal' language, so to speak, back then, means nothing but the fact that the writers of the New Testament wanted the text to last and to be translatable by many educated scholars around the known 'western' world. The Bible was written by men, and men are not perfect (or atleast i believe so.) So, if i have not answered your question, although it is impossible to truely know why it was written in Greek and not Aramaic, I think it was so educated people who could read and write Greek could read the Gospels (and Letters and Acts and Revelations.) Yes, why wasnt it written in Aramaic, the commoner's language? Well, perhaps they werent capable of reading or writing, only speaking Aramaic. I do not know. That is my take for why it was written in Greek.
 
Provita said:
To my understanding, Jesus spoke three languages. Roman (Latin), Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. According to several sources, including http://www.levitt.com/essays/language.html , many Hebrews of the supposed time of Jesus spoke three or four languages. Its entirely possible that jesus spoke Latin to the Romans, Aramaic to the common people, Hebrew to his fellow Jews, and possibly Greek to those out-of-towners (which, supposedly, he traveled to many areas within Palestine.) This has nothing to do with the New Testament being written in Greek though. Greek at that time was like English or Spanish today. It was the "universal" language spoken by many scholars, writers, and philosphers (a reason why the entire bible was later translated into Greek.) Just as later on, Latin was the universal language (the main reason the bible was translated into Latin.) Yes, perhaps there may have been some misinterpretations or mistakes, but after all... the Bible was written by humans. It was inspired, not dictated (in my belief atleast.) Thus there is always room for mistake. That does not refute the Bible, claiming it false. it just leaves room for possible human error. Even if the Bible was written in Aramaic, that would be useless. It would then have been translated into Greek, leaving room for error, then Latin, room for error, and then all the languages of the world, room for error. THEN there are the human errors of self-interpretation! This is why there are so many versions of the Bible. So many editions. The New American Bible, the Internation Bible, King James Bible, ect. The fact that the Bible was written in Greek, a 'universal' language, so to speak, back then, means nothing but the fact that the writers of the New Testament wanted the text to last and to be translatable by many educated scholars around the known 'western' world. The Bible was written by men, and men are not perfect (or atleast i believe so.) So, if i have not answered your question, although it is impossible to truely know why it was written in Greek and not Aramaic, I think it was so educated people who could read and write Greek could read the Gospels (and Letters and Acts and Revelations.) Yes, why wasnt it written in Aramaic, the commoner's language? Well, perhaps they werent capable of reading or writing, only speaking Aramaic. I do

*************
M*W: You're wrong. Jesus didn't exist, so he didn't speak any language whatsoever! Be that as it may, Greek may have been a "universal" language at the time Jesus existed, but then Jesus never existed.
Click to expand...
 
To make this argument, you must first prove he never existed. I cannot prove he existed, and you cannot prove he didnt exist. So you cannot make that argument. This dicussion is, IF JESUS EXISTED, WHY WAS HIS STORY WRITTEN IN GREEK, WHEN HE HIMSELF SPOKE ARAMAIC, not DID JESUS EXIST. If you want to argue that, take it somewhere else, but that argument is as easily resolved as the "There are no Absolutes" argument...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top