SeekGod.ca Discussion Forum

I was having a heated discussion about this very thing and the person told me I had made a big mistake in mentioning the sign of the cross in my defence of the NT being written in Greek as she said that aramaic was just a slightly different dialect than hebrew and both languages were very similar. So I too would like to know why it was not mentioned. Was it that similar to hebrew?

I think it's possible that the languages on the sign was partly language usage oriented as well as practicality. Greek was the common language for all. Latin was the legal language for Romans, and they would have known Greek. Hebrew was the language of the Temple, for the Jewish leadership, although it could be suggested, many did not know how to read Hebrew, which is why the LXX had been penned. But Greek was the language of commerce and therefore the common people would have known it.

Look at what was said about Jesus first.

Joh 7:14 Now about the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the temple, and taught.
Joh 7:15 And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?

They knew as Jewish leadership, but thought an 'average' person would not have known what He knew, including the Hebrew Scriptures.

Next, lets look at what the apostles were viewed as and what languages they were possibly given in Acts 2:

We should take a look at the use of languages in first century Judea, listed below (parenthesis) which are a few of the possible languages spoken in those regions at that time. Please keep in mind that the list is by no means comprehensive:
Acts 2 (written approx 63 ce)

...3. And tongues as of fire appeared to them, being distributed, and it sat on each one of them.
4 And they were all filled of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave ability to them to speak.
5 And Jews were living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation of those under the heaven.
6 But this sound occurring, the multitude came together and were confounded, because they each heard them speaking in his own dialect.
7 And all were amazed and marveled, saying to one another, Behold, are not all these, those speaking, Galileans?
8 And how do we hear each in our own dialect in which we were born,
9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites (Persian/Iranian dialects), and those living in Mesopotamia (Turkish dialects, Syrian, Persian, Akkadian, Aramaic), both Judea (Hebrew,Aramaic,Greek) and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia (Turkish dialects, Greek)
10 both Phrygia and Pamphylia (Turkish dialects,Greek), Egypt (Arabic, Greek, Aramaic), and the regions of Libya over against Cyrene (Latin,Greek, Aramaic, possibly Turkish dialect), and the temporarily residing Romans, (Latin,Greek) both Jews and proselytes,
11 Cretans (Greek, Aramaic) and Arabians (Arabic, Greek, Aramaic); in our own languages we hear them speaking the great deeds of God?

In amongst all the dialects--and there were many from many different regions, the common denominator was Greek for the common people. Being fisherman from Galilee--and the apostle were mostly from Galilee, Acts 1:1, and other, where it becomes noteworthy that they were recognised as Galileans by their speech and possibly pronunciation was affected by the contact with gentile/greek neighbors. Matthew 4, 26 and other.

Aramaic had many dialects. The sign above the cross covered the most used and 'read' languages, not just what may have been spoken. You can read a bit about the different dialects here: http://www.seekgod.ca/gibson.htm#aramaic

The aramaic alphabet and the hebrew alphabet do not match, incidentally, which needs to be understood for those thinking in terms of Hebrew primacy or aramaic primacy of the NT.

And of course, God knew the controversy of His Word which would take place, when people wanted to overturn the Scriptures and try to use any angle they can come up with to try to overturn what the Scriptures say.

Those who reject the Greek NT as sound doctrine also reject many more things. Eventually for some, they end up not only rejecting the NT, but Jesus, as being a pagan god instead of knowing Jesus Christ, who is God manifest in the flesh, Savior and Lord.

Another interesting thought is that most of the quotes in the NT of the Old seem to use the Septuagint rather than the hebrew text of the pharisees.

Also, the Hebrew text is specifically different at the specific verses quoted in the NT which are considered obscure enough that most do not notice.

I personally believe that the Septuagint is an Accurate Greek Translation of a "now lost" Hebrew OT. I suspect that they altered their OT after they learned of the NT quotes. they only changed those verses most jews dont know.

They explain in their Talmud that 70 jews DELIBERATELY mistranslated the OT into Greek to mislead the gentiles. Keep in mind that the Talmud was not written until the 4th Century century. why do we assume that the very leaders which Jesus called Children of Satan, would translate Gods Word Accurately for gentiles.

They admit even today that they lie to gentiles and the Talmud labels it a Mitzvah.

I have found out that copies of the Septuagint have been found in Qumran as well as Hebrew fragments which follow the Septuagint reading as opposed to the Rabbinic one.

Food for thought!

(01-29-2010 03:06 PM)Scotchman Wrote: [ -> ]Another interesting thought is that most of the quotes in the NT of the Old seem to use the Septuagint rather than the hebrew text of the pharisees.

Also, the Hebrew text is specifically different at the specific verses quoted in the NT which are considered obscure enough that most do not notice.

I personally believe that the Septuagint is an Accurate Greek Translation of a "now lost" Hebrew OT. I suspect that they altered their OT after they learned of the NT quotes. they only changed those verses most jews dont know.

They explain in their Talmud that 70 jews DELIBERATELY mistranslated the OT into Greek to mislead the gentiles. Keep in mind that the Talmud was not written until the 4th Century century. why do we assume that the very leaders which Jesus called Children of Satan, would translate Gods Word Accurately for gentiles.

They admit even today that they lie to gentiles and the Talmud labels it a Mitzvah.

I have found out that copies of the Septuagint have been found in Qumran as well as Hebrew fragments which follow the Septuagint reading as opposed to the Rabbinic one.

Food for thought!

Actually, the LXX was not used in by the NT writers, nor did Jesus quote from it. I have explained this in other threads. There is no "lost" Hebrew translation. The only ones are the two mas texts - ben Chayyim and ben Asher. The originals are long gone [decayed/disintegrated] and the Sept was translated from the Mas - The first five books by the Jews and the other books by unknown translators.

If you are going to accuse the Jews of such a heinous act of mistranslation, then please provide some proof!