What language did Jesus speak?

[Buddha Dharma]

Saying Jesus did not speak modern Hebrew is about as insightful as saying Shakespeare did not speak modern English.

That is a fair point, I grant.

Although Greek was the language of Diaspora Jewry, it is much less certain to what extent Greek was spoken in Judea. Even Josephus who was highly educated stated that he wrote in Aramaic and had others translate what he wrote into Greek because he lacked facility in that language.

Do you have a reference on Josephus? I'm not doubting your education Rabbi, I would just like to look at it. It may be you change my mind on some things here.

By the way, there is no such animal as Masoretic Hebrew.

There is what scholars call Masoretic Hebrew, which is Hebrew as it had become when the Masoretic Text was compiled.

Also I would point out that only about 5% of the Dead Sea Scrolls align with the Septuagint.

I would like to see links on this too. It's a common claim of Christian scholars that the Dead Sea Scrolls align much more with the LXX, but I don't doubt that could be theologically motivated.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

What makes you so certain? He is recorded as bending down and writing in the dust.

Never says anyone could make out what he said, though.

im certain he knew some things, he was pretty bright by all accounts, well I think so because his sayings were that of a intelligent man.

I was rereading Mark for a book I'm writing. I was amazed at how Mark portrays him as utterly incompetent. I'm not sure if he meant it that way or not. The parables tend to be about gardening or farming and the Sower is usually pretty dense and yet wants a high yield harvest. Jesus, pumpkin, "write what you know".

And we can assume Judas, as the disciples treasurer, was an educated scribe or bookkeeper.

He was accused of being a thief, IIRC. That means he only had to know more numbers than the rest of them.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Oral tradition reigned in the ancient world, so not having Jesus write anything doesn't mean we can't get an idea about him. Greek historians wrote things sometimes 800-1000 years after an event, such as on the Trojan War. They relied entirely on tradition to do so, and I doubt many people would be as keen to reject what they say.

Sometimes tradition is all we have from the ancients. They prized tradition and had an admiration for it that modern people might find hard to understand.

Some cultures like certain tribes in the Americas thought a story or account lost it's sacred dimension if written down. Modern people have lost touch with this ancient love for tradition.

Some of the accounts about Caesar Augustus are no less miraculous than those of Jesus, which shows how much Hellenist authors also enjoyed embellishment. Are we going to suggest we know nothing of Octavian? I hope not...

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Oral tradition reigned in the ancient world, so not having Jesus write anything doesn't mean we can't get an idea about him. Greek historians wrote things sometimes 800-1000 years after an event, such as on the Trojan War. They relied entirely on tradition to do so, and I doubt many people would be as keen to reject what they say.

And a simple war about someone's girlfriend being kidnapped evolved into a saga about gods and monsters and semidivine heroes, etc.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

And a simple war about someone's girlfriend being kidnapped evolved into a saga about gods and monsters and semidivine heroes, etc.

He he. Hera can be a fickle Queen of the Devas. I sincerely hope that maybe she's found Buddhism because of Zeus.

About my historical point though. A Trojan War still happened. There's a city now under the sea, exactly where we'd have expected Troy to be. The ancients may have embellished a bit, as I think they did with Jesus- but they didn't typically invent figures and events outright.

What would be their motivation to do so?

 

[fallingblood]

Yes I know this is an old thread, as I've been gotten onto about this before, but I see a good thread and I can't resist.

I think it's likely Jesus spoke Greek, Aramaic, and maybe even some Latin. Jews in his day were usually educated in Greek, but not Latin, which was for the elite. Most people still would have known a few smatterings of Latin like humans pick up any language by hearing and inquiring. I doubt Jesus spoke modern Hebrew.

I don't know the full details of this- but as I understand it, Masoretic Hebrew doesn't go back to the second temple era. In fact, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Targums far more commonly agree with Greek translation in the Septuagint than the Masoretic.

I'm one who is for the idea that Jesus spoke some Greek. He probably wasn't fluent in Greek, as there was no reason for him to be fluent. But because he was so close to large cities where Greek would have been the major language, to cities that were Hellenistic, its likely he would have had a passing knowledge of it.

Aramaic would have been certain. That was the lingua franca of Palestine. It would have been the language of Jews in Palestine. So he definitely spoke it.

There is little reason to think he spoke Latin though. Latin was a language for Rome. Palestine, while technically part of the Roman Empire, still operated separately. There were Hellenistic cities in Palestine, but there is little to no evidence of a Latin influence. And Jesus wasn't dealing with the elite in anyway. So he simply wouldn't have needed it.

I also have to make a disagreement about Jews in his day being educated in Greek. That may have been true for Jews in the Diaspora, but not for Jews in Palestine. Jews in Palestine, who for the most part did not have formal education, would have been educated at home (or in small groups) in Aramaic, the language of Palestine.

It is possible that Jesus knew Hebrew. Hebrew was a dying language at that time, or a language that wasn't used commonly, but Jesus does seem to be a bit more educated than the normal Palestinian Jew. And among some educated Jews, Hebrew was still being used.

 

[roger1440]

Saying Jesus did not speak modern Hebrew is about as insightful as saying Shakespeare did not speak modern English.

Although Greek was the language of Diaspora Jewry, it is much less certain to what extent Greek was spoken in Judea. Even Josephus who was highly educated stated that he wrote in Aramaic and had others translate what he wrote into Greek because he lacked facility in that language. Outside urban areas the exposure to, the need for, languages other than Aramaic was much less.

By the way, there is no such animal as Masoretic Hebrew. Also I would point out that only about 5% of the Dead Sea Scrolls align with the Septuagint.

"I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greek language although I have long accustomed myself to speak our own language, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness: for our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations" (Antiquities of the Jews, 20:1:2)

 

[blü 2]

I've been wondering; If Jesus spoke Aramaic or some other dialect, then everything had to be translated into Greek. Add to that the very real possibility that several of the people that heard Jesus speak must have gone off and repeated the stories orally. The sayings of Jesus could have been spread orally in several different languages. I would think that at least some of the stories must have been "creatively" repeated and very different than the original words spoken by Jesus. Now, of course we have the written Gospels based on what is presumed to be the "original" Greek manuscripts. Yet, are even they, merely a translation?

As far as my reading goes, none of the NT texts is a translation, not even Matthew, which is sometimes said to be the Greek version of an Aramaic original.

Apart from being in Greek (the language of commerce and administration in Judea) , another feature of the NT texts is that none of their authors ever met an historical Jesus, hence were not present at any of the 'sermons', nor witnesses to any of the claimed miracles. The letters of Paul were, it seems to expert opinion, written in the 50s CE, while the earliest gospel, Mark, was written in 75 CE or shortly after, Matthew and Mark were written in the mid-80s and John in the mid-90s.

 

[Colt]

I've been wondering; If Jesus spoke Aramaic or some other dialect, then everything had to be translated into Greek. Add to that the very real possibility that several of the people that heard Jesus speak must have gone off and repeated the stories orally. The sayings of Jesus could have been spread orally in several different languages. I would think that at least some of the stories must have been "creatively" repeated and very different than the original words spoken by Jesus. Now, of course we have the written Gospels based on what is presumed to be the "original" Greek manuscripts. Yet, are even they, merely a translation?

IMOP Jesus would have spoken Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew fluently. In that age and in the crossroads of trade for the world even the common man needed to have some working acquittance with several languages. The Apostles at Pentecost spoke their version of the Gospel in different tongues to the masses then present in Jerusalem for Passover.

"In the days of Jesus three languages prevailed in Palestine: The common people spoke some dialect of Aramaic; the priests and rabbis spoke Hebrew; the educated classes and the better strata of Jews in general spoke Greek. The early translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek at Alexandria was responsible in no small measure for the subsequent predominance of the Greek wing of Jewish culture and theology. And the writings of the Christian teachers were soon to appear in the same language. The renaissance of Judaism dates from the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. This was a vital influence which later determined the drift of Paul's Christian cult toward the West instead of toward the East." UB 1955

 

[Soapy]

I've been wondering; If Jesus spoke Aramaic or some other dialect, then everything had to be translated into Greek. Add to that the very real possibility that several of the people that heard Jesus speak must have gone off and repeated the stories orally. The sayings of Jesus could have been spread orally in several different languages. I would think that at least some of the stories must have been "creatively" repeated and very different than the original words spoken by Jesus. Now, of course we have the written Gospels based on what is presumed to be the "original" Greek manuscripts. Yet, are even they, merely a translation?

Scripturally, Jesus CHRIST could speak any language.

Being filled with the spirit of God meant that the spirit of language would also be in him.

Languages is not really such a hard thing to know or master. We can see even today in theses enlightened times that the whole world can speak and understand ‘ENGLISH’(?!). What is language such that this can be done?

Many of the Apostles anointed with the spirit of God at Pentecost were also given the ability to understand and speak even at that time, unknown languages (possibly what was nicknamed ‘Tongues’ since very few aside from the speaker knew the language and the populous needed another such person to interpret for them)

 

[Betho_br]

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself Luke 24:27

In Luke 24:27, when the author of the Gospel used the verb "διερμήνευσεν", this verb was used in these passages, in addition to Paul's writings:

Legum allegoriarum 3:87 Philo of Alexandria

… for the name of Isaac, being interpreted, means laughter of soul, and delight, and joy.

Quod deus sit immutabilis 1:144 Philo of Alexandria

which is the royal road for those who partake of the faculty of seeing who are called Israel; for the interpretation of the name Edom, is "earthly," and he labors with all earnestness, and by every means in his power, and by threats, to hinder them from this road, and to make it pathless and impracticable for ever.

Timaios 3:3

"It is fitting for one who is competing in the contest to do so with enthusiasm, just as I myself have suffered for the city through which we have passed. For I would willingly listen to an account of the contests in which the city is engaged, those in which she competes against other cities, just as she would be expected to do, having entered into a war, and in waging it, discharging the duties incumbent on education and nurture, both in practical activities and in interpreting words, in relation to each of the cities. So, gentlemen, Critias and Hermocrates, these things..." ) Plato's Works ~ A work nearing completion.

2 Maccabees 1:36

"The people around Nehemiah called this substance 'naphthar,' which is interpreted as purification, but it is commonly called 'naphthai' by many."

Acts 9:36

In Joppa, there was a disciple named Tabitha, who was also called Dorcas. She was full of good works and acts of charity that she did.

This means that Jesus translated the Hebrew Scriptures, so Jesus spoke at least two languages, Hebrew and another, which I assume to be Aramaic.