Hot answers tagged

27

There are specific reasons that can be identified in each instance, but the three you mention share one important feature: they are Semitic (i.e. Aramaic or Hebrew) words amid the (otherwise) Greek New Testament. The most basic reason for an English translation to transliterate1 rather than translate these terms, then, is to reproduce what a Greek reader ...


15

There are two basic theories here. The first is that the crowd misheard Jesus. The second is that they purposefully twisted his words to mock him. Commentators are fairly evenly split on which option is more probable. Misheard In the first view, the crowd was at a significant enough distance that they could not hear Jesus clearly. Additionally, those in ...


10

If the narrative is followed from verse 35, one will note that the Roman soldiers were present throughout, they “sitting down they watched him”. Note not all but “some of them that stood there…said, this man calleth for Elias”. Spoken by a Roman soldiers that did not know Aramaic. Matthew 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots:...


8

"Eli Eli lama sabachthani?" is Greek transliteration of Aramaic words. If it was Hebrew, then azabthani would have been used instead of Aramaic word "Sabachthani." Check this link for Hebrew NT of Matthew 27. http://www.bayithamashiyach.com/Matthew_27.pdf In Hebrew, "Eli Eli lama sabachthani?" will become "Eliy ‘Eliy lamah `azab’taniy?" Here is an ...


8

It might be helpful for you to research the Septuagint, which is also referred to as LXX being the Roman numeral for seventy as it is traditionally believed that seventy Jewish elders performed the Hebrew to Greek translation in about 300 B.C. Many Jews, in the days of Christ on earth, would have read this Greek translation of the Hebrew scripture. It is ...


7

Acts 25:14, "it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks," is a direct quotation from a play by Euripides (d. 406 BCE), the Bacchae, with Jesus speaking instead of the Greek god Dionysus. Euripides had used the plural ('pricks') for reason of meter, and Acts uses the same plural, although it would normally be a singular. In his own epistles, Paul never ...


5

In the case of "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani" (Mark 15,34) the Aramaic is needed to explain the misunderstanding in verse 35 when some of the crowd think He is calling for Elijah. The mistake is explicable only because of the similarity between the sound Eloi and the sound Elijah. In the case of "Talitha kuom" (Mark 5, 41) the Aramaic phrase seems to have ...


4

There are several evidences that New Testament was written in Aramaic. First century Israel spoke Aramaic. Not Greek. Jewish Historian and Priest Josephus tells us that Greek wasn't spoken in first century Israel and also "the extreme rarity" in terms of a Jew knowing Greek. Josephus wrote: "I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of ...


3

There are several explanations for this, but no consensus. These include: 1) He often spoke Greek; 2) He did on this occasion; 3) agape and phileo are synonymous anyway : 4) the conversation was in Aramaic and two different Aramaic words for love (chav and racham) were used; and 5) the conversation was allegorical and represented Peter's dawning ...


3

An alternative, and somewhat simpler, explanation is that many of those present knew very well that Jesus was quoting the opening line of the 22nd Psalm; but through their willful blindness, determined to avoid seeing that Psalm's fulfillment manifested in the tableau in front of them, they allowed Satan to fill their heads with a suitably distracting (...


3

As already mentioned, there were Romans who were present at the Crucifixion, so its possible that the phrase "Some of those who stood there..." in v. 47 is referring to the Romans. Also, it could refer to Hellenized Jews. These are the Jews who lived outside of Palestine in other parts of the Roman Empire. They usually did not speak Hebrew or Aramaic. ...


3

The hypothesis of an Aramaic original for the New Testament holds that the original text of the New Testament was not written in Greek, as held by the majority of scholars, but in the Aramaic language, which was the primary language of Jesus and his Twelve Apostles. A traditional view Papias probably held early in the second century is that Matthew was ...


2

The Hebrew Bible (as a whole) had only been translated into one language, Greek (Koine), by 30CE. This translation is known as the Greek Septuagint (Greek: "seventy"), or "LXX", the Roman numeral for "70". Hypothetically, if it had been translated into more languages than Greek, such as Aramaic, then we don't have any mention ...


2

Jesus was quoting Aramaic. Not Septuagint. Aramaic was the spoken language of first century Israel. According to first century Jewish historian, Josephus, Jews didn't speak Greek in first century Israel. He wrote: "I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language, although I ...


2

The following is not meant to be an answer specific to the question, but may help in some research on the subject: The Syro Malabar and Syro Malankara rites of the Catholic Church in Kerala, India, which attribute their origin to St Thomas the Apostle, used to have their liturgy in Syrian language upto the 1950s after which the liturgy adopted the native ...


2

Daniel Chapter 2 from the second part of verse 4 through the end of Chapter 7 is in written in the Aramaic language and with same script as the Hebrew scriptures. There are several less substantial occurences of Aramaic in the Hebrew scriptures detailed here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Aramaic. All of the Hebrew scriptures are written with the ...


1

There are two versions of the Aramaic Scriptures - the Targumim and the Peshitta. There are probably many here more knowledgeable than I here, but I think that the Targumim were completed about a century before Christ, and the Peshitta about a century or so afterwards. The Targumim are written in a Hebrew script and includes only the Old Testament, whereas ...


1

That Saul had some familiarity with Greek literature is shown by a number of passages, for example: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. (Acts 17:28) (this sermon, given in Athens, would have been delivered in Greek) So there's no issue with the idea that Jesus would ...


1

Perhaps the expression has a significance in their memory. Consider that Jesus' disciples, being Jews, were familiar with the Law and Prophets. Perhaps less than the scribes and Pharisees, but of the scribes and Pharisees the gospels mention that they were well versed in the traditions, which they taught as if they were part of the law that God had given ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible