Was Paul's Primary Language Greek?

by AGuest 13 Replies latest jw friends

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    To the Household of God, Israel, and all those who go with... may you have peace!

    On occasion I have been directed to post statements that some of the books of the NT (those by Matthew, John, James and Jude, including Hebrews, which was written by John, not Paul) were not originally written in Greek, but Aramaic. The reason most believe that Greek was in fact the original language of the entire NT is because most of what Paul wrote was written in Greek; however, this wasn't because Paul's primary language was Greek; it was because those Paul was sent to were primarily "Greek-speaking." Paul was a Roman, true (the city he was from, Tarsus, was under Roman rule), and the language of Rome at that time was Greek (the Greeks had been the previous world power and so most people spoke Greek; indeed, much of the Roman culture and beliefs had their origins in the Greek culture and beliefs). However, he was educated in the Law in Jerusalem, under Gamaliel.

    In Jerusalem, and particularly in the school of the Law, however, the Jews primarily spoke Hebrew as their first languge. True, a few spoke Greek (merchants, etc., and their households), but doing so was considered as "selling out," per se, so that the majority stuck to Hebrew, particularly when it came to communmicating with one another. Matthew was among these, as was John... as was Paul. Until recently, I was only aware of Matthew and John; however, given a recent discussion on the matter with a dear one on another thread, where I asked that one to be patient, I have now been directed to the following rcorded at Acts 21:37-22:3 with regard to Paul:

    "... as he was about to be led into the soldier's quarters, Paul said to the military commander, 'Am I allowed to say something to you?' He [the commander] said: 'Can you speak Greek?'"

    Now, the fact that the commander asked Paul this indicates that Paul had NOT addressed him in Greek, but some other language. Why is this noteworthy? Because the commander... was a Roman and most probably spoke GREEK. If Greek were Paul's FIRST language, then certainly he would addressed a man of station such as Claudius Lysias, in that man's native tongue. Acts 23:26

    Claudius then asks whether Paul is not in fact an Egyptian, to which Paul responded:

    "I am, in fact, a Jew, of Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no obscure city. So I beg you, permit me to speak to the people."

    So, okay, no big deal... yet. It is what is stated next that is of import:

    "After he gave permission, Paul, standing on the stairs, motion with his hand to the people. When a great silence fell, he addressed them... IN HEBREW LANGUAGE, saying: 'Men, brothers and fathers, hear my defense to you now.' (Well, when they heard he was addressing them IN THE HEBREW LANGUAGE, they kept all the more silent and he said:) 'I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia... BUT EDUCATED IN THIS CITY AT THE FEET OF GAMALIEL, instructed ACCORDING TO THE STRICTNESS OF THE ANCESTRAL LAW...'"

    This should be enough to help us understand what Paul's first language was, that it was Hebrew and not Greek. But it is Paul's words at Acts 26:14, as recorded by Luke, that make it clear:

    "And when we had all fallen to the ground I heard a voice say to me IN THE HEBREW LANGUAGE, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?'"

    The word from my Lord, dear ones, and so the TRUTH, is that certain books of the NT were in fact originally written in Aramaic (Hebrew) and later translated to Greek. In order to be "consistent" (and "decrease opportunity for [further] confusion") the canon compilers chose to include ONLY the Greek versions, rather than both the Greek AND Hebrew versions. Both of which exist today.

    I have shared this truth with you, just as it was given me by the Holy Spirit, my Lord, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH, Son and Christ of the MOST Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies... in a manner for those who need to see it in writing. May you now have ears to hear... and put faith in... the Spirit when HE speaks.

    I bid you all peace!

    YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

    SA

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    AGuest/Shelby..

    As a Documentory and Learning channel Fan..

    I stay up late watching Forensic Detectives uncover the Past..

    Thats what you have done in your post..

    Very entertaing and educational..

    Well done Shelby!

    .................

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    Paul was a jew, a pharasee (SP?) and as such his first language was hebrew, he was also a Roman citizen and that MAY have entailed some greek learning.

    We know that he was the "apostle to the gentiles" so unless the gentiles were hebrew speaking then Jesus sent the wrong guy ! LOL !

    Its all great to speculate about this, that and they other thing, but were do you start or stop?

    We are getting into WT territory here where they claim that the bible is the unaltered word of God and at the same time say that "jehovah" was removed from the NT by the copyists , ie: altered.

    You can't have it both ways and unless there is some proof about this speculation, in this case that Paul didn't speak/write Greek, than all it is is specualtion.

    In ALL the 1000's of manuscripts and parchments found there is nothing to idicate that any were originally WRITTEN in greek, even though the majority were probablu passed down orally in aramaic.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    Hello, dear PSacramento... and peace to you!

    Paul was a jew, a pharasee (SP?) and as such his first language was hebrew, he was also a Roman citizen and that MAY have entailed some greek learning. Agreed,as to the Hebrew part. The Greek part is addressed below (and it's spelled "pharisee")...

    We know that he was the "apostle to the gentiles" so unless the gentiles were hebrew speaking then Jesus sent the wrong guy ! LOL ! Since he was sent to the nations (gentiles)... and the nations spoke Greek (as did some of the Jews; however, most of the Jews spoke Hebrew, but he wasn't sent to them)... Paul would have had to know a bit more than "some" Greek.

    Its all great to speculate about this, that and they other thing, but were do you start or stop? It's not really up to me. Folks ask questions. The Spirit responds. They can't hear the Spirit... so I am told to share what I hear. So, I guess the answer is "where the Spirit says to start... or stop."

    We are getting into WT territory here where they claim that the bible is the unaltered word of God and at the same time say that "jehovah" was removed from the NT by the copyists , ie: altered. I say neither, that it is unaltered (it is certainly altered, in many instances, which is what Jeremiah prophesied, and the Revelation warned against)... or that it is the word of God (in any manner or on any level). How are we getting into WT territory?

    You can't have it both ways and unless there is some proof about this speculation, in this case that Paul didn't speak/write Greek, than all it is is specualtion. I think you may have misunderstood me. I never stated that Paul didn't speak OR write Greek. To the contrary, actually... unless I included a typo somewhere. If so, and you would be kind enough to point it out, I will correct/clarify...

    In ALL the 1000's of manuscripts and parchments found there is nothing to idicate that any were originally WRITTEN in greek, even though the majority were probablu passed down orally in aramaic. Okay, now I am confused. The issue here isn't whether any were written in Greek - some where. However, the BELIEF (due to the teachings of the "scholars") is that ALL of the NT was written in Greek... primarily because of the belief that Paul's primary language was Greek... both of which are incorrect.

    Are we misunderstanding each other on something, dear PSacramento? I am not sure, but I am more than willing to clarify anything that seems, well, unclear.

    Again, I bid you the greatest of love and peace!

    YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

    SA

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    Aguest,

    I was just staing an opinion, mine, not refuting yours :)

    Sorry if that wasn't clear.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    One should bear in mind that "Hebrew" in the NT primarily refers to the Aramaic language (e.g. John 19:13, 17), and in Acts 1:19, Aramaic is referred to as the dialect of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Jesus and the apostles are generally represented as using Aramaic (Mark 3:17, 5:41, 7:34, Matthew 5:22, John 1:42, Acts 9:36, etc.), and Hebrew was mainly a literary language and not a language learned in first language acquisition. The reference in Acts 26:14 is thus probably to Aramaic and Paul himself draws on Aramaic liturgy in 1 Corinthians 16:22.

    The reason most believe that Greek was in fact the original language of the entire NT is because most of what Paul wrote was written in Greek

    I have not seen any convincing evidence that any part of the NT was written in Hebrew.

  • willyloman
    willyloman

    Was Paul's primary language Greek? No, it was obfuscation.

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    May you have peace!

    One should bear in mind that "Hebrew" in the NT primarily refers to the Aramaic language (e.g. John 19:13, 17), and in Acts 1:19, Aramaic is referred to as the dialect of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Jesus and the apostles are generally represented as using Aramaic (Mark 3:17, 5:41, 7:34, Matthew 5:22, John 1:42, Acts 9:36, etc.), and Hebrew was mainly a literary language and not a language learned in first language acquisition. The reference in Acts 26:14 is thus probably to Aramaic and Paul himself draws on Aramaic liturgy in 1 Corinthians 16:22.

    This is totally correct. I started to be pendantic about it as well, but the Spirit directed me to use the term "Hebrew." So, I did...

    I have not seen any convincing evidence that any part of the NT was written in Hebrew.

    You're a pretty reasonable person. I will say it to you as my Lord first asked me: "Do you really think, child, that the letter to the Hebrews... was written to such ones in Greek? What would be the purpose of that... and how would such ones [who spoke Hebrew (Aramaic)] have understood what was written to them? Would it not have required a translation forthem? It would. But it did not occur that way, child. It was the opposite, child."

    And so, I thought about what he asked/told me on the matter... and it went from there. He told me of the other writings (those by Matthew, John, Peter, James and Jude) and reminded me of the language spoken by my Lord and the 12... and to whom the 12 were sent. He reminded me of the dispute between the Hebrew-speaking widows... and the Greek-speaking widows. Why should we assume that it was all in Greek? Because that is what men have told us? Okay, I can see where, given no other alternative, that would be the way to go.

    I have been given another alternative, however, from my Lord, the Spirit... and I gotta go with that, as he has never steered me wrong or lied to me, yet. I totally understand if that's a little much for some to grasp, but it is the truth. Given your reasonable, I think his initial question should at least start on the path to investigating the matter... as it did me.

    I bid you peace, dear Leolaia!

    YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

    SA

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    Deae PSacto... I hear you. I wasn't sure, actually, so thanks for clarifying!

    Peace to you!

    Your servant and a slave of Christ,

    SA

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine

    dayyum! baby jesus just spanked Leo.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit