So you believe that only the Gospels were written in Aramaic, but the rest of the New testament was in Greek?
Three Gods or one? Explain the Trinity.
- Thread starter tantalon
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Luke could very well be in Greek. But the fact is that Aramaic was the literal language of the Jews. Codex has proven that Matthew, Mark's, and John's Gospels were definitely originally done in Aramaic
What language did the first Christians, such as Peter and ...
www.quora.com/What-language-did-the-first...
St Peter's first language should have been Aramaic. He probably was also fluent at Hebrew, and perhaps (to a certain degree) spoke or understood basic Latin. Or even some Greek
This claims Peter knew very little Greek.
www.quora.com/What-language-did-the-first...
St Peter's first language should have been Aramaic. He probably was also fluent at Hebrew, and perhaps (to a certain degree) spoke or understood basic Latin. Or even some Greek
This claims Peter knew very little Greek.
You're right, these sources claim a lot of things.
What they are doing is taking aggregate data and applying it to an individual.
Them saying "most people of the day spoke Aramaic and didn't know Greek" would be like me saying "the average american salary today is $56,000...therefore that person across the street makes $56,000." I can't use data that describes the probable details of an ancient society and then use that as "evidence" that it was the case for the apostles. Who knows, maybe they were a special case. Maybe they learned Greek during the events of Acts. Maybe Paul taught Peter some Greek, and then Peter taught Mark some Greek. You can't make assumptions based off of what you don't know.
To be really honest, this is all a result of the Hebrew-roots cult. Its a bunch of ahistorical nonsense. It is at odds with the 6,000 manuscripts we have preserved today. It is is disagreement with the early church Father's and their comments about the authors of the NT.
AND....there are extraordinary mathematical properties in the structural design of the Greek in the Gospels....it simply could not have been invented or translated from another language. It has God's fingerprint all over it.
What they are doing is taking aggregate data and applying it to an individual.
Them saying "most people of the day spoke Aramaic and didn't know Greek" would be like me saying "the average american salary today is $56,000...therefore that person across the street makes $56,000." I can't use data that describes the probable details of an ancient society and then use that as "evidence" that it was the case for the apostles. Who knows, maybe they were a special case. Maybe they learned Greek during the events of Acts. Maybe Paul taught Peter some Greek, and then Peter taught Mark some Greek. You can't make assumptions based off of what you don't know.
To be really honest, this is all a result of the Hebrew-roots cult. Its a bunch of ahistorical nonsense. It is at odds with the 6,000 manuscripts we have preserved today. It is is disagreement with the early church Father's and their comments about the authors of the NT.
AND....there are extraordinary mathematical properties in the structural design of the Greek in the Gospels....it simply could not have been invented or translated from another language. It has God's fingerprint all over it.
You just want it to be Greek and I get that. But why would simple men who spoke Aramaic write in Greek that is a very difficult language? I don't buy it these simple men wrote in Greek.
@biker
I'll make you a deal. I will read all of these links you have posted if you watch one 3-minute video from YouTube.
Deal?
I promise that I will read it slowly and carefully. I wan't to know where you are coming from. But I also wan't you to listen carefully. Don't worry about the specifics, just try to get a grasp of what the man in the video is saying, ok?
I'll make you a deal. I will read all of these links you have posted if you watch one 3-minute video from YouTube.
Deal?
I promise that I will read it slowly and carefully. I wan't to know where you are coming from. But I also wan't you to listen carefully. Don't worry about the specifics, just try to get a grasp of what the man in the video is saying, ok?
I personally believe we are going to agree to disagree.
I will explain why.
I, like You, once thought everything from the New Testament was originally written in Greek. But it bothered me there were Aramaic words in the Greek. I discovered those Aramaics words are there because there are no Greek words that meant what those Aramaic words meant. That was my first clue that Greek was a translation. From then on, I studied how they made the parchment paper, how they could date it by when each method was used, and by how it was glued and later on was both glued and sewn. I am not trying to convince you of anything because no one could convince me when I felt it was all Greek. First of all, Rome was in power and they spoke Latin. The Greeks were has beens at that time. But Mesopotamia always had their own language. When Eshu was on Earth, it was Aramaic. His own words ELI ELI LAMA SABACHTHANI were said as He was going in and out consciousness before dying is 100% Aramaic!
I understand the Trinity as ONE God in essence/nature, yet three distinct persons who are co-equal: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I don’t claim to fully comprehend this, but I apprehend it.
As a child, I was very confused about the Trinity. I saw God the Father as all powerful, all knowing etc.. and Jesus as inferior to God the Father (junior) yet still very powerful and I thought the Holy Spirit was a bunch of guardian angels. I was one confused child!
As a child, I was very confused about the Trinity. I saw God the Father as all powerful, all knowing etc.. and Jesus as inferior to God the Father (junior) yet still very powerful and I thought the Holy Spirit was a bunch of guardian angels. I was one confused child!
The question is: Are you willing to have a real conversation? Or do you just want to make your point and leave?
I'm fine with either, But I wan't you to answer my question from post #153
Many Christians believe that we humans consist of body, soul and spirit. I am one of those who do, but no one can be dogmatic except to say we have a body and a spirit, certainly. God made us in His image.
If one agrees that we consist of body and spirit, at minimum, then explain where and how that soul and/or spirit resides. We can't.
If I myself exist in at least two parts, then why would I have such a struggle to believe in God in three persons, blessed trinity? And if I can't scientifically prove that I myself have a spirit soul, then how could I expect to explain the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?
Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. Blessed are those who believe without seeing.
If one agrees that we consist of body and spirit, at minimum, then explain where and how that soul and/or spirit resides. We can't.
If I myself exist in at least two parts, then why would I have such a struggle to believe in God in three persons, blessed trinity? And if I can't scientifically prove that I myself have a spirit soul, then how could I expect to explain the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?
Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. Blessed are those who believe without seeing.
I will watch your video. You don't have to go through my copy/paste. Because at this point in the ballgame, it will take a miracle to explain why in Matthew, Mark, and John there are Aramaic words that mean something the Greek have no words that mean the same thing so they had to leave the Aramaic in place during translation.
Ok thank you. This is a video of Chuck Missler showing us the mathematical genius of God within the original text of the Bible. He is a Hebrew wiz and studies subjects such as equidistant letter sequences in the OT, etc. He is a physicist and Bible teacher as well.
This is a clip of the original longer video, I wish I had the full version, but I couldn't find it...but here is the shortened version.