[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Did Jesus Speak Greek?
This is in response to an append by BIll Kish in which he asserts that
Jesus probably did not speak Greek and that therefore the Gospels,
being written in Greek, could be potentailly misleading in
their renderings (I think that's what Bill meant -- sorry if I'm
taking the point too far). Now that I have a little time to
respond to this specific item, I want to do so. I think there is
a very strong case to believe that Jesus knew and probably did teach
in Greek. Here are some of the reasons (for a good presentation
of the evidence, with bibliographies, which are always important,
see the recent article by Stanley Porter in the Tyndale Bulletin --
I disagree with his view of Greek tenses to the extent he carries
it but this presentation on Jesus speaking Greek was excellent
IMHO).
1. Business transactions and governmental activities took place
almost certainly in Greek.
2. Galilee has a large amount of evidence, including numismatic,
literary and funerary, for Greek being a common part of everyday
life.
3. Most of the NT writers, all Jews, seem to know the LXX, which,
like Aquila's version of the Greek OT, pre-date Jesus considerably.
4. Jesus dealt with non-Jewish or foreigners whom I would not expect
to know Greek, such as the Roman centurion whose servant is healed
or the Greeks in John 12 or Pilate. While one might argue in any
given case that one of these individuals knew Aramaic, it seems
to ME at least that it would be stretching credibility to
say that every individual Jesus ever came in contact with was
fluent in Aramaic.
5. Since the culture in which Jesus travelled virtually
demanded that one be multi-lingual, a phenomenon quite
common in Europe, there is no clear reason Jesus would not
have known Greek or have been able to converse in it.
Furthermore, since this would have been true of his
followers as well (especially the Galilean fishermen
would have needed Greek for commerce), it seems wholly
reasonable IMHO that Jesus or later Matthew could have
freely switched back and forth between Greek and Aramaic
or Hebrew (since it is also very possible Jews knew
Hebrew in the first century as well as Aramaic).
If you've read or heard Isaiah in both Aramaic from a Targum
and Greek for the LXX, why would it be a problem to take
Jesus' teaching, if it was all in Aramaic, and reproduce
it accurately in Greek when you are already used to that sort
of mental translation on a regular basis. Then again, if
Jesus taught significantly in Greek, the Gospels could simply
be reproducing the same words He spoke. In case it comes to
mind, and I'm sure this will cause a firestorm of
controversy, this creates no difficulty for me in the
sense of an Aramaic Q to a Greek Luke,etc. This is true
not only because the mental translation back and forth
is only hard for us, probably not for them, and also
because I view Q in NT studies much like Q in Star Trek: The
Next Generation. It's an omnipotent invention that becomes
whatever a modern author wishes it to become, and as no
basis empirically.
Ken Litwak
IBM
San Jose, CA