Jakob and James

[Chris Weimer]

You do believe the apostles were Israeli Jews, do you not ? They certainly were not Greek.

I don't believe in the apostles as was written of them. And I certainly don't believe that these apostles from Palestine wrote the New Testament.

Have you read of the recent discovery of James's Ossuary of the first century ? It has an Aramaic inscription ,"Yaqob akhi d'Yeshua Bar Yosip". -"Jacob brother of Yeshua son of Joseph." Same spelling as the Peshitta for our Lord's brother.

I've also read that it was forged, that Golan had forgery tools in his house, and that he is currently on trial and facing jailtime for it.

Read Josephus' testimony in his introduction and Antiquities 20,11,2. He wrote all his works in Aramaic and had them translated into Greek. He wrote that the people of Palestine did not know Greek and would not learn it, as it was undesireable for them to learn the languages of Gentiles.He knew of two or three men fluent in Greek, and he himself had studied it and was a very learned Pharisee and priest.Yet he said he was not fluent in that language.

However, the isn't the 'historical Jesus" and his "disciples" or "apostles" from Galilee, a bilingual area which you're confusing with Iudaea, which in effect you're right that Iudaea tried to remain as Semitic as possible leading up to their destruction in 70 CE.

That has been pretty well established. There is no other first century historian that contradicts Josephus' testimony
on this point. If the Jews of Palestine did not understand Greek, how would they have written the NT in Greek and to whom would they have written it ? It doesn't take a nuclear
physicist to figure this out. The NT would have been written in the language of the writers and their audience. It was later translated into Greek, even as The LXX and Josephus' works were.

Josephus' works weren't "later translated" into Greek. He had them authored into Greek for his audience: Rome. And then again, Galilee was a bilingual area (and stop using Palestine, the place hadn't existed yet).

Aramaic does sometimes transliterate words from Greek and Latin, especially names, such as "Petrus" , for "Petros" in Acts 1:13 and 1 Peter 1:1;2 Peter 1:1. Why is that useless ? Simeon Kapha had preached to some Gentiles and they received his message. They called him "Petros".The Aramaic preserves that in three places.

I hadn't even mentioned this. This is useless here. But then again, it would indicated the predominance of the Graecian culture on the NT, also by their coinage of the term euaggelion.

Sorry, but the Greek is nothing but a translation. If you want evidence, I can provide plenty. If you want only to assert your position and support it by asking questions, then you reveal the lack of evidence to support your position.

First you have to properly destroy my evidence, which you utterly failed to do so without resorting to circumstantial speculation.

Kindest regards,

Chris