05-01-2013, 10:10 PM
From a historical perspective, imagine if the following was the case: (this is a reversal of the history)
Imagine if the Messiah and the Apostles, and their immediate followers were ethnic Greeks living in an empire controlled by Babylon. Imagine if the Gospel was originally preached in Greek, but in an Aramaic-speaking empire. And imagine if the Apostles wrote epistles to congregations in Babylon, Hatra, Nineveh and Ur of the Chaldeans, instead of the current situation. Imagine that the first converts in those congregations where ethnic Greeks in exile, right from the temples of Zeus and Aphrodite. Imagine the Apostles went to their own people, the Greeks, first. And made them the leaders of the congregation, with ethnic Arameans as a later addition to the fold.
Now imagine that the NT fragments, the oldest ones, were in Aramaic. But with a Greek syntax, and errors showing that they must have been translated from Greek. Word plays that only make sense in the Greek. A/B word scenarios (polysemy), etc.
What language do you suppose those Gospels and Epistles would have been written in? The language of the empire they were sojourners in (Aramaic), or the language of their own people (Greek) ?
Of course, any reasonable person who would bother to examine the evidence and cast aside any prejudice, would conclude that the NT must have been originally written in Greek. Right ?
+Shamasha
Imagine if the Messiah and the Apostles, and their immediate followers were ethnic Greeks living in an empire controlled by Babylon. Imagine if the Gospel was originally preached in Greek, but in an Aramaic-speaking empire. And imagine if the Apostles wrote epistles to congregations in Babylon, Hatra, Nineveh and Ur of the Chaldeans, instead of the current situation. Imagine that the first converts in those congregations where ethnic Greeks in exile, right from the temples of Zeus and Aphrodite. Imagine the Apostles went to their own people, the Greeks, first. And made them the leaders of the congregation, with ethnic Arameans as a later addition to the fold.
Now imagine that the NT fragments, the oldest ones, were in Aramaic. But with a Greek syntax, and errors showing that they must have been translated from Greek. Word plays that only make sense in the Greek. A/B word scenarios (polysemy), etc.
What language do you suppose those Gospels and Epistles would have been written in? The language of the empire they were sojourners in (Aramaic), or the language of their own people (Greek) ?
Of course, any reasonable person who would bother to examine the evidence and cast aside any prejudice, would conclude that the NT must have been originally written in Greek. Right ?
+Shamasha