show_no_mercy

So are you trying to argue that, the church in Rome for example, spoke Aramaic? That Paul's letter to the Romans was originally written in Aramaic?

There's no reason why people "interested in the messiah" would want or need to speak and understand Aramaic. It's not like poor Gentiles, who were women, slaves, and otherwise lower class wannabe Christians, would have the resources to go out and learn a second language. They had the LXX, which was considered to be divinely inspired. Greek was the popular language of the empire, Aramaic was not. Gentiles would have no reason to go out and learn Aramaic, especially if they were "not considered wise by [their] day's standards".

If you want to argue for Aramaic primacy, then you should also be arguing for Ebionite primacy, since all of the arguments for Jesus' divinity and virgin birth come from a Greek reading of Hebrew scriptures. The Ebionites weren't restricted to reading the LXX and probably the reason why they were "judaizers".

judge

No I am not trying to argue that.

judge

This might be debated?

The Biblical Antiquities of Philo

show_no_mercy

So you concede, at the least, that Paul's letter to the Romans was written in Greek.

judge

Well I have come to quite a few conclusions during this thread most of which I am keeping to myself , but so far, Paul writing in greek is not one of them.

show_no_mercy

So Paul's letter to the Romans was written in Aramaic, yet the church at Rome could only understand Greek.

Gotcha.

spamandham

Justin Martyr's "Dialog with Trypho", although not written *by* a Jew, was written *for* a Jew.

The writings of Josephus.

The Septuagint.

The works of Philo.

...to name a few.

Further, according to Brittanica, "Other papyri indicate that at least three-fourths of Egyptian Jews had personal names of Greek rather than Hebrew origin." http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...2nd-century-ce

So now, the question is reversed. Aside from scriptural writings, what do we have written in Hebrew in this period and cities?

judge

That calim is debatable at best. Do you have any evidcne that it was written for jews

Josephus himself tells us he translated his own work into greek from the original language. He didn't do this for jews but for others.

A translation from Hebrew. Just, I would argue, as is the greek NT

Not so, or debatable at best. See the link above.

They all seem to have failed.

This doesn't show that jews were writing in greek though.
Not really... all we have for sure is works written by jews in either Hebrew or Aramaic that were later translated into greek.

IamJoseph

I doubt Jesus ever discussed anything with the greeks and romans: we have not seen a single responsa in the entire Gospels of Rome's decree of heresy. this infers that the Gospels and its reportings of Jesus, are Greek/Roman/European.

Most implausable.

This is proof it is far removed by anything Hebrew. The laws were already given, and none can change them - not even God the Father - because of the premise God reflects truth - and truth is not selective and inter-changeable. Further, only Moses can answer what is truth in reference to the Hebrew bible which Moses wrote.

spamandham

It seems clear the target audience is Jews. Is there a reason to suspect otherwise?

But why bother with such a translation, unless there were sufficient numbers of Jews who didn't know Hebrew?

Everything in regards to ancient history is debatable, but that doesn't mean there is good reason to debate it.

I assumed you would summarize as such before I posted. You appear to have an emotional attachment to the idea that Jews didn't assimilate into the Greek culture.

Certainly it does. It shows widespread assimilation into Greek culture.

It's bad form to make a demand on someone else that you are unwilling to comply with yourself.