Further Proof Jesus spoke Greek

[Alive]

@Gandalf what is your assessment of Brenton's LXX?

 

[Bluedragon]

Which is why I was discussing the kissing up to power basically amongst those Jewish leaders. If you wanted to be important, you had to deal with Rome and the Roman Empire. And if you didn't want to spend all of your time at the kiddie table, rather than having more influence than that, then why wouldn't you want to speak Latin. So Jesus before Pilate I would at least presume would have been in Latin, if not Greek, but if Jesus was only brought before a Jewish trial only, that would have been different.

I concur .....the record would be in Latin. Most likely the audible trial. It's not a true jury trial ......one Judge and Executioner ....Who cares whether or not the crowd understands? But that swings to the idea that activists for the Priest and Temple easiyl swayed the opinion by lieing in the transation ?

 

[Gandalf]

I concur .....the record would be in Latin. Most likely the audible trial. It's not a true jury trial ......one Judge and Executioner ....Who cares whether or not the crowd understands? But that swings to the idea that activists for the Priest and Temple easiyl swayed the opinion by lieing in the transation ?

Yea they could get away with a lot, and tell the Jewish populace what they wanted. Only they could and would not anticipate the rise of Christianity to come. With that everything changed.

 

[Gandalf]

@Gandalf what is your assessment of Brenton's LXX?

I own a Zondervan version of it, from the Regency Reference Library version, actually. My version is as such a Greek, English, Interlinear version of the book. I wouldn't want a version that didn't have the Greek included, if they publish an English only version. I wanted to look at differences between the Septuagint and the Hebrew. the Septuagint was originally only a translation of the five books of the Torah, with many other Jews coming forwards piecemeal to translate the rest of the OT. By using Midrash, as a whole, they individually spiritualized the passages predicting the coming of the Messiah, but changed an awful lot of other things as well. I only used it for limited research, such as looking at it at Ezekiel 28: where it changed the nine gems, into more than nine, etc., being curious at things so changed.

However this Brenton translation was originally published in 1844, with many errors, which haven't been corrected since. brenton left out verses, and changed verses such as in Job, taking out Leviathan, and Behemoth, replacing Leviathan with a whale, etc.., You can look on Amazon for all of the one star review complaints. However, since I wanted it for limited use, to see what else other than Messianic passages had been updated via Midrash, to see how accurate, or not, other material had been treated by it's many authors, and thus didn't look at a lot of passages other complained about.

And if I had done a study on it's Torah alone, I could have assessed how accurate it's treatment as a whole might have been. But because I only made limited use of it, to again, for example to see that major departure in Eze 28:, etc.., that was pretty much all I did, was look for departures from the Hebrew, rather than look into all of the errors, including missing verses Brenton is accused of. But it doesn't have a lot of competition, so I'd buy a copy if I were you, and compare it with online versions to look at errors and departures, and compare them. A hard copy is always usefull.

 

[EarlyActs]

I have never believed in the Aramaic Supremacy Nonsense that Jesus exclusively spoke Aramaic. This video is over 2 hours in length, and have never watched the entire video yet. But I still like to post it, because it hits hard early on on just how Greek Jewish Culture was, by the time of Christ.

There's no supremacy about it. Foreign powers knew that breaking language would break the people. They learned Aramaic by force, or Greek as needed, but the Aramaic started clear back in the Babylonian captivity, Dan 2+.