Subject: Luke written in Aramaic or Greek? |
Bible Note: "Some have attacked the credibility of the gospel of Luke, saying there's an error in the geneology of Luke 3:36. The problem isn't with the gospel of Luke, but with the assumption that this gospel was originally written in Greek, because the Aramaic version of Luke does not have this error. BACKGROUND Luke is the only gentile writer among the writers of the scriptures. We're told in Colossians 4:11-14 that he is a gentile, whom Paul mentions in 3 of his letters. Serveral historians tell us he was born in Antioch. Among them was Jerome, who at http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/Npnf2-06-23.htm#P8102_2630446 says "third is Luke, the physician, by birth a native of Antioch, in Syria, whose praise is in the Gospel. He was himself a disciple of the Apostle Paul, and composed his book in Achaia and Boeotia." Luke is also creditted by several people as having translated the Book of Hebrews into Greek. Clement of Alexandria, indeed, assumes a Hebrew original of Hebrews, which was translated into Greek by Luke. (see Bk. VI. chap. 14), but Eusebius disagreed, saying it was Clement of Rome who translated the Book of Hebrews into Greek. One early writer advocated Luke as the translator of the book of Hebrews based on the idea that the style of the Greek versions of Hebrews and the gospel of Luke was so similar. All of these writers seem to believe Luke knew both Aramaic and Greek. The common language of Syria was Aramaic, but the language of the government was Greek. There's a letter at http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-08/anf08-159.htm by Mara, son of Serapion (c 200-300 AD) in which he talks about how the governmental language in Syria was Greek, but most people there spoke Aramaic, which resulted in their recieving tombstones that they themselves would never be able to read. As a well educated man, there would be a high probability Luke would know both. HISTORIC EVIDENCE * The Syrian Church has traditionally maintained that the gospel of Luke was written in Aramaic. * Origen (c 210 AD) believed Luke to have been written in Greek (See Preface to Translation of Origen on St. Luke , Addressed to Paula and Eustochium at http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/Npnf2-06-23.htm#P8110_2634554 ). Origen also testified to a Hebrew origin to Matthew, so he's not a biased anti-semitic source. * Jerome (c 4th century) also believed in a Greek origin of Luke, calling Luke "competent in Greek". EVIDENCE OF TRANSLATION FROM ARAMAIC TO GREEK In Acts 8:27, there is a man who is called a M'HAIMNA, which can mean one of two things. It can be translated "believer" or "eunuch". The Greek text calls him a eunuch, but "believer" makes more sense given the context. This is a strong sign that the manuscript was translated from Aramaic to Greek, and that the Greek translators picked the wrong choice between the two possibilities. In Acts 11:28 it says... The Greek version says, "a great famine would spread throughout all the WORLD" The Aramaic version says, "a great famine would spread throughout the LAND" The Greek text says the famine was in "all the world". The Aramaic text just says "the land", which could be a local reference to the land of Israel. The context suggests the Aramaic text is the correct reading, since people from one part of the world were able to send help. If the famine were "throughout all the world", as the Greek text says, help could not be sent because everyone would be in trouble. Luke has the same problem as Mark in calling Simon a "leper". Also, the next section deals with Aramaic poetry found in the Aramaic version of Luke not present in the Greek version. Luke 18:25 in the KJV says, "For it is easier for a CAMEL to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God" The word "camel" here appears in the Greek as kamelon and in the Aramaic as GAMLA. The Aramaic word can refer to a camel or it can refer to a large rope. Now if we replace "large rope" in this verse we have, "For it is easier for a LARGE ROPE to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God" which makes a lot more sense and probably what Jesus was REALLY communicating. The Greek text does not try to translate this word, but only transliterates it as "kamelon". Perhaps when it was translated into Greek, they weren't sure which meaning to use, so they simply transliterated it." Part 1 of 2 |
Up | Down View Branch | ID# 10578 | ||
Questions and/or Subjects for Luke | Author | ||
|
billsisson | ||
|
EMILY | ||
|
Makarios | ||
|
Makarios | ||
|
Makarios | ||
|
Doris | ||
|
Doris | ||
|
Leroy | ||
|
Leroy | ||
|
dltlshines | ||
|
Raychel |