What language was the Bible written in? New Testament GREEK or ARAMAIC?

On the day of Pentecost when Peter preached, the vast crowd we're puzzled how come they said Peter spoke in his local gailiean accent yet they heard it from their respective own dialects.

Greek isn't the language i thought of, i thought it be hebrew.

The languages of the ancient near east. It can be a complicated web to pick apart when you're learning the history for the first time.

The whole business of the languages spoken in the Persisn, Parthian and Sassanid Empires is fairly hairy as well.

Somehow i never realized until recently that Zoroastrianism had its own liturgical language as well.

Then there's all the scripts - weird and wonderful.

Europe betrayed its Ancestral Root.

Be Filial.

Greeks must Return to Hellenism.

Your videos surely bring a lot of joy to a viewer like me :) Multas gratias ago!

It was Greek, for the very same reason, in the contemporary days world wide things eventually are in English.!

THE NEW TESTMENT IS GREEK . THATS BIBLE

Great film. Thank you.

I thought it was written in ebonics

I have heard of scholars who translate the bible "back" to aramaic to find better translations. Eg the aramaic for "lead us not into temptation" can also be translated into something like "lead us away from/around/somewhere else than temptation". So the "not" works a bit different if that makes sense.
This fits both to the aramaic first idea and the idea that the authors weren't native speakers of Greek

most of the new testment was most likely in greek, as luke john, romans, apostels etc. mark probably most likely could be aramic first, because that book is moslty towards jews, then translated to greek, but we dont know. but bias greek.

Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek koine.

I once used an app to have side-by-side the KJV and a Japanese translation of the Bible. I found Genesis somewhat easy just because it's introducing many basic concepts all humans know, and therefore uses many basic kanji for water, sky, animals, humans, etc.

The bible is great for language learning, especially if you are familiar with it. Even if you aren't, some passages are so simple that it would be easy to read and practice with them (like John chapter 1 or Genesis 1). I read my bible in German, Greek, Latin, a little in Hebrew, as well as my native Spanish and English. It definitely helps. It also helps that it's probably one of, if not the most widely translated book there is. The trinitarian bible society sells bibles online for cheap in dozens of languages :)

Even though Jesus and his followers’s native tongue was Aramaic Greek was the lingua Franca of the eastern half of the Roman Empire and a lot of his followers came from various backgrounds in the near east, North Africa and southern Europe. You had semites Jews Arabs and Phoenicians Amazigh Ethiopians Greeks Roman maybe some thracians I am not sure I think most of his followers initially were mostly Jewish if I am not mistaken.

His name in Aramaic was Yeshua which is short for yehoshua but I did some basic research and yehoshua is the Hebrew version of the Aramaic Isho. In Arabic his name is Issa but Arab Christians call him Yasu’a. I am not entirely sure .

ARAMAIC

"Literary excellence" is one of line reasoning for the Aramaic Primacy - which in my opinion is of second order.
The real thrust of the Aramaic Primacy lies in polysemous Aramaic words. also called moles.
These are Aramaic words with more than one meaning, where:
The sentence "feels" awkward and not completely sensical because, the scribes chose the incorrect meaning out of the
plurality of meanings of a polysemous Aramaic word when translating from the original Aramaic into Greek.

E.g. Mark 9:49 reads "And everything will be salted with fire…”
The Aramaic mole in this case is a melakh which can mean “salt” or “destroy”.
When translating from the original Aramaic, the scribes erroneously opted for “salt” instead of “destroy".
This is because “Salted with fire” sounds a bit off while “destroyed with fire” sounds more fitting, sensical and intuitive.

Very cool. Sounds like Lukie is going to learn The Targums - Aramaic Bible.

So Greek then was what English is now, basically...

the anti-christians in the comments are suddenly pretending to be experts on aramaic and koine greek 😂

On the subject of weird decisions of ancient translators, you should check out the Septuagint translation of Ecclesiastes. The translator appears to not know either Greek or Hebrew! By that I mean that he rigidly translates the Hebrew direct object marker אֵת with the Greek σύν. Now, there is a second Hebrew word, also spelled אֵת, which means 'with', and that clearly is where the translator is pulling in the word σύν. But contextually, it is absolutely clear in most cases that we are dealing with the direct object marker, which should be untranslated in Greek or at most receive the accusative article τὸν\τὴν\τό, and indeed the translator does render the object of σύν in the accusative case pretty much every time. Anyways, the result is almost unreadable Greek too. You have to constantly just ignore the instances of σὺν. The mistake is very basic in Hebrew, and also seems impossible for anyone attempting to write understandable Greek, so I don't know what to make of it.

I've bought your Gospel of John in Greek, Latin and English and it's very useful for learning the ancient languages, at which I'm very much a beginner. I can see, though, how closely the King James English follows the Greek.

Excellent video! I'd like to add that we have an extremely good idea how the Syriac gospel developed, and that the Aramaic tradition has a tendency to avoid literal Translations in favor of what "flows best" in the language. The oldest Aramaic gospel text we have any evidence of (and the oldest to see widespread use at any rate) is the Diatessaron of Tatian, a Harmonic gospel written in Mesopotamia in the early second century if memory serves, when St Ephraim wrote his commentary on the gospel this was the text he used. A little later separate Translations of the individual gospels begin appearing but they still deliberately emulate the style of the Diatessaron over the Greek. Then there's an ongoing process of actively revising the text to be as close to the Greek as possible while flowing naturally in the language which culminates in the Mapaqta Peshitta, which we have attestation of thanks to the Sinai and Cureton manuscripts. There is the other issue that Syriac was if memory serves not yet a major prestige dialect at the time of Christ (I believe that it's status as the single literary standard isn't cemented until the second century but feel free to correct me) and there's no reason it'd be written in that over some form of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic or Greek, with Greek being the most likely candidate because it's a fairly widespread and standardized literary form.

Hellenization of history is a great forgery with brutal conseguences.

Greek, no doubt in my mind. That said, it is fascinating to see the stylistic differences between the apostolic writings, as a result of their influences, linguistic or otherwise. Luke is a great example: in his prologue (Luke 1:1–4) he writes in a very classical style, but the rest of his Gospel is much more indebted to the style of the Septuagint translation. His is the most difficult of the four Gospels to read, for that and other reasons. Thanks for the video.

P. S. I was wondering why I hadn't seen any videos from either of your channels lately, but I checked today and it seems that many of them evaded my notifications. I have it set to "All", so I don't know what would cause this. Perhaps others have had the same problem.

It was written in ancient greek .... The new testament...because it is codified with numbers
(Ancient greek numbers)

That's why we have the 666

Xξς(F)

.... Coincidence ...?
No

999=ΤΡΙΑΔΙΚΟΣ ΘΕΟΣ (trinity god)
Ιησούς =888=jesus

Etc....

Now what is the connection of Christ and ancient Greece .... We have to ask Christ
Christ was also giving ancient greek name to his apostoles.
( Symeon --) Πετρος (Peter)

I have a Vulgate and Douay-Rheims bible together in one book. It's awesome to use to learn Latin.

@polyMATHY_Luke when will u make a video about old greek letters such as digamma koppa san or sampi?

Could you please recommend me a software for translating Latin? I can’t find the right translation App. Thanks.

Hey Luke, my partner is Greek and we were having a discussion about how Ancient Greek and Modern Greek are considered the same language. I'm a speaker of Spanish as a second language and I don't understand how Spanish or Italian are never considered to be the same language as Latin but Modern Greek and Ancient Greek are considered to be the same. Can you make a video explaining this please?

there are translation records of the new testament from Aramaic into Greek, but not the other way around, ill be more inclined to believe that the early Christians (apostles) wrote their accounts (gospels/epistles) down in their own language (Aramaic) first then supervised the translating into Greek.

Well Paul said in the book…The lord spoke to me in the “ARAMAIC” tongue!
The disciples that was left to preach the gospel was Aramaic speaking Jews….Tali cuma is not Greek…Josephus said he didn’t really know Greek and it was forbidden for the Jews of Judea to speak or learn Greek

Can you please make a video how to pronounce the writing on the cross of Jesus in latin an greek with it's accent?

The NT was entirely composed in Greek and uses the Grekk LXX as its Bible, including its mistranslations. Aramaic priority is crackpot in the field.

Why would it be written in Judea? The oldest surviving christian texts point at the early Christianity, at least the part that won out, was Greek. Not just in language, but in culture. All Pauline letters addressed outside Rome are to the Greek world of modern Greece and Anatolia. There is evidence that the later authors of the gospel of Mark and the later gospels had a poor understanding of the geography of Judea.
There is actually no good evidence for early Christianity being Judean.

Yea, I wanted to work with the Vulgate to practice some Latin, but apparently, at least as far as I could tell, there isn't a public version of the Latin Bible online with properly marked vowel lengths. So, pretty useless for learning.
You'd think it would exist for a book that's been retranslated and republished thousands of times, but nope.

That's the miracle of the bible, the message stays true regardless of the original languages. However, the originals give you an even greater meaning

The New Testament was written in a form of Koine Greek, which was the common (koine) language of the eastern Mediterranean, from the conquests of Alexander the Great (335–323 BC) until the evolution of Byzantine Greek (c. 600). Whereas the classical Greek city states used different dialects of Greek, a common standard, called Koine (κοινή "common"), developed gradually in the 4th and 3rd centuries BC as a consequence of the formation of larger political structures (like the Greek colonies, Athenian Empire, and the Macedonian Empire) and a more intense cultural exchange in the Aegean area, or in other words the Hellenization of the empire of Alexander the Great. Hence, the Septuagint, a translation of the Hebrew O.T. scriptures into Koine Greek, was done by 72 Hebrew scholars (6 from each of the 12 tribes) in the years 285–247 BCE.
After the Babylonian captivity, Aramaic replaced Biblical Hebrew as the everyday language in Judea. The two languages were as similar as two Romance languages or two Germanic languages today. Thus Biblical Hebrew, which was still used for religious purposes, was not totally unfamiliar, but still, a somewhat stranger form that demanded a certain degree of training to be understood properly. The languages spoken in Galilee and Judea during the first century include the Semitic Aramaic and Hebrew languages as well as Greek, with Aramaic being the predominant language. Most scholars agree that during the early part of the first century Aramaic was the mother tongue of virtually all natives of Galilee and Judea. Most scholars support the theory that Jesus spoke in Aramaic and that he may have also spoken in Hebrew (for religious meetings) and Greek when interacting with non-Jewish residents of Palestine, such as the Roman centurion or the Syro-Phoenician widow from the region of Tyre and Sidon.
Most biblical scholars adhere to the view that the Greek text of the New Testament is the original version. However, there does exist an alternative (minority) view which maintains that it is a translation from an Aramaic original, a position known as Peshitta Primacy (also known in primarily non-scholarly circles as "Aramaic primacy"). Although this view has its adherents, the vast majority of scholars dispute this position citing linguistic, historical, and textual inconsistencies. At any rate, since most of the texts are written by diaspora Jews such as Paul the Apostle and his possibly Gentile companion, Luke, and to a large extent addressed directly to Christian communities in Greek-speaking cities (often communities consisting largely of Paul's converts, which appear to have been non-Jewish in the majority), and since the style of their Greek is impeccable, a Greek original is more probable than a translation. Even such Aramaic-speaking apostles such as Peter and James wrote their letters to other Jews in Koine Greek, rather than Aramaic. The only possibility for an original Aramaic text might be the Gospel of Matthew, since Matthew (Levi) was an Aramaic-speaking Jew who wrote his gospel to other Jews in Palestine, trying to show them that Jesus of Nazareth was the fulfillment of God's promise to send a Messiah to Israel. However, there are no extant texts in Aramaic of Matthew's Gospel to confirm this theory. χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη.

ΑΡΑ ΤΟ ΤΟΥ ΥΠΟΔΕΙΓΜΑΤΟΣ ΟΜΟΙΟΝ ΤΟΥ ΕΚ ΤΟΥ ΚΙΕΒΟΥ ΑΝΤΑΠΟΚΡΙΤΟΥ ΠΕΡΙ ΤΗΣ ΟΥΚΡΑΝΙΗΣ ΩΣ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΗΝ ΑΡΑΜΑΙΚΗΝ ΥΠΟΘΕΣΙΝ ΤΟ ΦΙΛΟΨΕΥΔΕΣ ΔΗ ΕΣΤΙΝ; ΚΑΙ ΟΥ ΓΑΡ ΟΡΘΟΝ ΤΟ ΛΕΓΟΜΕΝΟΝ Ο ΤΙ ΕΤΕΗ ΔΕ ΟΥΔΕΝ ΙΔΜΕΝ, ΕΝ ΒΥΘΩΙ Η ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ; 😅

Eugene E Nida has written a wonderful book "Towards a science of translating" which thoroughly addresses the topic of bible translation out of the original language. He addresses the fact that since the conception of the letters of the new testament, there has been great debate in the church on whether or not to translate from one language to another more syntactically or more 'meaningfully'. Many earlier Latin translations of the NT were criticized for not following the Greek as closely as possible in regards to things such as word order and idioms even if it wouldn't make total sense in the final translation. Throughout the times it seems that the populous/the church seems to favor one over the other. Many newer English translations of the bible still fall on this very polarizing scale, with some like the NLT trying to preserve the meaning while still writing in casual, somewhat colloquial English, and others like the NASB designed specifically to adhere as close as possible to the original Greek and Hebrew. There is a lot of debate on whether or not John the apostle wrote Revelation or not with a large part of the argument lying in the contrasting styles. In my opinion, it would make a great deal of sense for Revelation to be written by John the Apostle in Aramaic to then be translated in a very literal manner into Greek by a scribe or member of the church.

read the Quran

The Septuagint was when the Torah/Old Testament was created. There were no Hebrew writings to translate.

Jesus does not speak Latin,
Jesus' language is Aramaic, which is a dead language .
The Bible is written in ancient, dead Greek.
Jesus is not God , not the Son of God.
Jesus is a man and a prophet

I invite you to Islam and to worship the one true, living God.
In Islam .
God is one,
God does not give birth or be born,
God does not have anyone like Him,
God does not exist and does not reside in His creation.

Greek Bible Camp's pronunciation gave me a stroke and a heart attack at the same time.......

The holy Oracles were written by hand by the prophets as the Holy Spirit gave utterance in all languages but the scribes corrupted them

Mark is not very convincing as having an Aramaic original
in Mark there are some Aramaic phrases that seem to be poorly transliterated

i think some of the "poor Greek" might come from using a Greek translation of OT material for the model of some of the stories that he is telling
Revelation is somewhat recycling material from a Greek translation of Daniel & Ezekiel in the OT
to me that seems the most likely explanation for Mark & Revelation

You seem to have misspelt 'consensus' as 'concensus' in the description.