Regarding the NT being in Greek and Christian sources saying that some Jewish Christians spoke Hebrew and used an original Hebrew Matthew and Hebrew translations of other NT books (i.e., the Nazarenes); and the DSS being (mostly) in Hebrew.
As far as the NT letters go, it makes sense that they would be in Greek since they are addressed to Jews (and Gentiles) in Greek-speaking areas of the diaspora (and Peter appears to have needed some help with his letter from Silvanus according to 1 Peter 5:12). And it similarly makes sense that an original Hebrew Matthew would have been translated into Greek (as per Papias), since the original is said to have been used by Hebrew-speaking Nazarenes while the NT version appears to be combined with Mark and Mark appears to have been written for Greek-speaking Gentiles, hence the NT Matthew/Mark combo being in Greek. And in my view Luke/Acts are pro-Pauline/pro-Gentile and used Mark and Josephus, so it makes sense that they are in Greek too. And Revelation appears to have been written by a Jewish Christian living in Asia, so it makes sense that it is in Greek.
And in the case of (most of) the DSS, which are all pre-70 CE and presumably from Judea and adjoining areas, it makes sense that they are in Hebrew and for Jesus to have spoken Hebrew (as per the original Hebrew Matthew), since that appears to have been the dominant language there in the first century CE (as per Josephus and the Mishnah) and that is where Jesus was from and when he lived too. But some of the DSS are in Greek, and as noted here:
All of the Greek texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls are written in koine, the common dialect of the post-classical Hellenistic and Roman worlds and the New Testament language. A total of 27 Greek manuscripts have been identified from the Qumran caves. This includes all remains of 19 papyri found in Qumran Cave 7, and several Greek manuscripts preserved in Cave 4, made up of mostly biblical fragments.
And leaders of the group that produced the Damascus Document were required to have "mastered all the secrets of men and the languages of all their clans." So there was a degree of Hebrew/Greek interconnectivity in the DSS too.
Last edited by John2 on Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:36 pm, edited 7 times in total.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
SA, the 1st century-ish Odes of Solomon is a connective tissue but it agrees with you in that it isn't strongly law observant, instead of building a wall around the Torah it spiritualises it in a lot of ways similar to Paul, eg circumcision is of the heart. I'm not saying I agree there never were law-observant Jewish Christians but a Catholic legend of such a group would have been helpful against marcion and gnostics. They wanted things to look pious and that was way more important to them. What I'm saying is such a group wouldn't have been the original Christians, because its hard to believe they would only have minor theological differences with Paul and not major ones, and want to be the leaders themselves. All this 'apostle to the gentiles' stuff is hard to believe, so much they had to make a pseudo 1 and 2 Peter not to mention Acts to make it seem like they were in agreement. Where's the writings of Peter, John, the other apostles. There are none. One answer is behind it there were Jewish Christians who did not observe strict requirements of the law from the start, because their spiritual savior had come to give them salvation, or similar mystical ideas.
But so what? There are just too many variables. Is it Christian or Jewish? When was it written? If it Christian who wrote it? It's meaningless and counterproductive to attach names and faces without any proof. That's my point. If there where "Jewish Christians" why is the term Ebionite appropriate?
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
All the neo-Eisenman shit John2 comes up with is like a homeless man's fantasy creation. He's created a whole world of fiction that appeals to him - like Giuseppe. It's nice for him to bring his little make-believe for show and tell here at the forum. But it's ultimately worthless without proof. He's Jewish Giuseppe.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
And you know what scholars think of Eisenman. And I don't hate Bob. He's a cool guy. Reminded me of Francis Ford Coppola or a beatnik poet who made it into a university. If I was trying to harm his reputation I would say other things trust me. I like him. It's just bullshit.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
SA, the fact you can't tell whether the Odes are Christian or Jewish proves it's both. In the book I'm holding right here it dates it about 100AD and which scholar is going to ruin their reputation by blaspheming and actually dating anything to the 1st century? Have you read it?
What is with the homeless man's fantasy? I can't tell what John2 is trying to say on one hand its the DSS folk were like proto-Christians and on the other he seems to be a Christian, isn't there a massive difference between DSS and the stuff Paul says, so is he anti-Paul? I don't understand but haven't been around here very long. Giuseppe is my hero on here, he makes me believe my own theories
My issue is this. It's okay to argue that the Odes were written originally in Chinese. But John2 doesn't just argue that. But makes - or buys into - an elaborate fairy tale mostly recycled from Eisenman which can't be critically evaluated. It's just a mess. Forgive me if this sounds sexist but it reminds me of a woman who asks you one question but the question leads to more and more questions - all about her - and then about an hour into this hell you realize - it's not about the question, it's all about her.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
OK I had to look up Eisenman. He takes the old Jewish Rabbi idea but makes him a political revolutionary as well. Its like anything. If you ignore the evidence you don't like, you can make Jesus into anything you want! But you have to justify why to ignore the parts you don't like
In Jesus's case you have to ignore his parables and mystical teachings that are hallmarks of a wisdom sage and emphasise the opposition to Pharisees as if that meant something politically (every man and his dog probably hated them back then, basically they're the leaders you love to hate)
They fact his disciples buy a few rusty swords makes him head of a revolutionary army. Its crazy stuff and totally at odds with Christian groups not only orthodox but Gnostic as well!
I propose a mystical Jesus because it fits the data quite well
The Odes, you ask what language they were in. Greek or Syriac?
What early church writing wouldn't have been translated into Greek for use in the west?
The fact is, there's evidence supporting both Greek and Aramaic.. but it doesn't really matter. They are early, 50's AD for sure I recon
Let's ask - what we know more or less for sure about early Christianity.
1. The Christian community of Pliny
2. Celsus' Jew
3. Celsus
4. Lucian's Peregrinus
5. Justin's debate with Jews over a second power in heaven and related rabbinic material
6. Irenaeus on a plurality of sects
7. Clement and Clement's sources on a mystery religion at Alexandria Church of St Mark (presumably at Boukolia) which are related or to be identified as one of Irenaeus's "sects"
8. the diagrams attributed to the Ophites by Origen (and normative 'Christians' according to Celsus)
9. various reports of persecution of Christians at the end of the reign of Marcus Aurelius through Commodus (Passion of the Scillitan Martyrs, Celsus, etc)
10. Inscription of Abercius
11. canon of writings including a gospel, writings attributed to the apostle etc
12. certain mysteries, sacraments, rituals including baptism, communion
13. the veneration of a crucified man-god who is connected with the god of the Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua.
What else? The Ebionites are not one of these "for sure" things. It appears as a marginal reference - quite brief - in a list of heresies and no other references are known. It would count as 'weak evidence' especially if it is acknowledged that (11) the canon of writings was corrupted and quite possible to include 'primitive Jewish Christians' as the foil of Paul. The strongest evidence is that early Christianity was a mystery religion, not a primitive form of Judaism.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
When you look at this list there is very little that can be used to construct the existence of 'Ebionites' or anything resembling 'Jewish Christianity.' Is Pliny's community 'Jewish Christian'? Celsus's Jew has a story about Jesus's Jewish origins which resembles certain documents used in Jewish circles but the portrait is clearly of Christianity being a rebellion against Judaism. Nothing 'Ebionite' about the tradition that I can see. Celsus similarly speaks of a mystery religion which has been recently outlawed. Lucian tells of a figure from Palestine who is fluent in Greek and learned from Egyptians. Justin shows that Christianity was to be equated with the 'two power' doctrine which is 'Jewish' in the sense that Marcion is 'Jewish.' Clement shows Christianity developed from Alexandrian Judaism possibly the Essenes but that's likely Eusebius's story. The Ophite diagram is gnostic. Nothing 'Jewish' about the martyrs from the end of the second century and so on.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote