Archaeology, Resources, and Jonesboro – June 22
One of the more interesting questions raised in Jonesboro was about archaeology. I found folks in Northeastern Arkansas enthralled about archaeology, even discussing it at the local IHop (yes, Tara, that includes you).
One of the more interesting questions raised in Jonesboro was about archaeology. I found folks in Northeastern Arkansas enthralled about archaeology, even discussing it at the local IHop (yes, Tara, that includes you). I have some recommendations for those of you who are fans of the dirt and shovel. Zondervan has produced the Archaeological Study Bible. It is very well done and full of information. Beyond that there is the Biblical Archaeology Review, which is full of timely discussion as well as information on how to go on digs. If you like to get down and dirty when it comes to biblical history, then these resources are quite helpful. It was heartening to see such interest tucked away in the center of the country. Often it is details that comes from archaeology that helps to make the text more vivid.Just to note one detail. Sometimes it is said that those crucified were simply thrown into a grave for criminals. However, we did find in 1961 a crucified man with a nail in his heel found in a family grave, indicating that sometimes those who are crucified do get a normal burial, a point of significance for the death of Jesus and his burial by Joseph of Arimathea. To all in Jonesboro, keep digging!
2 Comments
pwdraw
Original language for Matthew
Dr. Bock, can you comment on the original language for the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Matthew. There have been some articles claiming that the Gospels were written in Hebrew and later translated into Greek. Also what languages did Jesus speak? I grew up being taught that he spoke mostly Aramaic in the homes and synogogues. Obviously he knew Hebrew, because he read Isa 61 and commented on it but his primary language was Aramaic. That has been the traditional teaching but there have been recently articles stating that Jesus spoke Hebrew prmarily and that the above Gospels were written in Hebrew. I would appreciate your take on this subject.
bock
dlb- Jesus’ languages
My own take on this is that Jesus could well have been bi- or tri-lingual. He would have known Greek and Aramaic for sure and probably Hebrew as well (since Hebrew and Aramaic are pretty close to each other). He woudl have speoken Aramaic usually, Greek in ethncially mixed contexts, and perahps Hebrew in some more official disputations, although Aramaic is the most likely language of such discussions as the lead language of the area. Remember as well that to read a language and to speak it are two different things (Just look at Bar Mitvah candidates today, who can read but not use the language).
We do have early church traditions (See Eusebius’ remarks on Papias) that speak of Matthew writing in the Hebrew dialect, which also could mean Aramaic or Hebrew. The problem is that it is not clear if Matthew’s gospel is meant or some kind of notes about Jesus’ life. Either way, whatever is referred to here is something other than the Matthew we have, which is in Greek. I think it very unlikely that Jesus primarily spoke in Hebrew and that all the gospels were written originally in Hebrew. The reason we have targums (OT texts in Aramaic) in this period is because most people did not know Hebrew.
dlb