Shavout or Pentecost?

[MorningSong51]

If the Book of Acts was originally written in Aramaic, why does Acts 2:1 use the word Pentecost rather than Shavuot for the Hebrew festival of weeks, would it be because of the Greek origin (from the Greek word Pentekoste) are there an exchange of words?

Shavuot, the “Feast of Weeks,” is celebrated seven weeks after Pesach (Passover). Since the counting of this period (sefirat ha-omer) begins on the second evening of Pesach, Shavuot takes place exactly 50 days after the (first) seder. Hence, following the Greek word for “fifty,” Shavuot is also referred to sometimes as Pentecost. Although its origins are to be found in an ancient grain harvest festival, Shavuot has been identified since biblical times with the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai.

Pentecost is on Sunday, May 27, 2012 and Shavuot begins in the evening of Saturday, May 26, 2012, and ends in the evening of Monday, May 28, 2012.

 

[Nine_Two]

Because the Book of Acts wasn’t originally written in Aramaic.

The only books which have that theory attached to them are the Gospel of Matthew, and I believe, Hebrews.

 

[Khalid]

The Book of Acts was originally written in Greek by a Gentile. Only Matthew was originally written in Aramaic.

 

[MorningSong51]

Because the Book of Acts wasn’t originally written in Aramaic.

The only books which have that theory attached to them are the Gospel of Matthew, and I believe, Hebrews.

Aramaic original New Testament hypothesis

The question came from the NIV version that says:

14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,[a] ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’

Footnotes:
Acts 26:14 Or Hebrew

The CEV (Contemporary English Version) has:

14 We all fell to the ground. Then I heard a voice say to me in Aramaic, “Saul, Saul, why are you so cruel to me? It’s foolish to fight against me!”

Not even a footnote - just the Aramaic.

 

[MorningSong51]

The Book of Acts was originally written in Greek by a Gentile. Only Matthew was originally written in Aramaic.

Thank you.:coolinoff:

 

[Nine_Two]

Aramaic original New Testament hypothesis

The question came from the NIV version that says:

14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,[a] ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’

Footnotes:
Acts 26:14 Or Hebrew

The CEV (Contemporary English Version) has:

14 We all fell to the ground. Then I heard a voice say to me in Aramaic, “Saul, Saul, why are you so cruel to me? It’s foolish to fight against me!”

Not even a footnote - just the Aramaic.

A hypothesis developed by a national church that has no evidence isn’t something that can be given credence.

There is no denying that many of the individuals used and spoke Aramaic, but it does not follow that the Greek man who wrote it (St. Luke) for a Greek audience, wrote in Aramaic.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Aramaic original New Testament hypothesis

The question came from the NIV version that says:

14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,[a] ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’

Footnotes:
Acts 26:14 Or Hebrew

The CEV (Contemporary English Version) has:

14 We all fell to the ground. Then I heard a voice say to me in Aramaic, “Saul, Saul, why are you so cruel to me? It’s foolish to fight against me!”

Not even a footnote - just the Aramaic.

As I read it, it just says that the voice spoke in Aramaic. I see nothing to indicate that it was ever in Aramaic in the book of Acts.

According to the introductions the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were written for a Greek audience. Why would Luke write it in Aramaic?

 

[MorningSong51]

A hypothesis developed by a national church that has no evidence isn’t something that can be given credence.

There is no denying that many of the individuals used and spoke Aramaic, but it does not follow that the Greek man who wrote it (St. Luke) for a Greek audience, wrote in Aramaic.

True, there was an excellent article that reflected this thought in the question: levitt.com/essays/pentecost, I can’t copy & paste but look at the end conclusion:
“Thus, the great weight of evidence is that First Fruits and Pentecost were always intended to fall on Sundays, without regard to the day of the month they occurred.”