SPLIT: Jesus spoke at least 4 languages

[ProVobis]

It’s a Roman legal proceeding, because it’s the Roman empire, and Judea of which Jerusalem was a part, was under the rule of Pilate the Roman procurator. Since Pilate had the saying written in Hebrew, Latin and Greek, THOSE languages then, were common languages of the day.

Scholars have presented this as the most likely to be the inscription on the cross.

 

[supertubos]

Greek is likely, as this was the language of commerce, and clearly the apostles knew and wrote in koine Greek.

Hebrew and Aramaic are almost certainties, as they represent the language of the day and the language of the Torah. Since Jesus read from the Torah, He would have needed to know Hebrew.

Latin is almost certainly NOT a langauge Jesus learned. There is simply no basis for fluency, there. It was the language of the Romans for official Roman business, with whom Jesus had no need to engage in.

How did He spoke to Pilates? I doubt that Pilates would know Hebrew or would descent to the level of speaking it even if he knew.

Jesus went to Jerusalem every year. There there were Latin signs everywhere. And on the roads, cemeteries of the romans. Not like the neon today, but there were. and there roman merchants, roman soldiers who would bark orders in … Latin, of course, we now know that it was low level Latin, but it was Latin. He would not be a Cicero (could be !) but He knew Latin, most probably.

 

[steve_b]

The language of the “government” that the Jews would have interacted with most often was Aramaic…
which would have been the Sanhidren. If you’ll note in Jesus’ trial, most of the proceedings took place there (with a side trip to Herod). However, because the Roman government hadn’t given the local Jewish government the ability to use capital punishment, they had to appeal to the (name removed by moderator) to get that approved.

So, you clearly do NOT have a good view of what the Jews’ government was like.

Pilate ruled Judea. NOT the Jews.
M:

Because they all knew Hebrew and Greek?

And Latin. .[Jn 19:20] all working languages of that day.
M:

I would suggest because of the RCC’s investment in Latin that the reverse is true.

The text would be written in Latin to indicate the Roman Government’s stamp of approval. (You do realize that this is the same Roman government that became intertwined with the RCC, right?)

The CC converted the Romans.
M:

It is only obvious to the biased. First, there is no indication of the ORDER in which they were written. Only that they were written in these three languages.

read .[Jn 19:20]
M:

Second, the order in which they were written can indicate any number of things, and not necessarily the most common languages. If you’ll note, Hebrew and Latin represent the two governmental bodies that approved the killing of Jesus (with the third indicating the crowd that demanded He be crucified.)

I note that no matter what is said to you by anyone, rather than admit you’re wrong when you’re wrong, you go into snippy mode.
M:

So, what is obvious to the biased isn’t so obvious to those who can think critically.

Here’s what I said?

"Here’s the order of languages on the plack Hebrew Latin Greek.
Obviously, THESE are the MOST common languages at the time, that’s why these languages are used."

that list of languages in that order, comes from .[Jn 19:20] all working languages of that day.

 

[Petergee]

I would suggest because of the RCC’s investment in Latin that the reverse is true.

The text would be written in Latin to indicate the Roman Government’s stamp of approval. (You do realize that this is the same Roman government that became intertwined with the RCC, right?)

Really? Do tell, exactly when did that happen?

In fact Latin was the language of the common people and soldiers throughout the Roman empire. The ruling classes in eastern areas of the Empire such as Judaea, mostly spoke Greek.

So, what is obvious to the biased isn’t so obvious to those who can think critically.

At least you got that right.