What language did Jesus and Pilate use?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pinctor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is difficult to comprehend that Christ, having lived in the middle of the Roman Empire for 33 years, didn’t know some Latin.
Except HE didn’t live in the middle of the Empire. Israel was at the utmost fringe of it.
From John:
The Latin has a nice ring to it.
What would it have sounded like in Greek?
The inscriptions above His head on the cross were in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. Let’s presume He was fluent in all three.
He probably knew some Latin; but spoke it only with Roman administrators and the like.
 
Except HE didn’t live in the middle of the Empire. Israel was at the utmost fringe of it.
Not necessarily geographically. Latin had been around for a long time before that.
What would it have sounded like in Greek?
Don’t know. Do you have the Greek for vita, via, and veritas? You seem more partial to it.
 
Not necessarily geographically. Latin had been around for a long time before that.
Actually, Judah was part of Ptolemaic territory before the Seleucids took it in 198 BC (and after that the Hasmoneans, the Herods and the Romans), so Greek has a much longer history in this region.
Don’t know. Do you have the Greek for vita, via, and veritas? You seem more partial to it.
‘Hodos’, ‘aletheia’ and ‘zoe’. But I doubt that Christ used either Latin or Greek in this instance, unless somehow His disciples were all Latin/Greek speakers.
 
Pilate certainly knew Latin, of course, his native language. Having been Prefect of Judea and Samaria for almost ten years, he probably picked up some Aramaic as well. But living in Caesarea, a cosmopolitan port city, and formerly Stratos Tower, which was a greek city, he probably knew Greek to a much greater degree.

Jesus and his Disciples were all Jews and uneducated, so Aramaic is what they spoke. Though, as working men, probably knew many key words in Latin picked up through laboring for, or dealing with the Romans. Jesus, growing up in Nazareth, probably worked as a carpenter in Sepphoris, which was very close to Nazareth. Sepphoris became the capital city of the Galilee under Herod Antipas, and many Roman administrators and soldiers stayed there and in the general area. So Jesus knew a few key words of Latin, and maybe could speak passable Latin.

Jesus’ ministry could have lasted as long as eight years, and he traveled to many places. While he preached mainly to Jews, he might have had a passable command of Greek. The Greek-Syrians comprised the major population of the Decapolis cities, where Jesus was known to preach.

All of the Chief Priests of the Second Temple in Jerusalem would have know Aramaic and the holy language of Hebrew as a matter of course. But they served as de facto administrators of the Roman Empire and under Roman authority, so all of them knew enough Latin to get by with the Roman soldiers and administrators. The most powerful of the High Priesthood would have known conversational Latin as a necessity of their position.

So…it is clear from the NT that the Chief Priests accompanied Jesus to Pilate. Pilate soon established what Jesus did and did not understand, and in what language. It was these Chief Priests who served as interpreters to whatever extent necessary between them- if they were needed at all.

As for the Greek language, it is interesting to note that Flavius Josephus, later in life as a Roman, wrote Wars (or was it Antiquities?!) in Greek. He especially learned Greek for that purpose- Greek being the intellectual language of the day. In his younger years, Josephus, as Joseph bar Matthias, was a Jerusalem aristocrat and a trained Jewish Priest of the Second Temple. Josephus knew Latin so well that he was chosen to go to Rome as a young man to secure the release of several imprisoned Priests. It is interesting that even one in his high and “fast track” position in the Jerusalem High Priesthood, with a fluent command of Latin, did not know Greek. But the reason is simple. The Jews hated the Greek-Syrians and were constantly skirmishing with them, and would not have bothered to learn what to them was a heathen language.

source John Hagan “Year of the Passover”
 
Steve53,

thank you for a most interesting post.

Sepphoris was a Greek city and was in the Decapolis, whose name shows that all this area was Greek to a large extent at least.

I note
Pilate soon established what Jesus did and did not understand, and in what language.
It is a pity we do not understand what Jesus understood and in what language.
You very wisely avoid offering an answer to the question asked in this thread,

You note that the ministry of Jesus may have been longer than three yeasrs, it also might have been shorter.
 
As I recall, the tutors for the children of upper class Romans were usually Greek slaves. So it seems highly probable that the children would have learned Greek.
 
Steve53,

thank you for a most interesting post.

Sepphoris was a Greek city and was in the Decapolis, whose name shows that all this area was Greek to a large extent at least.

I note

It is a pity we do not understand what Jesus understood and in what language.
You very wisely avoid offering an answer to the question asked in this thread,

You note that the ministry of Jesus may have been longer than three yeasrs, it also might have been shorter.
Sepphoris was NOT a member of the Decapolis. The only member city west of the Jordan River was Scythopolis, where there was a large Jewish population as well.

Remember that Jesus was a man who did not know letters- which meant he could neither read nor write. And the Jews hated the Greek-Syrians. So Greek is out. The conversation between Pilate and Jesus was likely a mixture of Aramaic and Latin, with the Chief Priests smoothing things out as best they could between Pilate and Jesus.
 
Steve53,

thank you for a most interesting post.

Sepphoris was a Greek city and was in the Decapolis, whose name shows that all this area was Greek to a large extent at least.
Sepphoris was outwardly influenced by Greco-Roman culture, but it was Jewish at the core. There are virtually no pig bones attested in the early Roman period at Sepphoris. Occasionally, archeologists find an odd bone here or there of swine, but here there are virtually none. Much later, as early as the 2nd century, we find a significant increase: up to 8 or 10 percent of the bones are pigs. This can be explained by virtue of the presence of the Roman army at the site.
 
Sepphoris was NOT a member of the Decapolis. The only member city west of the Jordan River was Scythopolis, where there was a large Jewish population as well.
Correct.
Remember that Jesus was a man who did not know letters- which meant he could neither read nor write.
This is actually something that is up for debate. 🙂
Yes, John does record that the people wondered where Jesus got all that knowledge since He did not know letters, but what about Luke’s account which says He “read” from Isaiah? 😉
And the Jews hated the Greek-Syrians. So Greek is out.
Not necessarily. Granted, many lower-class rural folk did speak the more native languages of either Aramaic or Hebrew, and there was indeed a more negative view of Greek in later years (especially post-AD 70). But Greek was not discarded wholesale: in Palestine, about two-thirds of funerary inscriptions found in ossuaries dating from the period are purely Greek, with the remaining one-third are bilingual, composed of a mixture of Greek and Hebrew/Aramaic.
As for the Greek language, it is interesting to note that Flavius Josephus, later in life as a Roman, wrote Wars (or was it Antiquities?!) in Greek. He especially learned Greek for that purpose- Greek being the intellectual language of the day.
Josephus actually wrote Wars in his native language (Aramaic?) first, but later prepared a Greek translation. His later works are all originally in Greek - which he is quite good at, save for some clumsy idioms. In one enigmatic passage in Antiquities, Josephus takes pride in his Jewish learning (20.263-264), but adds that Greek was so common among his people that it was not much of an achievement (and thus, many Judeans never found any reason to learn it perfectly), since even slaves who wish to know it are able to do so!

For those of my own nation freely acknowledge that I far exceed them in the learning belonging to Jews; I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language, although I have so long accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness; for our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their periods; because they look upon this sort of accomplishment as common, not only to all sorts of free-men, but to as many of the servants as please to learn them. But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our laws, and is able to interpret their meaning; on which account, as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains.
 
This is actually something that is up for debate. 🙂
Yes, John does record that the people wondered where Jesus got all that knowledge since He did not know letters, but what about Luke’s account which says He “read” from Isaiah? 😉
While I don’t understand the idioms of the time, could their reaction have been simple surprise at HIS knowledge without formal education? Certainly, as a physical worker, HE never attended school nor received private instruction, however, as the owner of a sinless and perfect human head HE could have taught HIMself to read in any language.
Not necessarily. Granted, many lower-class rural folk did speak the more native languages of either Aramaic or Hebrew, and there was indeed a more negative view of Greek in later years (especially post-AD 70). But Greek was not discarded wholesale: in Palestine, about two-thirds of funerary inscriptions found in ossuaries dating from the period are purely Greek, with the remaining one-third are bilingual, composed of a mixture of Greek and Hebrew/Aramaic.
Indeed, in Capharnaum’s synagogue (from the 100s) there are inscriptions in Greek, even though it stands right on top of scorched remnants from AD 70 and presumably anti-Greco/Roman antagonism would have been far higher by then than in our LORD’s day.

ICXC NIKA
 
“Not necessarily. Granted, many lower-class rural folk did speak the more native languages of either Aramaic or Hebrew, and there was indeed a more negative view of Greek in later years (especially post-AD 70). But Greek was not discarded wholesale: in Palestine, about two-thirds of funerary inscriptions found in ossuaries dating from the period are purely Greek, with the remaining one-third are bilingual, composed of a mixture of Greek and Hebrew/Aramaic.”

That Jewish ossuaries of the early first century would be inscribed in Greek is interesting and surprising. All of them? I don’t know how to respond. Could they be forgeries?🙂

“Josephus actually wrote Wars in his native language (Aramaic?) first, but later prepared a Greek translation. His later works are all originally in Greek - which he is quite good at, save for some clumsy idioms. In one enigmatic passage in Antiquities, Josephus takes pride in his Jewish learning (20.263-264), but adds that Greek was so common among his people that it was not much of an achievement (and thus, many Judeans never found any reason to learn it perfectly), since even slaves who wish to know it are able to do so!”

I would disagree. Source?
Josephus wrote Wars in Latin originally for the pleasure of Titus, his patron. He had no reason to write it in Aramaic. He then learned Greek to translate it correctly, and also made a Hebrew version. Josephus spoke conversational Latin from a young age- that was why at 26 he was selected to go to Rome to negotiate the release of captive priests.

The Romans admired Greece, and their philosophies and culture, and so Greek became the intellectual and elite language of the Roman Empire. The Jews worshiped one God and looked down at the paganism of the Greeks and Romans. As an aristocratic priest in the Second Temple, Josephus would have looked down as well upon the Greeks and not learn their language. Josephus would later write that the Jewish culture was far more ancient than the Greeks, and Pythagoras assimilated many of his ideas from the Essenes.
But the High Priesthood knew that it owed its power and position to Rome, and the High Priesthood during that time served as de facto Roman administrators. Realizing this, the Temple elders would have made sure that the most promising of their young Priests would be fluent in reading and writing Latin.

There was always animosity between the Greek-Syrians and the Jews, though the merchant class had inevitable business dealings with them. The Roman prefects and procurators would play one faction off against the other in minor skirmishes, and make money off criminal enterprise preying on both groups. In A.D. 67, when the Jews attempted to break away from Rome, the Temple priesthood formed their own army. Josephus was made a general. One of his mandates was to protect the Jews of the Galilee from the aggression of the Greek-Syrians in the various towns.

As an aside, this bias might have greatly affected Saul, later Paul. Half Greek, it would be interesting to see how he was treated as a priest at the Jerusalem Temple. Likely, early in the game, he realized that as half-Greek he would always be a second-class citizen at the Second Temple! His initial zeal against the Christians might have been an attempt to prove himself and gain stature in front of the High Priesthood. Unsuccessful in that respect (and after an epiphany, of course!), Saul converted to Christianity and worked against the Temple priesthood with great energy, and, not without controversy, embraced all Greeks and non-Jews and welcomed them into the new Christian sect.

(source Hagan “Year of the Passover” “Fires of Rome”
 
‘St. Luke, speaking of the residence of the Infant Jesus in the house at Nazareth, writes: And Jesus advanced in wisdom and age, and grace with God and men. As Jesus grew in age, so did he increase in wisdom: not that he went on every year acquiring a greater knowledge of things, as is the case with us; for, from the first moment of his life, Jesus was full of all divine knowledge and wisdom: *In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge; *but it is said that he advanced, because every day as he advanced in age he manifested more and more his sublime wisdom.’

St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

It’s interesting to read discussions about languages and history, very edifying – but for the record: He knew every language and everything. 🙂
 
That Jewish ossuaries of the early first century would be inscribed in Greek is interesting and surprising. All of them? I don’t know how to respond. Could they be forgeries?🙂
Not all of them, of course, though a lot which do have Hebrew/Aramaic inscriptions also have Greek in them. And BTW, ironically, the one ossuary whose authenticity is debated (the James Ossuary) is actually one that only has an Aramaic inscription. 😃
I would disagree. Source?
Josephus wrote Wars in Latin originally for the pleasure of Titus, his patron. He had no reason to write it in Aramaic. He then learned Greek to translate it correctly, and also made a Hebrew version. Josephus spoke conversational Latin from a young age- that was why at 26 he was selected to go to Rome to negotiate the release of captive priests.
Actually, Josephus says thus himself at the very beginning (Wars 1.1-3):

WHEREAS the war which the Jews made with the Romans hath been the greatest of all those, not only that have been in our times, but, in a manner, of those that ever were heard of; both of those wherein cities have fought against cities, or nations against nations; while some men who were not concerned in the affairs themselves have gotten together vain and contradictory stories by hearsay, and have written them down after a sophistical manner; and while those that were there present have given false accounts of things, and this either out of a humor of flattery to the Romans, or of hatred towards the Jews; and while their writings contain sometimes accusations, and sometimes encomiums, but no where the accurate truth of the facts; I have proposed to myself, for the sake of such as live under the government of the Romans, to translate those books into the Greek tongue, which I formerly composed in the language of our country, and sent to the Upper Barbarians; Joseph, the son of Matthias, by birth a Hebrew, a priest also, and one who at first fought against the Romans myself, and was forced to be present at what was done afterwards, [am the author of this work].

Unless Josephus was thinking of ‘our country’ as Rome here…😉
The Romans admired Greece, and their philosophies and culture, and so Greek became the intellectual and elite language of the Roman Empire.
Correct. The relations between Rome and Greece actually extend back further in time: Greeks had settled in colonies in Southern Italy and Sicily since the 8th century BC. Italian tribes came into contact with them, eventually adopting their alphabet, weights and measures, coinage, and even their gods.

Now, some Romans later in history didn’t like Greek stuff; for example, Cato the Elder in the 2nd century BC prophesied Rome’s demise if it kept adopting Greek culture; he considered everything Greek to be suspect; he even mistrusted Greek actors, claiming that they only wanted to poison Romans. And some Greeks, of course, hated the Romans for pillaging their country, decimating the population and bringing many of their countrymen to Rome as slaves.
The Jews worshiped one God and looked down at the paganism of the Greeks and Romans.
Correct. 🙂
As an aristocratic priest in the Second Temple, Josephus would have looked down as well upon the Greeks and not learn their language. Josephus would later write that the Jewish culture was far more ancient than the Greeks, and Pythagoras assimilated many of his ideas from the Essenes.
It seems to me, that it is more of a campaign on Josephus’ part to present Jewish religion to his foreign audience not as the barbarian superstition with primitive or exotic practices (cf. circumcision) that many non-Jews held it to be, but as a completely rational and venerable ancient tradition on par with Greco-Roman religion and philosophy, something that some Hellenistic Jews such as Plato also did: a sort of apologetics, if you will.
This in a time when nasty rumors about how Jews actually worship a donkey in the Temple of Jerusalem as a god (an accusation later transferred to Christians!) were circulating even among the learned (cf. Tacitus).
 
This has been a most interesting thread, and I give myself a pat on the back for having initiated it!
Thanks to all!

I am not sure why Jesus is considered to have been unlettered. Is there a proof text?
 
As an educated Roman Pilate certainly know Greek. Is is possible Jesus and Pilate were speaking in Greek?
It’s entirely possible. Aside from the fact that He could’ve been given the gift of knowing it ad hoc, it’s entirely possible that He had learned at least basic Greek during his life. Many people had very basic skills in Greek.
 
It seems to me, that it is more of a campaign on Josephus’ part to present Jewish religion to his foreign audience not as the barbarian superstition with primitive or exotic practices (cf. circumcision) that many non-Jews held it to be, but as a completely rational and venerable ancient tradition on par with Greco-Roman religion and philosophy, something that some Hellenistic Jews such as Plato also did: a sort of apologetics, if you will.
Plato? Surely you mean Philo. 😉
Are you sure:
John 8:6
The story of Jesus and the adulterer is not considered to be original to John and was probably a later interpolation. So taking it to be a historical account of what Jesus did is problematic.
 
Plato? Surely you mean Philo. 😉
Oy, vey iz mir. 😊
The story of Jesus and the adulterer is not considered to be original to John and was probably a later interpolation. So taking it to be a historical account of what Jesus did is problematic.
You’re correct that the Pericope Adulterae is not found in its canonical place in any of the earliest surviving Greek Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, although all four of these manuscripts may acknowledge the existence of the passage via diacritical marks at the spot. A few more manuscripts put it in other places, such as after John 21:25, after Luke 24:53, after Luke 21:38, or even after John 7:36.
The first surviving Greek manuscript to actually contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the late 4th or early 5th century. Thus, whether it was part of John’s original Gospel at all is quite suspect.

That being said, Papias (ca. AD 125) already refers to a story of Jesus and a woman “accused of many sins” as being found in the Gospel of the Hebrews, which may well refer to this passage; there is a very certain quotation of the pericope in the Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum (ca. 3rd century AD), though without indicating John’s Gospel.

Didymus the Blind (ca. 313- 398) made reference to the pericope as being found in “several copies”; and it is now considered established that this passage was present in its canonical place in many Greek manuscripts known in Alexandria and elsewhere from the 4th century onwards. St. Jerome reports that the pericope adulterae was to be found in its canonical place in “many Greek and Latin manuscripts” in Rome and the Latin West in the late 4th century. This is confirmed by the consensus of Latin Fathers of the 4th and 5th centuries, including Sts. Ambrose and Augustine. The latter in fact claimed that the passage may have been improperly excluded from some manuscripts in order to avoid the impression that Christ had sanctioned adultery (De Adulterinis Conjugiis 2.6–7).
 
Oy, vey iz mir. 😊
You win for using Yiddish!

As for the history of the Pericopae Adulterae - well said. You’re obviously well versed on NT MSS history, something which I must admit I never had an interest in. The Old Testament was much more my style. I was just pointing out that care must be taken in drawing conclusions from a disputed piece of scripture.
 
We don’t know for certain which language Christ used at the Last Supper.

But wouldn’t it have been more significant if He had spoken Hebrew, since that was His worship language? Just a thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top