I have dabbled a bit, but not studied them very much. Spent several years studying various versions / translations of the Bible which led me down the same path -- in the Greek is says X. Finally came across the Aramaic New Testament and that opened my eyes to a number of things. Have not been very active in study / research in the Bible for a number of years though.
If you have not looked at the Aramaic NT, I highly recommend you do so. Dave Baucher IIRC was one of the better ones I read. His contention was essentially that the people who supposedly wrote the NT were more fluent in Aramaic as that was their daily / spoken language vs. Greek which was used for for scholarly text and more for people like Paul.
Did you know that Caucasian Europeans are the true Israelites? Unlike the Edomites who are the false jews spoken about in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 when God exposes them as not being related to Judah or Jacob Israel at all but they are the synagogue of satan. Anyways the Edomites hate us they are from Esau that's why the hooked noses people come after white people with so much hateful propaganda.
Obviously this is a super long subject with tons of evidence and discussion that would need to follow but here's a starting point for you if you're interested and there's plenty of facts and sources to back these claims up.
Absolutely. I have a mini library devoted to all the research and study I've done over the years. People have devoted entire lifetimes to the study of all these texts! That's one reason I backed off and do not spend as much time anymore. I could devote the rest of my life and still not get to the bottom of it all. So I am much more measured with the study that I do.
That's a wise approach but there's also a difference between studying ALL these different texts in their old languages and just simply reading them. Like I have read so many non canonical scriptures and the parts that don't align or don't make sense I just leave out and then I do my intense studying into the canonical texts whenever I used to do it I mean. You can find many examples in the bible where naysayers, atheists, false converts etc will say that there are contradictions or parts that don't align in the canonical bible but everytime I've gone back and looked into the context of the entire chapter or book and defined the words in the greek or hebrew or maybe both then I have always got to the bottom of every issue.
Anyways I've been in a bit of a funk but I'll be on Poal this week and we can discuss some interesting finds and texts.
This would make sense as I believe they were fresh out of the enslavement around this time and of course people like Paul knew hebrew but the common language of the Israelites around this time (1st century) was I believe Aramaic.
Yes Chronos you are exactly correct the Greek was specifically for the more intelligent or scholars aka not the stupid but the highly educated in schools and such. The Aramaic however was the most common spoken language for the average, below average,or poor people who were Israelites. During this time Aramaic was way more common than Hebrew among the general population of the Israelites. This is because their Hebrew slowly died out among the poor/average because the enslavement was multiple generations without allowing for schools or freedom, therefore forcing them to learn Aramaic out of necessity, losing their Hebrew mostly, and having the highly educated learn Greek. This was a common theme for a few hundred years because of the combination of both the Assryian enslavements an the Babylonian enslavements which was the beginning of the time that the Israelites lost their identity.
Many casual Bible researchers continue to go back to the Greek "roots" of words and pretty much ignore the Aramaic. We can imagine that most New Testament players would be more comfortable with Aramaic than Greek given that they were fishermen and such. Since the actual books were written many years after the events transpired, how would those stories have been transmitted? Written in Greek or told in Aramaic? I find it a fascinating, yet under explored area.
FWIW - my username has absoltuley nothing to do with any gods of any sort and does not glorify anything.
This is a very good point because after first the enslavement of Israel by the Assryians and then the enslavement in Babylon of Judah by this time the majority of ancient Israelites had lost their identity and they were speaking Aramaic because hebrew was only preserved by the scholarly and highly educated hebrews since they were slaves in foreign lands and their language wasn't being spoken. This is one reason the first translation of the bible is the Aramaic Targum and if you look for the original versions it talks about how Cain was basically a child that came from Eve desiring the fallen angel Sahamiel or satan and Cain was like a half breed of the heavenly beings whereas Abel was Adam's son and was not. This eventually gets into tons of different aspects of the bible like why Ham's lineage was part nephilim because his mother Naamah was of the forbidden seed of the tribe of Cain and Noah only took her as a wife before she was holy and her grandfather repented in his heart and Naamah left the villages of Cain to stay on the holy mountain with the sons of Seth. It's a lot of detail I'm overlooking but the Aramaic Targum was a very important text/translation in the super early centuries like 100-300 A.D. I think we O.T. targum versions closer to Christ's time than original hebrew or something I forget but it's close and important to look at for those who have the time.
During the time that the Israelites lost their identity and became the "Lost Tribes of Israel" they fulfilled the prophecy of God which said "In Isaac shall thy seed be called" (Genesis 21:12 and Romans 9:7 for two witnesses). It was a prophecy meaning the Israelites will be known by the patriach Isaac. This happened when they lost their identity and became known as the Sukka, Sacae, Scythians, before eventually being known as Anglo-Saxons (Saxons from the Angeles). There were multiple dispersion's, one at the start of their Egypt stay, which was right after the famine of Joseph, one at the start of Exodus and also another during the 40 years in the wilderness while they endured their punishment. Lastly there was a dispersion around the time of the captivities of Assyria and Babylon one migration route west through the Aegean Sea into Greece and Italy which they ended up being brethren of because the earlier diaspora founded those countries. Also the Israelites were said to have created Troy. The other migration route was North either up through the Balkans and/or up through the Caucasus mountains and finally up through the Danube River into Germany/Denmark/the Angeles which was obviously founded by the Tribe of Dan, just like Sardania on the other western route which means rulers of Dan (a main island of Italy). What a HUGEEE coincidence that the European caucasians are said to have unknown origins but were from the caucasus mountain regions. It's because we lost all of our history, documents, heritage, when the bible says we fleed our captors to the North when talking about right after the Babylonian enslavement because there were our Israelite brothers from the Assryian enslavement already living as Scythians up near the Caucasus mountains and the Balkans. Anyways Sacae, Sukka, Scythians were all names our captors called us when we lost our hebrew language from enslavement and uneducation. These names all mean "Sons of Sac" aka Sons of Issaac. The word Saxon obviously means Sac-Son, Son of I-saac, and an Anglo Saxon was an Israelite that took the northern migration route into European nation states already founded by former Israelites. The Anglo Saxons were from the Angeles which is around denmark/germany area but before that they got their from the Danube river after traveling to the southern part of it when they had to flee Israel. Remember only a small fragment of Israelites, mainly Benjamin and Judah returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple.
(post is archived)