That makes sense
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
What are the Aramaic gospels and do they carry any weight?
- Thread starter Asforme&myhouse
- Start date
Mark 10:29-31 NKJV
So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel's, who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time—houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”
I guess I am wondering about how someone leaves a wife for the sake of the gospel and then has more children? I realize that it could be speaking of spiritual blessings, but it is certainly using physical things so I don’t think one can just rule those out. So i find it interesting that the Aramaic lists maidservants... which would eplain the children. @ZecAustin what were you saying the other day about there not being lawful prescription for taking a maidservant that didn’t include her becoming a wife to yourself or to your son?
So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel's, who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time—houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”
I guess I am wondering about how someone leaves a wife for the sake of the gospel and then has more children? I realize that it could be speaking of spiritual blessings, but it is certainly using physical things so I don’t think one can just rule those out. So i find it interesting that the Aramaic lists maidservants... which would eplain the children. @ZecAustin what were you saying the other day about there not being lawful prescription for taking a maidservant that didn’t include her becoming a wife to yourself or to your son?
Don't take the individual words as a detailed prescription. It also says you'll receive a hundred times as many mothers as you had before - I can't picture that at all. There's no reason to think that the blessing doesn't include more wives or a restoration to the first wife to provide those children - or adoption, or spiritual fatherhood of new believers...
It's all figurative. It means "lots of relationships & stuff, better than what you left". Don't get bogged down in the detail.
It's all figurative. It means "lots of relationships & stuff, better than what you left". Don't get bogged down in the detail.
And he even makes that explicit:
Matt 12 :46-50
While he was yet speaking to the multitudes, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, seeking to speak to him. One said to him, "Behold, your mother and your brothers stand outside, seeking to speak to you." But he answered him who spoke to him, "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?" He stretched out his hand towards his disciples, and said, "Behold, my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father who is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother."
I believe most of the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic with some written in Greek. This is a controversial belief though. I studied this out a few years ago, and it sure seems like a strong case to me. Search for Aramaic Primacy and you’ll find troves of information. That said, when I study, I read from a Greek transalation (NASB, WEB, NET, KJ, or NKJ), a Hebrew Translation (CHB), and various Aramaic translations (usually all four at http://www.dukhrana.com/peshitta/index.php). I find it makes my studies more fruitful.
I understand and I agree. I’m not naming and claiming anything here, I just find it interesting that the Aramaic reads more logically. It doesn’t list fathers or mothers in the second half of the verse. Everything else is sort of a one to one.
Before realizing the truth about what the Bible says concerning marriage, the fact that the word wife was in there at all, made me uncomfortable.
Thanks for the information
In the Aramaic, linked with maid servants, or the Greek without them?
What!?! What are we going to do around here if we stop doing that???
That’s what I was thinking! But I understand what what @FollowingHim is saying. There are lots of rabbit trails where one just ends up chasing their own tail.
I had a further thought this morning, the first gospel was apparently written in as early as 50 AD, which even for an early date that's pretty long time after witnessing the ascension of Jesus and receiving the Holy spirit to begin writing anything down. Assuming even this early date, this comes a full two years after the Acts 15 Jerusalem Council decree, (potentially... anyways I wasn't there so I don't know)
I believe that initially the Apostles did not expect there to be a two thousand year and counting "Church Age", nor did they really expect any of the gentiles to come to the faith until Peter and Paul testified otherwise. I'm pretty sure they saw their "mission" as finding where all the Jews were and sharing the good news with them, and given the theatrics of their preaching at Pentecost and the successes of the early church in holy Spirit-fueled evangelism, I don't know that they thought it worthwhile to compile the good news into a compilation book for future generations immediately.
I think after the Jerusalem Council, the enormity of the task set before them begun to sink in, and Mark began to pen the first "gospel" in Greek.
It seems silly to try to assert that no-one wrote anything down at all before that time (especially in light of Luke 1:1). I'm sure writings in Aramaic abounded, and the information contained in those writings were used and made it in to what we now know as the gospels. I just haven't seen that the information of those presumed writings were preserved in anything but the compilation gospels in Greek. Matthew, Mark, and John all make use of translated Aramaic to Greek, which wouldn't have done in an original Aramaic text. That only leaves Luke, and if Luke was writing to Theophilus in Aramaic I will be weirded out.
I believe that initially the Apostles did not expect there to be a two thousand year and counting "Church Age", nor did they really expect any of the gentiles to come to the faith until Peter and Paul testified otherwise. I'm pretty sure they saw their "mission" as finding where all the Jews were and sharing the good news with them, and given the theatrics of their preaching at Pentecost and the successes of the early church in holy Spirit-fueled evangelism, I don't know that they thought it worthwhile to compile the good news into a compilation book for future generations immediately.
I think after the Jerusalem Council, the enormity of the task set before them begun to sink in, and Mark began to pen the first "gospel" in Greek.
It seems silly to try to assert that no-one wrote anything down at all before that time (especially in light of Luke 1:1). I'm sure writings in Aramaic abounded, and the information contained in those writings were used and made it in to what we now know as the gospels. I just haven't seen that the information of those presumed writings were preserved in anything but the compilation gospels in Greek. Matthew, Mark, and John all make use of translated Aramaic to Greek, which wouldn't have done in an original Aramaic text. That only leaves Luke, and if Luke was writing to Theophilus in Aramaic I will be weirded out.
In the Greek. I didn’t understand how someone could leave their wife for the sake of the gospel, as in how could that ever be justified. Through having a better understanding or I should say a more biblical understanding of marriage, and gaining life experience, I can understand that verse. My first wife left me. She would have stayed with me, had I stopped following Jesus. She made it quite clear. Her leaving had nothing to do with poly. I was still very much in the monogamy only camp at the time.
The Peshitta is the oldest Aramaic text. The reason there aren’t older texts than this, according to some, is because the Eastern Church burned texts that were damaged, as it was a disgrace to have damaged biblical texts. The texts that have been found in Aramaic have almost no discrepancies, whereas the Greek texts do. This is possibly due to the attention put to detail of the Bible, much like with the Torah.
The translations you speak of in the New Testament aren’t in the Aramaic Bible, which is actually a proof. Why put the translation in there? Why not just use the Greek word?
Or you end up with 72 virgins of undetermind gender.
there's a few writings preserved here and there but the Aramaic Gospels are considered by most scholars even those of the Assyrian Church of the East to be of oral lineage not written that's why there's not many older writings.
Edit: plus what @aineo said
Last edited:
I thought it was 72 Virginians??
They're not? What's this then?
http://aramaicnt.org/the-gospels/mark/mark-05/
Myself not knowing a lick of aramaic even to fake it, I have to take other people's word on it.
Stop mucking things up. We were on a roll here
.Interesting find. Explanations anyone?
The explanation is easy - that is an English translation of the Aramaic NT that isn’t true to the Peshitta. If you go to the site I recommended, http://www.dukhrana.com/peshitta/index.php, and look up Mark 5, you will notice that text is not there in the original Peshitta. The Aramaic word study tools on that site are phenomenal. I am not familiar with the translation you’ve referenced, but I suspect they may be trying to keep it as close to the Greek translations as possible, but I don’t know. I cannot defend their methodology. The site I referenced is very highly regarded though.